After Dubai, the race against the climate crisis

Fortification of climate adaptation measures, scaling of renewables and ensuring finance mechanisms that stand the test of time are essential to win the battle

The Climate Conference of Parties is over — until the next one. But the work doesn’t end with the gavel going down in Dubai. The low-carbon transition is a marathon, which requires not just the phase-out of fossil fuels but also the fortification of climate adaptation measures, significant scaling of renewables, and robust finance mechanisms that stand the test of time. COP28 suffered profound failures on key fronts and it’s time for a new approach to COPs.

UN Climate Chief Simon Stiell, COP28 President Sultan al-Jaber and UAE chief negotiator Hana Al-Hashimi with others on Wednesday. (AP)

First, what did COP28 achieve? Although the loss and damage fund was operationalised on the very first day, the sums pledged represent around 0.2% of the annual losses faced by developing countries due to the climate crisis. There are homes in the developed world that cost more than some of the country's contributions made to the fund so far!

From that high, the story goes mostly downhill. The final outcome document of the Global Stocktake lacks teeth, lets developed countries off the hook, and compromises on finance. It misses the biggest factor in climate justice — accountability. A recent study by the Council on Energy, Environment and Water (CEEW) finds that developed countries are not on track to meet their 2030 emission reduction targets, and will overshoot them by 38%. COP28 ended with weak language on past inaction and a failure to target the implementation gap of developed countries against their own unambitious targets for 2030.

Now to the saga about phasing out fossil fuels. The misdirected targeting of coal over oil and gas opened a fissure for petrostates to exploit. For two years, India insisted that fossil fuels cannot be cherry-picked for phase-down or phase-out. Yet, draft after draft targeted coal, leaving out direct references to oil and gas. Incidentally, the European Union’s per capita coal consumption (830 kg) is similar to India’s (848 kg), while an average American consumes 1,050 kg of coal and a Chinese person 3,282 kg annually. The US is also the world’s largest producer of oil and gas in the world. These fissures among major emitters allowed petrostates like Saudi Arabia to push back. The final text refers to transitioning away from fossil fuels in a just, orderly and equitable manner, phase-down of unabated coal power, and makes references to the role of transitional fuels.

Meanwhile, limited progress on climate finance rendered mitigation ambitions hollow. The decision text acknowledges the lack of a common definition and accounting methodology. The quantum and timeframe for the new collective quantified goal remain undecided. During its G20 presidency, India had promoted the tripling of renewable energy and doubling of energy efficiency but had paired this with the call for trillions of dollars of investment in the Global South. By contrast, the COP28 decision text has high ambitions but makes little progress on financing them.

As 2023 comes to a close, the scale of what we are confronting is clear. It was the hottest year on record, and pledges made at COP were “not nearly enough” to limit global warming to the 1.5 degree Celsius threshold, according to the International Energy Agency. Further, India highlighted in Dubai that adapting to the climate crisis alone will cost it ₹57 trillion over the next seven years. Whereas the final text outlines comprehensive adaptation targets across sectors, it has no specific measures to fill the adaptation funding gap and makes assistance from rich countries a voluntary commitment.

So, where do we go from here? COPs were meant to raise ambition, facilitate the means of implementation, and ensure transparency and accountability for actions and inactions. COP28 largely failed on all these counts. Instead, the more significant climate action at COPs happens outside of the negotiating chambers. For instance, this year, India launched the second phase of LeadIT with Sweden and sought additional partners for the Global Biofuel Alliance. The International Solar Alliance now has 118 member countries with Romania joining on the sidelines of COP28. Other States forged new sectoral initiatives and coalitions, such as a Global Cooling Pledge and new ambitions for nuclear power.

If more action is on the sidelines, then the COP process needs reform. The focus must be on implementation across the board. Smaller but more frequent inter-sessional meetings should focus on key pillars of action: Mitigation with equity at its core; climate adaptation and building resilience; finance (with clear roles for multilateral development banks and development finance institutions for de-risking investment); technology co-development with the Global South (along with innovative ways to address the concentration of intellectual property for clean tech); delivery and tracking mechanisms; and most importantly, accountability.

In 1970, Albert Hirschman wrote in his treatise Exit, Voice, and Loyalty that when faced with declining quality and benefits from an organisation, members can choose to exit altogether or voice their grievances. Their loyalty to the organisation can influence the decision. COPs continue to fail to hold influential members accountable, whether for past inaction or curbed ambitions and implementation in the future. Member States — and other stakeholders in business and civil society — might voice frustration to fix a broken system. Eventually, they might exit in favour of other forums they deem to be more effective and responsive to their interests. Only an overhaul of COPs can breathe new life into the process. Climate action as well as climate justice, meanwhile, hang in that balance of choices.

Arunabha Ghosh is CEO, Council on Energy, Environment and Water (CEEW). The views expressed are personal