26th November 2024
In October we published an editorial in the BMJ (1) and Lancet (2) asking for two outcomes from COP29 [Conference of the Parties], the annual United Nations meeting on climate change: a detailed plan for phasing out fossil fuels as rapidly as possible; and a large financial commitment from high income countries to support low and middle income countries that are already being harmed by climate change and will be harmed further. The meeting has now concluded, and, although some promises were made, the outcome fell far short of what we asked for. (3)
Expectations from COPs have fallen very low. Greenhouse gases in the atmosphere have increased after each of the first 28 COPs and will increase after this one. COPs are, as Shakespeare said of life, “full of sound and fury, signifying nothing,” and prominent scientists and world leaders, including a former secretary general of the UN, have declared them “not fit for purpose.” (4) The election of Donald Trump, a climate change denier, as the next president of the United States immediately before COP29 cast a deep shadow over the proceedings, and the meeting being held in a petrostate for the third year running made expectations even lower than usual.
Those criticising COPs want them reformed not abandoned. They should be held more often, streamlined, give more of a voice to developing countries, be held only in countries supporting climate action, have stricter rules on fossil fuel lobbying, and concentrate on implementation not negotiation. (4) Christiana Figueres, the former UN lead on climate change, a signatory of the letter calling for reform, pointed out that: “At the last COP, fossil fuel lobbyists outnumbered representatives of scientific institutions, Indigenous communities and vulnerable nations.” (4)
Discussions on phasing out fossil fuels got off to a disappointing start when the Azerbaijani president Ilham Aliyev called oil and gas “a gift of god.” In short, no progress was made. COP28 created a “global stocktake”, which called on all countries to contribute to “transitioning away from fossil fuels” and to submit climate pledges aligned with the 1.5C limit. Agreement on this was blocked because the draft text had been so “watered down” as to amount to “attempts to backtrack from the commitments taken last year.”
This discussion now moves to COP30 in Brazil, which will be an important COP as it will be 10 years since the Paris agreement on keeping the increase in global temperature to well below 2C over pre-industrial levels and ideally below 1.5C. Countries will be required to update their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) on how they will meet the Paris agreement. As we wrote in the editorial, most climate scientists are sceptical that we will achieve the Paris targets, and this year’s delay will make is still less likely that they will be met.
The biggest issue at COP29, which had been called “the finance COP,” was over high-income countries providing financial support to low- and middle-income countries vulnerable to climate change. This is a matter of justice in that high income countries have produced most greenhouse gases but low- and middle-income countries are suffering the most. Providing funding is also, as António Guterres, UN Secretary-General said, an investment and in the interest of high-income countries because this global problem cannot be contained if high income countries don’t provide the support.
Vulnerable countries in the global south need trillions of dollars to move to cleaner economies and to protect their people, and they were demanding $1.3 trillion a year, an increase from the $100 billion a year promised in Paris in 2015. High income countries initially offered $250 billion a year, but those representing low- and middle-income countries walked out. Negotiations eventually resumed, and high-income countries agreed to “take the lead” in raising $300bn a year for developing countries by 2035. The money will come from a “wide variety of sources”, including public funds, development-bank loans and private finance “mobilised” by government spending. The agreement also calls on “all actors” to scale up funds from “all public and private sources” to “at least $1.3tn” by 2035. As Marina Romanello, director of the Lancet Countdown, has highlighted, countries managed to find $1.4tn to subsidise fossil fuels in 2022 alone. Redirecting these funds from fossil fuel companies to low and middle income countries might be a good place for governments to start.
These commitments are part of what is called the “new collective quantified goal on climate finance” (NCQG). We must try and keep up with the jargon.
The COP now moves onto Brazil, a country of central importance in climate change. Health professionals, scientists, academics, and others will continue to call for faster, fairer action, because the global temperature will keep rising, people will be killed and suffer from storms, floods, droughts, wildfires, heat waves, and food shortages, and more people will be forced to migrate in search of a living for their families until the COP delivers meaningful outcomes.
Elaine Mulcahy
Director, UKHACC
Richard smith
Chair, UKHACC
1 Mulcahy E, Smith R. COP29 must move from stalling to action. BMJ 2024;387:q2244 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.q2244
2 Mulcahy E, Smith R. COP29 must move from stalling to action.Lancet 2024 Oct 26;404(10463):1623-1624. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(24)02307-9. Epub 2024 Oct 22. PMID: 39454584.
3 Climate Brief. COP29: Key outcomes agreed at the UN climate talks in Baku. 24 November 2024. https://www.carbonbrief.org/cop29-key-outcomes-agreed-at-the-un-climate-talks-in-baku/
4 Harvey F, Noor D, Carrington D, Niranjan A. Cop summits ‘no longer fit for purpose’, say leading climate policy experts. Guardian 2024 November 15. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/nov/15/cop-summits-no-longer-fit-for-purpose-say-leading-climate-policy-experts