India Rejected the Proposal of $300 Billion A Year at Baku

The COP 29 conference established a new climate finance goal to mobilise $300 billion annually by 2035 for developing countries. However, India rejected this proposal.

COP29 at Baku: Climate Finance

New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG): The conference established a new climate finance goal to mobilise $300 billion annually by 2035 for developing countries.
- This figure represents a tripling of the previous commitment of $100 billion set in 2009.
- The overarching aim is to reach $1.3 trillion per year by 2035, combining public and private sources to effectively address climate impacts in developing nations.
Carbon Markets: COP29 achieved agreements on carbon markets, finalising all elements of the Paris Agreement related to this topic.
- This is expected to help countries implement their climate plans more efficiently and contribute to global emissions reduction efforts.
Other Agreements: The conference also made strides in areas such as transparent climate reporting and adaptation strategies, launching initiatives like the Baku Adaptation Road Map.

Finance to tackle Climate Change: Background

At the 15th Conference of Parties (COP15) under the UNFCCC in Copenhagen in 2009, developed countries pledged to collectively mobilise USD 100 billion annually by 2020 to support climate action in developing countries, with a focus on meaningful mitigation measures and transparency in implementation.
This target was formalised at COP16 in Cancun and reaffirmed at COP21 in Paris, where it was further extended until 2025.

Criticism by Developing Countries

Inadequate Financial Commitments: Developing nations criticised the $300 billion base target as insufficient to address their climate mitigation and adaptation needs.
- India called the package “too little and too distant”, stressing that it falls short of the $1.3 trillion annual funding required.
Failure to Meet Past Promises: Developed countries have not fulfilled the earlier promise of mobilising $100 billion annually by 2020. This undermines trust in the new commitments.

Exclusion and Lack of Transparency: India alleged that its request to speak before the adoption of the climate finance package was ignored, accusing the process of being “stage-managed”.
Geopolitical Dominance: Critics, including Nigeria and Bolivia, argued that the NCQG was shaped by geopolitical interests of developed nations, ignoring the pressing needs of vulnerable countries.
Delayed Action: The financial mobilisation goal is set for 2035, which developing countries see as too distant given the urgency of the climate crisis.
Limited Progress on Trust and Collaboration: India and others emphasised that trust and collaboration—key to addressing climate change—were lacking in the negotiations, leading to widespread dissatisfaction.