COP29 outcomes fall short on finance and nature

But a deal was done, even if it is an inadequate one. As António Guterres, the UN Secretary-General, put it : 'The world must pay up, or humanity will pay the price. Climate finance is not charity, it's an investment.'

Rich nations will provide US$300 billion to help poorer nations decarbonise their economies and adapt to the impacts of climate change, as part of a wider goal of mobilising from all sectors $1.3 trillion of finance needed, according to expert analysis released at the COP.

While the $300 billion sum is eye-popping, it's worth putting that figure in perspective; government subsidies for fossil fuels, the burning of which is the primary cause of the climate crisis we face, topped $7 trillion last year.

There was similar anger at the lack of explicit mention of fossil fuels in COP29 outcomes, after a breakthrough at the previous COP where all countries agreed to transition away from fossil fuels. Questions were raised about the influence of fossil fuel states when it appeared Saudi Arabia had been given the opportunity to amend COP decision language before the Azerbaijani Presidency of COP29 shared it with other nations. The Azerbaijani Presidency, by contrast, laid the blame for the lack of a better deal squarely at the feet of the refusal by western nations to commit more money.

The troubled COP negotiations left many eminent figures questioning whether the COP structure is still fit for purpose. The trouble is, it is the only game in town, and no matter how unsatisfactory, the money pledged is an advance on previous commitments.

It also stands in contrast to the recently concluded COP16 of the Convention on Biological Diversity, which ended without any deal agreed on funding to tackle nature loss. That COP did, however, recognise the importance of nature, including animals, for tackling climate change.

By contrast, nature was almost entirely missing from COP29. IFAW joined our partners in the Nature4Climate Coalition, urging for more focus on finance for nature in the COP29 outcomes. But in the final decision texts themselves, there is very little mention at all of nature. While the focus of COP29 was always going to be the financial goal, this lack of reference to nature is still disappointing.

It means all eyes are now on COP30 in Brazil, where nature-tropical forests in particular-will feature heavily on the agenda of the Brazilian COP30 Presidency.