Dissatisfaction and discord characterised the sentiment between the Global North and South at the conference. John Podesta, senior adviser, in the US, on International Climate Policy, was followed out of the room with protesters shouting ‘shame’ at him, and Greenpeace called the outcome of the conference as “woefully inadequate”. But can we be surprised or dismissive of this anger?
In the final few hours of the talks, developed nations agreed to give at least $300 billion a year to developing countries by 2035 – “a paltry sum”. This pledge is far lower than what the Global South requested, which called for $1.3 trillion annually from developed countries. The African Group of Negotiators described it as “too little, too late”.
Paradoxically, 2024 saw the hottest-ever day and month, yet climate change is falling down the political agenda. Trump’s victory provided a difficult backdrop for negotiations, as America’s role, globally, becomes much less certain. Trump’s Fossil fuel expansion, the USA’s role in institutions such as The World Bank in funding climate finance, and agreement to commitments are on the ropes, as his presidency looms.
Similarly, the questioning of climate action has gone hand in hand with the increasing popularity of right-wing parties in other democracies, namely France and Germany, hint to a trend away from climate change being a major issue on the political agenda.
Often climate financing is seen as an act of good-will or benignity from developed nations. Yet, action is necessary out of moral and historical obligations. We are ‘taking away the ladder’, a term Friedrich List coined in 1841; having climbed up it, industrializing using unrenewable sources and disproportionately polluting the planet, we are denying undeveloped countries to follow a different path, and claiming we owe very little to finance a different path. The global north is acting like children forced to share the toys that they stole from their friend in the first place.