From COP31 to COP32 — climate talks cannot ignore the development crisis

The ongoing negotiations at the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP31) in Antalya, Turkey, reveal a stark conflict in international climate policy. Developing nations are being urged to speed up the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in a global economic system that inherently disadvantages them when it comes to accessing finance, technology, and opportunities for growth.

This issue transcends the mere debate over climate financing; it exposes a fundamental disparity between the environmental imperative of decarbonisation and the economic structures that govern development. The withdrawal of the United States from the Paris Agreement exacerbates these tensions, as the country, historically the largest emitter of carbon, has abandoned the framework designed to address its consequences.

While American state and local governments remain engaged, the federal government's absence raises critical questions about historical accountability and international burden-sharing. The president of the COP31 conference, Murat Kurum, acknowledged these disparities at the conference's opening, stating that bridging the gaps in access to finance and technology is among the most crucial responsibilities of climate diplomacy.

However, translating these acknowledgments into actionable commitments remains a formidable challenge. Four key issues highlight the underlying global development tensions within the climate transition. First, climate finance is fundamentally a matter of distributive justice. The principle of "common but differentiated responsibilities" has been a cornerstone of international climate negotiations since the 1992 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.

It acknowledges that countries have contributed unevenly to the climate crisis and possess vastly different capacities to address it. This principle is enshrined in article 9.1 of the Paris Agreement, which obliges developed countries to provide financial resources to developing nations. At COP31, the G77 and China, including South Africa, have emphasized the importance of maintaining this obligation within the Climate Finance Work Programme.

European governments, on the other hand, advocate for a broader approach, highlighting private investment, multilateral development banks, and contributions from a wider range of nations. European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen defended Europe's stance, asserting that they are mobilizing climate finance to ensure everyone benefits from the clean energy transition.

While Europe has made significant contributions, questions persist regarding the extent to which this finance reaches the developing countries. There is a crucial distinction between providing public finance and mobilizing private investment. The former represents a transfer of resources that reflects differentiated responsibilities, while the latter relies on expected financial returns and may not benefit countries or projects that cannot attract commercial capital.

Additionally, reclassifying existing development assistance as climate finance could displace expenditure on essential sectors such as healthcare, education, and poverty reduction. The underlying disagreement is not only about the volume of finance but also the allocation of responsibility, risks, and costs.