BAKU: The United States climate summit (COP29) in Baku on Sunday concluded amidst high drama with the adoption of a controversial agreement to triple climate finance for developing countries to $300 billion annually by 2035. However, the process and the amount agreed upon faced strong opposition from India and other developing nations, who expressed dissatisfaction with both the substance and the manner of adoption.
India, a prominent voice among developing countries, rejected the proposal outright, calling the agreed-upon financial goal inadequate and unfairly distributed.
Chandni Raina, adviser to the Department of Economic Affairs and part of India’s negotiating team, criticised the agreement for failing to address the urgent needs of developing nations grappling with the impacts of climate change. She described the sum as “abysmally poor” and “a paltry amount” compared to the estimated $1.3 trillion required annually until 2030 for effective climate action.
India also condemned the process of adoption, calling it “stage-managed” and highlighting the lack of inclusivity in decision-making. Raina said India had informed the COP20 Presidency and the Secretariat of its intention to make a statement before the decision was finalised but was not given the opportunity to do so.
She said that trust and collaboration were essential to tackling the global climate crisis and accused the developed nations of undermining both through their approach. According to India, the reliance on private and multilateral sources for the proposed finance goal deflects responsibility from developed countries, which are historically more accountable for greenhouse gas emissions.
Raina further noted that counting finance mobilised through Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs) is not a step forward from the previous $100 billion goal but a diversion of responsibility onto developing countries.
The criticism reflects broader frustrations among developing nations, many of which feel that their voices are being sidelined in international climate negotiations. Countries like Nigeria and Bolivia echoed India’s sentiments, saying the proposed goal fails to meet the principles of equity and common but differentiated responsibilities outlined in the Paris Agreement. Observers and experts have also criticised the agreement for its lack of ambition.
A senior official from the Ministry of Finance told TNIE the deal was no good and “if the inflation rate is taken into account, you will realise that the narrative of tripling of climate finance is a farce. The Climate Finance Shadow Report 2023 from Oxfam shows the public finance component in the $100 billion committed by developed countries previously was only 15-20%, which would be the case in the $300 billion deal as well.”
Vaibhav Chaturvedi of the Council on Energy, Environment, and Water remarked that the decision puts the 1.5°C temperature target out of reach, as mitigation efforts cannot succeed without adequate financial and technological support.
The financial agreement was a critical agenda item at COP29, given its role in enabling developing countries to meet their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and adapt to the impacts of climate change. However, the delayed implementation of the $300 billion goal—set to begin only in 2035—has raised concerns about its effectiveness.
Many developing nations argue that they cannot wait more than a decade for the resources they need now to address escalating climate challenges. Disproportionate burden placed on the Global South, which is being asked to transition to low-carbon economies at significant economic and developmental costs, often in a hostile financial environment has been called out by India in unequivocal terms at the international climate arena.