The recent UN Climate Conference in Baku concluded with a contentious decision to raise the annual climate finance contributions from industrialized nations to a minimum of $300 billion by 2035. This decision follows intense negotiations and marks a tripling of the previous $100 billion commitment. However, many developing countries criticized the figure as insufficient, having demanded up to $1.3 trillion annually by 2035.
The newly agreed framework, part of the 'Baku to Belem roadmap', aims to explore further financing possibilities ahead of the next conference in Belém. Despite this, dissatisfaction persisted, especially regarding the lack of concrete steps to reduce fossil fuel dependency and greenhouse gas emissions. Countries like Chile, Canada, and Switzerland opposed a draft decision that would have merely referenced earlier commitments to phase out fossil fuels.
German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock expressed frustration over the perceived 'power plays' by oil-rich nations, accusing them of stalling progress. She emphasized the necessity of aligning climate aid with emission reduction efforts, stating that financial contributions alone are insufficient to combat climate change.
Critics from organizations like Oxfam and Greenpeace argued that the conference failed to meet the urgent needs of vulnerable nations. The absence of substantial commitments to move away from fossil fuels and increase renewable energy was seen as a significant setback.
Despite these challenges, the conference did manage to set a new baseline for future climate finance, although it fell short of expectations. The outcome has been acknowledged as a stepping stone, albeit a modest one, towards addressing the growing demands of low-income countries in their fight against climate change.
