In Baku, the negotiators are now facing a mountain. On Wednesday, November 13, the Egyptian and Australian co-facilitators proposed two still very long versions of the main text of this 29e Climate Conference of the Parties (COP29), the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG, “new quantified collective objective”). In the second, which will serve as a basis for negotiation, 90 options and sub-options remain to be decided. An infinitely complex diplomatic equation on a crucial subject, the aid to be provided to developing countries to finance their climate transition.
“We are very worried, because there was more than a year of preparation on this text and all of this was rejected as a basis for negotiationcommented on Thursday, Jacob Werksman, chief negotiator of the European Union, in reference to the first draft (“draft”) swept aside on Tuesday by developing countries. [Le texte] is still over thirty pages long. We are far from a landing field. »
Suffice it to say that the coming days promise to be perilous for the negotiators from the 197 countries meeting in Azerbaijan. After the departure of world leaders, who spoke on Tuesday and Wednesday, they must now clear the field of alternatives before the arrival of ministers in the middle of the week of November 18. The latter will try to conclude the negotiations. “We will try to leave them as little as possible to dohoped Mr. Werksman. We remain optimistic. We can accomplish this task on time. »
“A kind of choreography”
Concerning the heart of the document, that is to say the total amount of financing and the sources of the money in the next ten years, the text puts three major choices on the table. Options that reflect the ambitions of major areas of the world. The first mainly responds to the expectations expressed by developing countries: a quantum of 1,100 billion to 2,000 billion dollars annually between 2029 and 2035.
Read also | Article reserved for our subscribers At the COP29 podium, the countries of the South are demanding action and funding
Read later
In the myriad of sub-options, it is proposed to direct funding towards certain categories of countries (220 billion dollars for the least developed countries and 39 billion dollars for small island developing States). These proposals seem difficult to accept for certain rich countries, particularly when mention is made of “burden sharing among developed countries based on historical emissions and gross domestic product per capita”. A hypothesis which would force the United States and the European Union (EU), responsible for the vast majority of greenhouse gas emissions since 1850, to pay enormously.
You have 54.4% of this article left to read. The rest is reserved for subscribers.
Related News :