The 29th UN Climate Conference (COP29) concluded with the adoption of a new climate finance goal of $300 billion. However, critics argue this figure is grossly inadequate to address the escalating climate crisis. Experts from the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) described the outcome as a missed opportunity to deliver on critical financial commitments, accountability measures, and human rights safeguards.
Developing countries had called for at least $1.3 trillion annually to support mitigation, adaptation, and loss and damage. This request represents just a fraction of what wealthy nations spend annually on fossil fuel subsidies and military endeavors.
Instead, the agreed $300 billion goal falls significantly short, leaving many vulnerable nations struggling to cope with the growing impacts of climate change. Critics contend that developed countries have failed to meet their legal obligations to provide debt-free public finance and phase out fossil fuels, instead allowing dangerous loopholes like carbon markets to undermine progress.
Nikki Reisch, Director of CIEL’s Climate & Energy Program, criticized the lack of ambition and accountability, stating that developed countries continue to prioritize polluters’ interests over climate justice. The inclusion of carbon offsets in the agreement, she noted, creates a loophole that allows big polluters to evade meaningful emissions reductions.
Erika Lennon, a Senior Attorney at CIEL, echoed this concern, emphasizing that carbon markets are not a substitute for genuine climate finance. Weak rules, she explained, risk exploitation while failing to deliver tangible emissions reductions or uphold human rights.
The conference also faced criticism for embracing speculative technologies like carbon capture and storage (CCS), which have repeatedly failed to deliver effective results. Rachel Kennerley, a CIEL campaigner, argued that CCS is diverting resources away from proven climate solutions, serving as a distraction rather than a remedy.
The exclusion of loss and damage from the climate finance framework has been particularly contentious. According to Lien Vandamme, CIEL’s Senior Campaigner for Human Rights and Climate Change, this omission denies justice to those most affected by the climate crisis. Vandamme also highlighted the absence of human rights safeguards in the agreement, warning that this could exacerbate harm to vulnerable communities and ecosystems.
The venue of COP29, held in Azerbaijan, drew further criticism for its restrictions on civic space and human rights violations. Observers noted that fossil fuel lobbyists were given significant access to the negotiations, while civil society activists and journalists faced suppression.
According to Sébastien Duyck, a Senior Attorney at CIEL, the importance of public participation and accountability in climate action has been challenged, warning that COP29’s failures reflected a troubling disregard for basic rights.
Gender justice also suffered setbacks, with limited progress made on advancing the Lima Work Programme on Gender. Camilla Pollera, a CIEL Program Associate, lamented the lack of support for women environmental defenders, who face unique threats as they challenge resource exploitation and systemic gender discrimination. The final agreement, she argued, missed an opportunity to ensure comprehensive protection and empowerment for these frontline activists.
Despite the disappointing outcomes, there is hope for renewed accountability. The upcoming International Court of Justice hearings in December may clarify states’ legal obligations under international law, offering a pathway to address gaps in the COP29 agreements.
As civil society movements continue to demand climate justice, the need for bold, equitable, and rights-based solutions remains urgent. COP29, critics argue, must serve as a wake-up call for future climate negotiations to prioritize ambition, equity, and the protection of human rights
