The United Nations Climate Change Conference of Parties took place for the 29th time (COP29) from November 11th through the 24th, in Baku, Azerbaijan, a blustery city along the coast of the Caspian Sea. The overarching goal for COP29 was to navigate financial pathways and establish a mechanism to achieve goals set out by the Paris agreement 8 years ago at COP21. Did COP29 succeed? Like many things in life, the answer to this question is not easy, but perhaps can be summed up by both successes and failures. Yes, at the end of a painful two weeks of negotiations, during overtime sessions that ran into the wee hours of Sunday morning, nations agreed to triple financing flowing into developing and vulnerable countries, from ~100 billion to 300 billion. Although this is technically a success, the failure stems from the cold reality that this number needs to be in the trillions to make a practical difference in people’s lives when it comes to damaging climate change impacts and adaptation needs. Another key financing success was the establishment of science-informed carbon markets, specifically, the PACM (Paris Agreement Crediting Mechanism). The PACM is a big win for operationalizing adaptation and mitigation efforts, although it remains to be seen how it will truly work, in practice. I will remain cautiously optimistic.
As a scientist and member of a United Nations Observer organization (which includes non-governmental research institutions all over the world), I was able to follow most negotiations and focused on sessions where the policy in question absolutely requires accurate and up to date science. Examples of negotiations that I, and members of my team, followed, include the Global Goal of Adaptation (GGA) and Research and Systematic Observations (RSO). Here, we saw some relative wins on improving observations and technical capabilities for regions around the world that are both data-poor and vulnerable to climate change impacts. The final text for the RSO was refreshingly finished by the end of the first week and is a nice example of the recognition of the science gaps and needs and attempts to address them. Another nice win was the passage of the Gender Action Plan and recognition that women and children often suffer disproportionately during climate disasters.
Tempering these obvious successes are more subtle failures. During the RSO negotiations, as well as the GGA and virtually all other sessions where the science is key, the disturbing trend of minimizing the established science continues. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), is the recognized authority on both physical and social sciences of climate change. It is a separate, entirely independent United Nations body that incorporates vetted, peer-reviewed, published, and comprehensive scientific literature world-wide. Yet, still, those seeking to undermine the science, attempt to dilute its authority in these negotiations. Why? At the end of the day, it is about the money, and we circle back to what this COP was about, financing. In some ways, it is not unexpected that these negotiations were hard fought, and only partially successful. It is also not unexpected that when money is front and center, attacks on facts and science continue. From my perspective, it is even more critical that an increased scientific presence continues at COPs. Science must continue to act as the foundation for climate policy by informing, feeding, and nurturing solutions for society.
Christine A. Shields is a U.S. based research scientist with expertise in applying Earth System Models to Earth’s past, present and future climates. Christine focuses on Earth’s hydrological cycle in the context of climate change, with particular emphasis on atmospheric rivers (ARs), monsoons, cyclones, and extreme events, which sit at the intersection between weather and climate. She studies how weather systems connect regions around the globe, including polar climate. As a global citizen Christine is keenly interested in building sustainable and actionable climate change policy. LinkedIn profile: https://www.linkedin.com/in/christine-shields-69a4175/.
