Finalising a list of 100 metrics to measure progress on adapting to more extreme weather and rising seas after two years of work may have seemed like a relatively straightforward technical win for the UN climate summit in Belém. The COP30 presidency were hoping they might even get it wrapped up in week one of the talks, which winds up on Saturday.
No such luck, as the negotiating groups for Africa, Latin America and the Arab countries have decided they want to use the talks on indicators for the Global Goal on Adaptation as a place to press for more funding from wealthy governments. Earlier in the week, as we reported, they asked for two more years to discuss the metrics, which include “means of implementation” – code for how adaptation will be paid for.
By the mid-point of the talks – when negotiators compile their work into texts that are either ready to be approved at the end of the COP or need further refinement by ministers who arrive on Monday – the latest version of the adaptation text was entirely inside square brackets, meaning that none of it has yet been agreed among countries. It will now fall to the presidency to find a way forward.
The text they’ve been handed shows no sign of any convergence of views, and includes two main options on adaptation finance – one which would have nothing at all and the other which reflects developing-country proposals for a new quantitative goal of either $120 billion (from the Least-Developed Countries) or $150 billion (Arab Group) a year by 2030.
Under a current target set at COP26 in 2021, donor governments pledged to deliver at least $40 billion a year by 2025. But with aid budgets being cut by many, current predictions are that they are on track to deliver little more than $25 billion, which leaves a huge gap compared with needs.
Global South’s climate adaptation bill to top $300 billion a year by 2035: UN
Parts of the proposed text released on Saturday also aim to prevent developing countries from being expected to fund their own adaptation measures and say that the indicators would be voluntary and left to countries to decide how to use them, in a bid to avoid being told what they should do to make their agriculture, water and health systems and other infrastructure more resilient.
Debbie Hillier, Mercy Corps’ UNFCCC policy lead, noted that the new text brings together the full spectrum of positions raised by negotiators. “The large number of options and brackets underscores how much work still lies ahead and how crucial ministerial engagement will be in resolving the core political divergences,” she said.
She pointed to the reference to providing at least $120 billion in adaptation finance for developing countries as a signal that “pressure is mounting for a serious response to the scale of adaptation needs,” adding that the text “recognises the urgency of delivering additional and predictable public finance”.
On Friday, African Group of Negotiators Chair Richard Muyungi told Climate Home News that a two-year extension of discussions on the metrics may not be needed if there is political will to unlock more funding for adaptation.
“[If] we get the means of implementation in the indicators, I think we’ll be able to agree [them] within the shortest time possible,” he added.
While adaptation finance has erupted as an issue in the discussions on the metrics, negotiators on this track don’t actually have a mandate to decide finance matters. That is why the hot topic of whether and how to set a new target is also part of talks on the broader finance goal (NCQG) that was decided in Baku last year.
Sources told Climate Home News it may be more likely that adaptation could be allocated a share of the $300 billion a year developed countries agreed to mobilise for poorer nations by 2035 under the NCQG.
