Countries of high wealth assert they have satisfied their climate obligations that were past due.
Countries with substantial wealth claim they've met overdue climate obligations. This assertion raises questions about the fulfillment and effectiveness of their commitments, inviting scrutiny and discussion on global climate responsibility
The OECD, consisting mostly of affluent nations, has estimated that the yearly amount of $100 billion in climate finance that was initially promised to poorer countries in 2009 will be finally provided by 2022. However, this is two years later than envisioned, and the figures are tentative, so they could be revised.
Before COP28, the UN climate summit in Dubai beginning on November 30th, the new estimates may reduce stress between affluent and poorer countries. The missed commitment had come to represent the contradiction of wealthy nations insisting that poorer countries forgo fossil fuels while not offering the financial aid to help them attain it or adjust to the hotter planet created by the industrialized nations' coal and oil usage. Nevertheless, a weak but present signal that affluent countries have reached the objective is better than having nothing.
Joe Thwaites of the National Resources Defense Council, an environmental organization, believes that developing nations will take a "trust but verify" stance. Predictions from the OECD, which were released at the 2021 Glasgow climate summit, established the basis for these estimates. The amounts of money invested by MDBs and governments are in line with these forecasts, leading the OECD to conclude that the $100bn commitment is likely to have been fulfilled. "I don't think they would make that statement if they weren't sure of it," Thwaites commented.
An image from The Economist is displayed, showing an illustration of a person holding a magnifying glass. The person appears to be searching for something in the background.
However, wealthy countries may be met with criticism for any self-praise. Not only did much of the funding come late, but in the form of loans from multilateral development banks which poor countries must repay. These countries may contend that borrowing to finance climate change actions will make their debts more unsustainable, as they already struggle with high food and energy prices and a strong U.S. dollar. At the Africa Climate Summit, African nations discussed a collective stance for the COP and asked for a "comprehensive and systemic response to the looming debt crisis", beyond the current process of dealing with sovereign defaults.
The wealthy countries have not proven to be successful when it comes to generating private finance, as they have often promised. Estimates of the amount of external finance that countries in the global south require in order to adapt to climate change tend to be quite high, in the trillions of dollars. With limited resources available to finance ministries in the global north, they are likely to use aid money to encourage private finance rather than providing everything themselves. According to the OECD, however, the amount of private finance generated through these efforts was only $14bn in 2021.
In the lead up to the COP in Dubai, wealthy countries are attempting to avoid any heated debates about financing. The deal made between the United States and China concerning climate promises has given people reason to be optimistic. The same sort of agreement between the two largest polluters had preceded the Paris Agreement in 2015. Negotiations regarding compensation for poorer countries affected by climate change, rather than aid for mitigation or adaptation, were at the forefront of last year's COP. This did not result in any commitment to reducing global warming. The EU has expressed that they will make a considerable contribution to a loss and damage fund, while John Kerry, America's climate negotiator, has said they will give millions. This, along with the fact that the $100bn pledge has been met, may ease the tension.
By 2025, wealthy countries must come to an agreement on a new commitment, as the present framework they are following is set to expire. According to Michai Robertson from the Alliance of Small Island States, which consists of nations that are particularly susceptible to climate change, the technical debates have been "directionless". There is no unity on the subject of what should be considered climate finance, how long the new objective should persist, or who should contribute. Established in 1992, the donor nations set excludes countries with high emissions, such as China, and petroleum-producing countries, such as Saudi Arabia and the UAE. From time to time, wealthy countries propose that these countries should also provide financial aid.
Continued disagreement exists over how any new funds should be used. In 2021, wealthy countries have agreed to double the finance provided for adapting to climate change instead of reducing emissions. This is a priority for the poorest nations, which emit little but are highly impacted by a hotter planet. Rich countries, having to answer to their climate-conscious citizens, are often more focused on getting middle-income countries to give up coal. Last year's conference concluded with a deal of $20bn between a handful of wealthy countries and Indonesia for this purpose. Fulfilling these promises is a start, yet there is no sign of resolution in the disputes over the cost of a hotter planet.
