Scaling Down Emissions

As the world grapples with the escalating climate crisis, COP29, held in Baku, Azerbaijan in November, became a critical juncture for addressing the global climate agenda. Convened under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), Conferences of the Parties (COPs) are the world’s leading forum for negotiating climate action. This year’s conference centred on the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) for climate finance, a successor to the $100 billion annual goal set in 2009 - a target that has not been fully met.

This year, COP29 earned the distinction of being the ‘Finance COP’, attended by more than 50,000 people from around 200 countries, underscoring the critical need to scale up and mobilise climate finance to address the intensifying climate crisis. Civil society groups advocated for an ambitious target of $5 trillion annually to tackle global climate challenges, with at least $1 trillion allocated specifically to developing nations for adaptation, mitigation, and addressing loss and damage. Some developing countries suggested dedicating at least 1 per cent of the global GDP, amounting to approximately $1.27 trillion annually, while others pushed for the Loss and Damage Fund to remain distinct from the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) or to be established as a sub-goal under the new financial framework.

In alignment with these demands, UN Secretary-General António Guterres stated, “Contributing to the NCQG is not charity; it is an investment in our collective future.” He reinforced the principle of ‘Polluters Pay’, emphasising that the Global North, responsible for the majority of historical greenhouse gas emissions, must shoulder a significant share of this financial burden.

The negotiations in Baku concluded with a profoundly disappointing outcome: a proposed annual goal of just $300 billion by 2035. Civil society activists have aptly labelled this outcome as the ‘Betrayal in Baku’. This figure, falling drastically short of expectations, sparked outrage among developing nations and civil society, who viewed it as a betrayal of climate justice. Many have labelled this decision as not just inadequate climate finance but a form of climate genocide, reflecting the devastating impact that insufficient funding will have on vulnerable nations.

Historical Responsibility and Climate Injustice: The Disproportionate Impact on the Global South:

The historical responsibility for climate change lies heavily with the Global North - industrialised and developed countries such as the United States, European nations, Canada, and Japan. These nations have contributed disproportionately to greenhouse gas emissions since the Industrial Revolution, largely driven by their reliance on fossil fuels for economic growth and industrialisation. Despite comprising a smaller share of the global population, these countries have been responsible for the majority of cumulative emissions, leading to the destabilisation of the global climate system.

In recognition of this disparity, the ‘polluter pays’ principle has gained traction globally, underscored by UN Secretary-General António Guterres’ assertion that major polluters must bear the cost of addressing climate impacts. This principle calls on countries historically responsible for climate change to finance mitigation, adaptation, and compensation efforts, particularly in vulnerable nations.

In stark contrast, the Global South, including countries like Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Mozambique, have contributed less than 1 per cent of global carbon emissions. Despite their minimal historical emissions, these countries are among the most affected by climate change, experiencing devastating impacts such as extreme weather events, rising sea levels, and prolonged droughts. For instance, Pakistan has faced catastrophic floods, like the 2022 deluge that submerged one-third of the country, affecting over 33 million people. Pakistan’s emissions account for less than 1 per cent of global totals, yet it is ranked among the top 10 countries most vulnerable to climate change. Bangladesh is frequently battered by cyclones and faces existential threats from rising sea levels, even though its per capita emissions are one of the lowest in the world. Similarly, Mozambique is highly susceptible to cyclones and floods, which have caused immense economic losses and displacement despite its negligible contribution to global emissions.

This glaring inequity underscores the need for climate justice, whereby the Global North must provide financial and technical assistance to the Global South to address the disproportionate burden of climate change they bear. Mechanisms such as the Loss and Damage Fund, initiated at COP27 at Sherm el Sheikh, Egypt, and discussed at COP29, aim to operationalise this principle, ensuring vulnerable countries receive the support they need to rebuild and adapt.

Equity in Development: The Global North’s Legacy and the Path Forward for the Global South

The argument made by some in the Global South - that they should be allowed to follow the same carbon-intensive development path as the Global North to grow their economies - raises important points about equity and historical responsibility. However, it misses several crucial aspects of the current climate crisis and the opportunities available today.

First, while it is true that the Global North has historically prospered through carbon-intensive development, that model is no longer viable or justifiable in the context of the current climate crisis. The environmental and social costs of fossil fuel-driven growth are now well-documented, and the consequences - rising temperatures, extreme weather events, and loss of biodiversity - are too dire to ignore. The world has shifted, and the transition to clean energy is no longer a choice but a necessity for global survival.

Take Pakistan’s Thar Coal Project, for example. While Pakistan has discovered its own local coal reserves in the Thar Desert, which could help fulfill the country’s energy needs and reduce dependence on expensive LNG and imported coal, this reliance on coal is a step backward in terms of climate action. Environmentalists rightly argue that coal is a major source of greenhouse gas emissions, contributing significantly to global warming. While the temptation for a developing country like Pakistan to use its local resources for energy security and economic growth is understandable, it overlooks the long-term environmental costs of continuing the fossil fuel path. The Thar Coal Project, while providing short-term energy solutions, may lock the country into a carbon-intensive model like China that exacerbates the very climate crisis it is trying to address. More critically, it will transform the Thar landscape, degrading soil and groundwater quality while threatening public health, biodiversity and social fabric, as highlighted by recent scientific studies.

The argument for coal as a development tool overlooks the growing viability of renewable energy as a more sustainable, economically practical option. Clean energy technologies like solar and wind are increasingly affordable, scalable, and locally available, particularly in regions like Thar. Pakistan has significant renewable potential; for example, the Jhimpir-Gharo wind corridor could generate over 47,000 MW, while Thar Desert solar projects could provide clean energy to meet the country’s peak summer demand of 32,000 MW.

Focusing on renewables allows Pakistan to avoid the financial strain of coal and gas power generation, which locks the country into unsustainable capacity payments. These payments drain national resources and hinder investments in more cost-effective renewable solutions. A shift to solar and wind energy, including off-grid solutions, could offer a more sustainable and economically viable energy future, fostering long-term stability and environmental protection.

Despite these opportunities, Pakistan’s climate response remains inadequate. The latest Climate Change Performance Index published by German Watch at the eve of COP29 highlights the country’s poor performance in managing greenhouse gas emissions, implementing climate policies, and contributing to the Paris Agreement’s Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). This limited progress exposes Pakistan to increasing climate risks, underlining the need for stronger climate policies and greater commitment to renewable energy development.

The argument that the Global South is being denied opportunities overlooks the potential to leapfrog the carbon-intensive development path of the Global North. While the North grew through fossil fuels, developing countries like Pakistan have the chance to transition directly to clean energy, creating sustainable economies, job opportunities, and reducing fossil fuel dependence. By investing in renewables like solar and wind, the Global South can avoid the environmental and economic costs of coal, ensuring a more equitable and sustainable future.

Debt Amplifies Climate Vulnerabilities

Debt is a critical factor that amplifies the climate vulnerability of developing countries like Pakistan. With a debt exceeding $125 billion, Pakistan’s financial constraints hinder its ability to invest in climate resilience. The devastating 2022 floods, which displaced 33 million people and caused $30 billion in damages, highlighted the severe consequences of climate inaction.

At COP29, Pakistan and other nations in the Global South called for grants instead of loans, as existing debt traps further impede efforts to transition to clean energy and adapt to climate impacts. The demand for grants is not just financial relief; it is essential for sustainable development and for breaking the cycle of debt that exacerbates climate vulnerability. The Global South’s frustration was captured by a powerful analogy: “The Global North crashed the world’s party, spilled drinks everywhere, broke all the furniture, and left us with their mess. Now they’re handing us the cleaning bill and offering loans with interest if we can’t pay.”

The Rise of Carbon Markets and Private Sector Influence

One of the most debated issues at COP29 was the increasing focus on carbon credit markets, heavily promoted by Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs) and private investors. World Bank President Ajay Banga announced plans to mobilise $120 billion by 2030, with over 60 per cent from private sector investments. These markets, including voluntary carbon markets (VCMs), allow entities to offset emissions by investing in carbon reduction projects. However, critics argue that these mechanisms primarily benefit private interests and ‘carbon cowboys’, side-lining frontline communities. Civil society groups warned against these markets, calling them a distraction from real renewable energy solutions and labelling them ineffective without major reforms.

Adding to concerns, MDBs’ push to control climate finance raised questions about their priorities, as many continue to finance fossil gas projects globally. Critics noted their focus on leveraging public funds for private sector profits, undermining the spirit of genuine climate action. Furthermore, at developing country pavilions, strategies prepared with MDB support often lacked stakeholder input, with launch events dominated by MDB representatives instead of national officials, casting doubt on ownership and legitimacy. These dynamics underscore the urgent need for inclusive, transparent climate finance mechanisms that prioritise renewable solutions over profit-driven models.

The Alarm Bells of Science

COP29 also saw the release of alarming research predicting that a 2°C temperature rise could trigger irreversible impacts within decades. The Global Stocktake, a periodic review of progress under the Paris Agreement, revealed that the world is far off track in limiting warming to 1.5°C. This urgency should prompt swift action, yet the negotiations ended with frustrations.

In conclusion, climate justice requires scaled-up finance focused on grants, not loans, to help vulnerable nations like Pakistan without worsening debt. The Global North must fulfill its historical financial commitments, and carbon markets need reform for real impact. The focus must shift to renewable energy and sustainable development. As COP29 ends, the message is clear: no deal is better than a bad deal. The world must act urgently for climate justice.

Fiza Naz Qureshi is a campaigner at Big Shift Global. She can be reached at

fizaqureshi044@gmail.com