Danielle Falzon, Ph.D., Assistant Professor in the Department of Sociology at Rutgers University – New Brunswick, shares her reflections of the recent COP29 summit.
In November, the United Nations climate negotiations, COP29, convened in Baku, Azerbaijan, drawing tens of thousands of participants from around the globe, including government representatives, civil society organizations, researchers, and activists. This was my eighth time attending the COP as part of my research on inequality in climate policymaking, but this year’s summit stood out, especially on issues of climate finance and global cooperation.
A Divisive Location
COP29 took place in an oil-producing nation, a decision that sparked considerable backlash. This was the second consecutive year that a COP meeting was held in a country with strong oil interests—last year’s summit was hosted by the United Arab Emirates. The city of Baku’s proximity to oil drilling sites, just kilometers from the conference center, only heightened concerns about the summit’s legitimacy and the apparent conflict of interest. In addition to these environmental concerns, the country’s authoritarian government, known for stifling dissent and imprisoning journalists, further fueled the criticisms of the location.
But it wasn’t just the venue that dominated the conversation. The climate negotiations faced a deeply contentious issue: climate finance. This has been a long-standing point of division between the Global North and South, and COP29 was no exception.
The Climate Finance Debate
The climate finance debate overshadowed much of the summit. The question was how much money should be mobilized to support climate action in the Global South in the coming decade. The previous target of $100 billion annually by 2020 had not been met, and many were hoping to see more ambitious commitments this year.
Unfortunately, the final outcome fell short of expectations. Climate-vulnerable nations had called for trillions of dollars per year, but negotiators settled on a far more modest $300 billion per year by 2035. Even more troubling, the goal only called for the Global North to provide a significant portion of that funding as public finance, leaving the door wide open for further shortfalls. Without clear commitments from other sources, many activists and negotiators from the Global South were left disappointed by the result.
The Role of the U.S. in Future Climate Negotiations
A lingering question at COP29 was the future of U.S. participation in the climate talks, particularly with the return of Donald Trump to office. During his first term, the U.S. continued to participate in COP meetings, even as it pursued policies that often clashed with the goals of the Paris Agreement. Should Trump withdraw the U.S. from the global climate treaty, it would not only threaten the country’s seat at the table but also undermine global efforts to tackle climate change.
Despite this uncertainty, most of the world remains committed to advancing the goals of the Paris Agreement, with or without the U.S. on board. While the U.S. has often been a disruptive force in climate negotiations, global resolve is strengthening to ensure progress continues, regardless of any individual country’s actions.
The Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA)
In my own work, I focused on the Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA), an important element of the Paris Agreement aimed at reducing vulnerability, increasing resilience, and enhancing adaptive capacity to climate impacts. While the GGA’s objectives are crucial, they remain vague, and adaptation projects around the world have had limited success. Countries at COP29 worked on refining the GGA by establishing clear targets and indicators, focusing on critical areas like water and food security.
As a researcher, I am looking closely at how these decisions are made, conducting interviews with negotiators to understand the diverse priorities at play in these negotiations. Being able to attend these meetings in person at the COP is crucial for advancing my research agenda at Rutgers. At COP29, not only was I able to closely follow the GGA for my academic publications, I was able to grow my networks, advance nascent research projects, and put on an event to encourage actionable, evidence-based collaborations between researchers and policy-makers.
An Event at the SHARE Hub
With the support of Rutgers Global, I partnered with colleagues, Erasmus University, Oxford Policy Management, and the Climate Ambition Support Alliance to host a side event at COP29 titled “Just Climate Action From Mountain to Sea: Barriers and Opportunities for Addressing Loss and Damage.” The event took place at the Saleemul Huq Action Research Exchange (SHARE) Hub, a space dedicated to bridging the gap between research and action on climate change.
The event focused on the unique challenges faced by mountain and coastal ecosystems, which are increasingly vulnerable to the effects of climate change. Distinguished speakers, including Dr. Bimal Raj Regmi from Oxford Policy Management and Hyeonggeun Ji from the Hague Humanitarian Studies Centre, shared insights on the difficulties of translating international policies into meaningful local solutions. A panel discussion with experts including Jannet Felicia James Gwambe from ECOP Mozambique and Md. Shamsuddoha from the Center for Participatory Research and Development in Bangladesh sparked rich conversations on how local communities are coping with climate impacts and what more needs to be done to address loss and damage effectively.
A Call for Greater Action
As COP29 concluded, it became clear that the road to meaningful climate action remains fraught with challenges. Whether it’s the failure to meet climate finance targets, the uncertainty surrounding the U.S.’s role in the Paris Agreement, or the need for more effective adaptation strategies, the summit highlighted the deep divisions within the global community. Yet, despite the setbacks, the determination of many nations, civil society groups, and researchers to advance climate action remained strong.