This year’s Cop29, the United Nations climate conference, proved to be a particularly challenging one.
Climate negotiations are never straightforward but become even more complex when financial commitments are involved. The main point of contention was how much wealthy nations — major contributors to global fossil fuel emissions — should pay poorer, more vulnerable countries to help combat climate change.
After two weeks of tense discussions, filled with finger-pointing and resentment, negotiators from around the world pushed through, reaching a deal in the early hours of Sunday, November 24. At times, a deal appeared unlikely but ultimately it was secured.
Here are the key Cop29 highlights you need to know.
$300 billion deal by 2035
Early on Sunday morning, negotiators agreed that wealthy nations will provide $300 billion (£238bn) annually to developing countries by 2035 to help them address the impacts of climate change.
However, the most vulnerable nations need $1.3 trillion (£1tn) per year to adapt to and mitigate the effects of climate change, as highlighted in an earlier agreement made during climate talks in Azerbaijan.
As a result, several people have criticised the final amount. India said that the “paltry sum” was agreed upon by the Cop presidency without considering the nation's objections.
The amount was referred to as a “joke” in Nigeria. Malawi added that it was “not ambitious” compared with the least developed nations.
Experts have already stated that if nations don't contribute the necessary funds, the Cop agreement is meaningless.
The $300 billion will come from “all public and private sources”, according to the agreement.
And, according to a 1992 UN framework, 23 industrialised nations — and the European Union — that have historically produced the most emissions that cause global warming are required to contribute to climate financing.
International mega-banks, such as the World Bank, are expected to contribute to the cost together with governments. Additionally, it is hoped that businesses and wealthy individuals will follow suit and donate funds to climate action.
Carbon credit trading rules are approved
New regulations allow wealthy, high-emission nations to purchase carbon-cutting “offsets” from underdeveloped ones.
Known as Article 6 of the Paris Agreement, this programme establishes frameworks for a UN-regulated market and facilitates direct country-to-country carbon trading. Since many carbon credits are generated in developing nations through projects including reforestation, carbon sink protection, and renewable energy adoption, supporters believe this could channel critical investment into these regions.
However, critics warn that without strict safeguards, this system could be exploited by major polluters to delay significant carbon reductions, undermining the effectiveness of climate targets. Past scandals in the unregulated carbon market have fuelled concerns about the credibility of these credits.
Fear of Trump
One common goal among negotiators in Baku was preventing a second Donald Trump presidency from undermining years of careful climate discussions. As a result, the decision by wealthier nations to pledge increased investment by 2035 was not surprising.
The aim is to set a deadline for the US to re-engage in climate efforts once Mr Trump leaves office. In a similar vein, efforts were made to broaden the base of contributors to the global climate cause. Including China in the conversation — albeit voluntarily — was considered an important step in demonstrating the value of participating in forums such as Cop.
“No one thinks Trump in the White House will be anything but damaging to the multilateral climate regime. But this agreement was about trying to limit the damage as much as possible,” said Professor Michael Jacobs, visiting senior fellow at the think tank ODI Global.
Energy Secretary Ed Miliband previously said while Mr Trump could not “stop” the battle to save the planet, the UK would seek “common ground” with the US president-elect on climate change.
Cop might be on the ropes
Hosting in Azerbaijan, a country with no real history of involvement in the Cop process, did not please many participants.
The assertion that oil and gas are a “gift from God” by the nation's president, Ilham Aliyev, did not help the situation.
There was also the direct criticism of politicians, charities, and “Western fake news media” for “spreading disinformation”.
Campaigners are more vocal than ever
A more combative approach by many environmental non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and activists was one of the prominent themes at Cop29. For many developing nations, these organisations are vital in navigating complex events such as Cop. During the negotiations, several advocates strongly pushed for rejecting nearly every deal presented.
Similarly, after the final agreement was adopted, speakers from several countries openly opposed the accord during the closing plenary. Their outspoken criticism was applauded as they condemned the financing text, even after all countries had officially accepted it.
Preparations for the next Cop
The next COP will be held in Belem, Brazil, in a year.
Brazil’s climate ambassador, Ana Toni, told AFP that the country would not “shy away” from advocating “a just transition to ending fossil fuel use”.
However, many activists are disappointed that Cop30 will take place in a nation planning to increase its domestic fossil fuel production for the third consecutive year.
At Cop29, Brazilian Environment and Climate Change Minister Marina Silva described the upcoming negotiations as the “Cop of Cops” and said“there is no more time to lose”. She added: “At CoP30, our objective will be to do what is necessary to keep 1.5°C within reach.”
