COP29: Useless talkfest or powerful driver of change?

As the world prepares for COP29, taking place from November 11 to 22, 2024, in Baku, Azerbaijan, the question of whether these conferences are effective remains pertinent. 

This year’s conference will focus on advancing global climate finance goals, strengthening commitments and enhancing action related to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Paris Agreement. Key topics will include limiting global warming, adapting to climate impacts and mobilising financial resources for these initiatives. 

COP is useful because it brings representatives from 197 countries together to negotiate, and agree on, climate action, making landmark decisions that have global repercussions. Historically, COP has facilitated crucial agreements, such as the Kyoto Protocol at COP3, the Paris Agreement at COP21, the Glasgow Climate Pact at COP26 and the Loss and Damage Fund at COP27. Each of these milestones reflects the collective commitment of nations to confront the climate crisis and implement actionable strategies to combat its effects.

Furthermore, COP enables representatives on the frontline of the climate crisis to directly address the world’s biggest emitters. It provides them with a platform to justify an increase in funding for climate adaptation and mitigation. This is particularly important as the impact of climate change becomes increasingly severe, disproportionately affecting vulnerable nations and communities. 

In addition, it creates opportunities for lobbyists and protesters to demand urgent action against climate change, amplifying the voices of those advocating for environmental justice.

The gathering of world leaders, policymakers and activists fosters dialogue and collaboration, which are essential for addressing a challenge as complex as climate change. The ability to convene representatives from diverse backgrounds and perspectives facilitates knowledge sharing and innovation, potentially leading to more effective climate strategies.

However, the extent of its usefulness is increasingly being questioned, considering the slow delivery of climate action and decisions agreed upon at previous conferences. Despite the COP process having existed for almost three decades, the world is still on track for global temperature increases of over 2°C. This reality raises concerns about the effectiveness of COP meetings and their ability to drive meaningful change. 

So, what exactly are the annual meetings meant to achieve, besides bringing people together to speak about the climate crisis and make decisions that often remain unimplemented? 

Unfortunately, COP is becoming another one of those “all talk and no action” conferences that merely give the illusion that there is progress in dealing with the climate crisis. COP seems to benefit the Global North, or developed countries and their investors, more than the communities most affected by climate change.

For example, the negotiations on damage and loss could be considered a failure because many vulnerable and affected countries and their people, mainly in the Global South and developing countries, are not getting adequate support to deal with climate-change fueled weather extremes and their effect. 

While the agreement to form the Loss and Damage Fund at COP27, in Egypt in 2022, was a huge milestone, the fact that countries have not been able to reach consensus on the basic operationalisation of the fund is disappointing.

This includes how developed or industrialised countries ought to provide financial resources to developing countries to assist with existing damage, especially damage mainly caused by them. The lack of an operational plan makes the agreement to form this fund feel futile.

Countries like the US, Japan and France have pushed back against the Loss and Damage Fund due to fears of liability consequences and a reluctance to duplicate funding for humanitarian aid. 

This raises significant questions about whether COP actually creates a platform for accountability among countries that have high carbon emissions. Moreover, it is unclear whether UN member states perceive the climate crisis as a global issue, requiring collective action, rather than viewing it through a lens of self-interest, only addressing it when it directly impacts their nations.

While there have been discussions on the importance of climate finance, they do not seem to be progressing as they should at recent COPs. The reality is that developing countries need financial resources, as well as technology transfer and capacity-building, to help them reduce emissions, adapt to climate change and address loss and damage. As such, the provision and mobilisation of climate finance remain a priority for many countries at the negotiations. 

The usefulness of COP for vulnerable and affected countries, as well as for Global South and developing countries, has not necessarily translated into their ability to influence technically powerful countries regarding climate change. 

While these decisions are being made, little consideration is given to these countries’ lack of technical and financial capacity to establish national frameworks and institutions to commence climate action or pursue adaptation. 

Developing countries that do receive assistance are often those with investment potential, where green economies could be established or multinational companies can benefit from operating. For instance, countries such as South Africa, Costa Rica, Fiji and Kenya have received attention and support, while those with lower investment potential remain neglected.

COP typically concludes with pledges from numerous countries for enhanced carbon and methane emissions targets, deforestation reduction and promises of billions in financing to aid vulnerable nations and Indigenous peoples suffering from the fallout from climate change. 

Unfortunately, these promises are often voluntary and legally non-binding. As a result, countries and institutions can make grand declarations about how they will “save the world from the climate crisis” without any real obligation to follow through. 

COP needs to create an environment where there is stronger international cooperation and binding climate targets for all countries, with equitable consideration of capacity. The challenge lies in translating the rhetoric into actionable commitments that can drive real change on the ground.

As COP29 gets underway, the urgency of the climate crisis cannot be overstated. Increased temperatures, loss of life and the deterioration of water, food and land call for immediate and robust action. The results of COP meetings must go beyond insufficient, small-scale, slow responses. Developing countries, which are the most hard-hit by climate change, require support for urgent adaptation measures and the development of renewable energy structures. 

Moreover, the pledges and actions promised at COP are becoming increasingly ineffective in addressing this climate crisis. The lack of burden sharing from richer to poorer countries creates an unreliable environment for developing countries to cope with the consequences of climate change. Therefore, COP29 must prioritise actions that ensure equitable support and resource mobilisation for all nations, particularly those facing the brunt of climate impacts.

COP29 presents an opportunity to reimagine the role of international climate negotiations. If effectively harnessed, it could catalyse substantial progress towards global climate goals, benefiting not only developed countries, but also those in the Global South facing the most severe consequences of climate change. 

The question remains — will COP29 rise to the occasion and prove itself useful or will it continue to fall into the pattern of talk without action? The success of COP29 will depend on its ability to move beyond rhetoric and create a framework for real accountability, ensuring that all countries contribute equitably to addressing the climate crisis.

Karabo Mokgonyana is a renewable energy campaigner at Power Shift Africa focusing on renewable energy in Africa, just transitions and climate security.