Stockholm (NordSIP) – Many policymakers, campaigners, and observers have expressed their disappointment with the outcome of the three major international rounds of climate, biodiversity, and plastics negotiations that took place during the last quarter of 2024. Nevertheless, the heads of some non-governmental organisations remain determined to highlight the progress that has been made and the possibilities that lie ahead.
The so-called ‘Climate Finance’ COP29 in Baku, Azerbaijan finished with a contentious agreement on the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG). Although it was universally acknowledged that $1.3 trillion would be needed annually to support developing countries’ efforts to mitigate and adapt to climate change, wealthy nations only committed $300 billion. Although this represented a tripling of previous pledges, it fell far short of expectations. Moreover, the COP28 pledge to transition away from fossil fuels was not revisited, with any related action points left for the next event in Brazil.
Climate gems amidst the COP29 rubble
Commenting on this outcome Laura Clarke, CEO of environmental non-profit ClientEarth said: “This is not only a major setback for climate justice, but is also at odds with high-income countries’ own interests – given the huge number of studies which show that the cost of inaction is much higher than the cost of action,” adding that “at COP 28, we celebrated the historic pledge from all countries to ‘transition away’ from fossil fuels. But in Baku, the plan to turn this ambition into action was pushed back to next year’s summit in Brazil. This is just not good enough.” Nevertheless, Clarke is keen to emphasise the positives. For instance, Latin America’s second largest emitter Mexico pledged to reach net-zero by 2050, and 25 countries joined the European Union in committing to eliminating any new unabated coal power in their new Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). All parties to the Paris Climate Agreement are expected to publish their updated NDCs in 2025.
Clarke also points to the progress made at the G20 summit that took place in parallel with COP29: “At G20 in Brazil, which took place in the second week of COP29, the UK launched the Global Clean Power Alliance. Members, including Brazil, Australia, Barbados, Germany, and the African Union, will work together to reach the global goal of tripling renewable energy capacity and doubling the rate of energy efficiency improvements by 2030. More than 30 countries representing nearly 50 per cent of global methane emissions signed up to a new declaration to set targets in future NDCs on reducing methane from organic waste.”
ClientEarth, which specialises in using existing laws to support climate action and eliminate greenwashing, is keeping a close eye on the climate justice hearings due to take place in the coming days at the International Court of Justice (ICJ). Clarke explains the significance of these discussions: “The ICJ will determine what states are required to do, under international law, to prevent climate-related harm to present and future generations, as well as the legal consequences for causing significant harm.”
Plastics ‘coalition of the willing’ digs in
The fifth session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee to develop an international legally binding instrument on plastic pollution, including in the marine environment (better known as INC-5) took place in late November in Busan, Republic of Korea. It also developed into a highly controversial event, with some delegations walking out and a last-minute deal to resume negotiations in 2025 despite INC-5 having been billed as the final round. Despite these drawbacks, Joan Marc Simon, Founder and Director at Zero Waste Europe also highlights the positives: “We almost made it. Most countries in the world are in favour of an ambitious Global Plastics Treaty that addresses plastic production, restricts toxics, increases circularity and delivers on financing for a just transition. However, after more than 2 years of meetings, negotiators ran out of time to agree a deal and decided to call one extra session to hammer the treaty.”
Simon believes this outcome can be seen both as a success and as a failure. In his view, a semblance of victory was achieved in shifting the longstanding narrative away from waste management towards the more effective, but contentious approach of addressing the entire life cycle of plastics and their related toxins. Simon explains the significance of this development: “Having been to all INC meetings I can confirm that the battle of the framing is won. The blockers of this process openly talk against production cuts, plastic levies, and toxic chemicals. They are thereby accepting a framing which they neither control nor master, and which provides the conditions for the countries with ambition to draw a line behind which they stand together with civil society and progressive industry.”
Simon describes the tactical battle between plastic and petrochemical producing ‘low ambition’ countries and what he calls the ‘coalition of the willing’ made up of more than 85 countries. He believes that the latter have finally managed to coordinate and successfully resist the former’s strategy of obstructionism and delay designed to force through a weak treaty due to time having run out. Rather than a case of ‘kicking the can down the road,’ Simon believes the outcome bodes well for the next round of negotiations, although he remains convinced that the consensus-based decision-making process is deeply flawed and open to abuse.
The battle for effective climate, biodiversity, and plastic pollution action will continue in 2025 with the milestone date of 2030 looming large. Geopolitical changes may yet influence the course of events, but with NGOs highlighting the positives that may not have been reflected in media headlines one can hope for further tangible progress to be made in the coming 12 months.
