COP29: Missed opportunities and empty promises?

COP29’s $400 billion finance deal – to be mobilised by 2030 – is a downpayment on climate justice. It signals recognition from global leaders that global finance mechanisms and ethics are now aligned in the fight against climate change. However, it is far from enough.

For communities already bearing the brunt of climate-induced disasters – particularly in developing countries and Small Island Developing States – the deal gives little solace. The pledged funds fail to provide the critical support required to prepare for and recover from escalating climate impacts. In 2023 climate-related disasters caused $202.7 billion in economic damage, according to the International Disaster Database. Soon the amount required to avert and minimise loss and damage might exceed $100 billion per year. Yet, only $69 million of the $749 million promised has been received. The much-anticipated New Collective Quantified Goal on Climate Finance failed to set a clear sub-target for loss and damage, delivering instead a patchwork of vague commitments.

The message to communities vulnerable to the worst effects of climate change appears to be navigate the storm alone. The Global Network of Civil Society Organisations for Disaster Reduction (GNDR) remains steadfast to this indifference – we must demand a significant increase in financing and hold developed countries accountable. Climate finance should be grant based, not loan driven, and used to strengthen national and local systems to avert and minimise loss and damage, rather than funding fragmented, hard-to-access projects.

Loss and damage: promises without progress

The contrast between COP pledges, concrete actions and political will remains stark. Two COPs have passed since the global agreement was adopted to fund loss and damage – hailed as a landmark victory for climate justice. Yet, at COP29, financial commitments from major polluters remained uncertain, and there is still no clear pathway to ensuring that funds reach communities most affected by the climate crisis. The so-called ‘full operationalisation’ of the Loss and Damage Fund as a ‘Baku breakthrough’ – named after COP29’s host city – appears overstated. COP29 failed to secure substantial increases in pledges, with many critical decisions deferred to UNFCCC’s advice and implementation conference in June (SB62) and COP30 in November.

One promising avenue for cooperation on loss and damage is the Early Warnings for All initiative. Locally-led anticipatory actions and inclusive early warning systems could avert and minimise loss and damage. However, without significant increases in finance and investment, these efforts will fall short.

The elephant in the room: old silos persist

Beyond finance, COP29 once again highlighted the disconnect between climate change adaptation (CCA) and disaster risk reduction (DRR). Despite the well-established link between climate change and the increasing frequency and intensity of disasters, DRR and CCA remain fragmented, hindered by separate policy origins and workstreams.

GNDR’s advocacy at COP29 underscored the need for greater coherence between these fields. In Baku, and at other global events, such as July’s UN High-level Political Forum, we championed risk-informed development, which bridges science, policy and practice. Yet there is limited coordination, capacity gaps, policy silos and slow-moving funding mechanisms, and these are all being exacerbated by the political economy that shapes decision-making. Overcoming these barriers is crucial for maximising resources and building resilience at scale.

The road to COP30: a historic opportunity

COP30 in Belém, Brazil, presents a historic opportunity. It is a chance to reclaim the summit from fossil fuel interests and ensure voices that have been marginalised and overlooked are heard. With Brazil’s leadership, the focus must shift toward integrated climate action, DRR and equitable financing that empowers local communities.

From now until COP30, as we celebrate and reflect on 10 years of the Paris Agreement, advocacy efforts must intensify. All those concerned about the climate crisis should push for systemic reforms that prioritise local expertise, equitable financing and meaningful community participation. The UNFCCC must lead by example – strengthening multilateralism, integrating climate, biodiversity and desertification conventions and ensuring the Paris Agreement remains a guiding force. We need to drastically improve our commitments to limit warming to 1.5 degrees and set robust policies for the transition away from fossil fuels.

Room for optimism: turning the tide

COP29 laid bare the gaps, but it also reinforced the climate movement’s resilience. This must persist – we must demand not just pledges but real, impactful actions. And we must collaborate – the path forward requires governments, civil society, the private sector and local communities to work hand-in-hand.

Although NGOs and CSOs represent community voices and could enhance local actions, their participation in key policy spaces, along with access to finance, is limited. Skyrocketing attendance costs to COP and other key events, and resistance to local leadership, must be addressed so that civil society can influence key negotiations. We hope Brazil’s Presidency will step up and fulfil its role as a decisive leader and honest broker to deliver a just and equitable space for everyone.

We must also transform the narrative – from the “last mile” to the “first mile” – where local communities lead the charge for resilience. Indigenous communities’ centuries-old knowledge systems hold the key to sustainable, locally-led adaptation strategies. And Indigenous leadership, in particular, must be recognised and uplifted.

COP30 must set bold ambitions for climate finance and local resilience, ensuring that people on the frontline of climate-induced disasters receive the support they desperately need. To turn these commitments into concrete action, political will must take precedence over diplomatic deadlock. Broken promises and missed opportunities cannot define our future.