For me, COP29 is defined by two stories.
The first is one of inaction. Plenary meetings (main meetings of all UN delegates), negotiations, and meetings about reports on the science of climate change offered re-runs of previous COPs. While Scientists continued to underline with ever thicker ink the absolute necessity to, “tighten our belts” and transition away from fossil fuels to avert “hell and high water,” delegates engaged in platitudes, making grandiose statements about the need for and importance of sustainable and just development. These claims are hardly new, and they were made at a COP – the third in a row hosted by a petrostate – in which negotiators failed to make a major leap in the right direction.
The purpose of this COP was to settle on a New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) for climate finance – the delivery of funds from developed countries to help developing countries mitigate and adapt to climate change. Developing countries were pushing for $1.3tn per year, delivered primarily as grants (as opposed to loans) from the public budgets of developed nations – the parties most responsible for and least vulnerable to climate change. Science was clear that a figure in the trillions was necessary to limit warming to 1.5°C, but developed nations only agreed to “take the lead” in raising $300bn per year by 2035. Even with the half-baked concession to raise $1.3tn by 2035 from all sources of finance, public and private, India’s delegate, Chandni Raina, termed the sum “paltry.” This all too gradual progress is part of the reason why a collection of prominent global leaders, including former UN Secretary General Ban-Ki-moon and former Executive Secretary of the UNFCCC Christiana Figueres, signed a letter calling for significant reform to the COP process.
The calls for reform are prominent amongst local stakeholders as well, the main characters of the second story – the one of action. At an NGO (non-governmental organization) panel discussion focused on community action in a changing climate, David Munene, a leader of the Catholic Youth Network for Environmental Sustainability in Kenya termed the COP process “insanity” – the repetition of the same thing over and over again with the expectation of a different result. This disaffection is why NGO leaders in multiple panels issued some version of the following call to action: “countries won’t take action – we have to.”
People and organizations from around the world are listening. This includes MASIPAG, an NGO that empowered Leodegario Velayo (and other Filipino farmers) to endure severe weather events through farmer-to-farmer education programs focused on diversified, climate change resilient farming systems. Save Soil also aims to empower farmers through a multipronged approach to incentivize the adoption of sustainable practices and the development of farmer collectives. This also includes Prasiddihi Singh, a 12 year-old climate activist and founder of Prasiddihi Forest Foundation aiming to increase forest cover in India through youth-led tree plantings. Another youth climate activist, Anisa Abibulloeva, a leader of Little Earth in Tajikistan, aims to promote youth engagement in climate innovation through workshops and inclusive advocacy efforts. She joined Keith Wingeard on a panel focused on youth innovation to address climate change. Keith works for an NGO called Solar Cookers International which aims to address indoor air pollution and promote clean cooking throughout the global south. These examples are remarkable because they’re common.
It’s easy to get hung up on the insane insufficiency of the first story. Whether we address the climate crisis in a just way will ultimately come down to whether we can free ourselves from the corporate and elite interests blocking progress. But, if we fixate on this story of insufficient global and national action, we’ll lose sight of the second story – the story of folks making the choice to continue doing the hard work to address climate change in spite of global ineptitude. This is the story that inspires people (like me) to more actively push for necessary societal change from the bottom-up.
Thomas Bonitz is a Ph.D. candidate in Geography in the College of Liberal Arts & Sciences.