Flooding in Asia, hurricanes in the Americas, wildfires in Europe—these will make up the sobering backdrop for negotiations around new climate finance at COP29 in Azerbaijan. We cannot deny the threat of climate change or that its effects are now a reality for billions of people. So when delegates arrive to set a new global climate finance target, they must be bold on both mitigation and adaptation.
For years, climate finance has focused on mitigating climate change by supporting countries in reducing their emissions. Indeed, the best way to avoid the needless deaths and casualties caused by rising temperatures is to curb the emissions that exacerbate extreme weather events in the first place.
With the effects of climate change intensifying, we will also need to help communities rebuild after natural disasters and to make these communities more resilient to begin with. Work continues on the global goal on adaptation, a framework for which was agreed at COP28 in Dubai, which should help to protect at-risk com-munities and inhibit disruption and migratory flows.
But right now, the money available for climate finance is limited. The current global finance goal of $100bn per year was only reached last year, despite being in place since 2009. In any case, this $100bn target is no longer sufficient even just for mitigation, so any new finance goal will need to be substantially higher.
At present, only 23 countries are obligated to pay climate finance, a list that was set more than three decades ago. Without expanding this list, donor countries will be spread too thin to properly fund climate action, especially given significant pressures on domestic spending.
Greece, for instance, is currently trying to build new defences after wildfires nearly swept through Athens this summer. Yet, because it is one of the 23 countries obligated to pay climate finance, it will also have to contribute to other countries’ adaptation. China, the world’s biggest carbon emitter, and Saudi Arabia, the world’s biggest exporter of petroleum, will not have to pay a penny, as they were not on the original list.
This is blatantly unfair both to donor countries dealing with their own vulnerabilities and to poorer countries which are reliant on this relatively small pot. If we want to be serious about tackling climate change, as well as adapting communities already feeling the heat, we will need to get more money and from more sources. That will mean making sure that countries like China and the Gulf states also contribute to climate finance.
Other countries, such as Canada and Switzerland, have already called for this list of donor countries to be expanded. If we want the UK to be a global leader in climate finance—and the foreign secretary has made clear that he does—we should join them in arguing for more money from new and existing donors alike. Further, we must use the UK’s world-leading expertise in the finance sector to bring forward other new sources of funds to help deliver on this vital agenda.
