Loss and Damage at COP29: Missed Opportunities and the Path Forward for the Fund
The Case for Action on Loss and Damage
| Loss and Damage is defined as the impacts of climate change which are not avoided by mitigation, adaptation and other measures such as disaster risk management. It encompasses both economic losses- lives, livelihoods, homes and territories- and non-economic losses, such as the loss of culture, identity and biodiversity. The damage results from both extreme weather events like hurricanes and floods and slow onset events such as sea level rise. |
The planet has already warmed by approximately 1.3 degrees due to human induced climate change. Millions of people are facing the real-life consequences of higher temperatures, rising seas, fiercer storms and unpredictable rainfall. The IPCC acknowledged that human induced climate change is already resulting in irreversible impacts and “losses and damages” for vulnerable communities and countries.
Many Global South countries are trapped repaying their debt, hampering their ability to respond to the impacts and costs of the climate crisis. At the same time, these countries are often more vulnerable to climate change, facing the brunt of extreme weather events and insufficient climate finance. According to the CAN network, without dedicated financing and adequate funding for adaptation, Sub-Saharan African countries will have to take an additional $996 billion in debt, a 50% increase on current debt levels as a percentage of GDP.
Global South countries are disproportionately affected by climate change without historically being the largest contributors to emissions. Since the industrial revolution, the US has cumulatively produced 25% of the world’s CO2 emissions, while 22% can be attributed to the EU. In contrast, most countries across Africa have been responsible for less than 0.01% of all emissions over the last 266 years. While emerging economies such as India and Brazil are now among the largest emitters, their historical contribution remains negligible compared to global north countries. This raises critical questions about climate justice: how should countries that contributed most to the crisis bear the responsibility for resolving it? The key lies in financing mechanisms that would allow global north countries to account for their historical emissions while supporting the Global South adapting to and recovering from climate impacts.
Financing Loss and Damage
Following COP29, one figure has dominated discussions: a $300 billion climate finance deal from Global North countries. This is up from the $100 billion a year that was pledged in 2009. Though the commitment was made in 2009, it was fulfilled for the first time in 2022. It was also agreed that Global North countries would secure efforts to scale up finance from public and private sources to US $1.3 trillion a year by 2035.
But what about funding for Loss and Damage specifically?
Loss and damage was left out intentionally of the financing commitments under the pact. While the Loss and Damage Fund is meant to address this gap, contributions remain voluntary. At COP28, pledges amounted to $647 million, far from the $300 billion needed every year to address the losses and damages already being felt by vulnerable nations.
At COP29, pledges shrunk further, with only 6 countries –Australia, Austria, Luxembourg, New Zealand, South Korea and Sweden, as well as Wallonia, a region in Belgium, committing funds. Together, they contributed an additional $85 million to the existing fund. A key issue raised at COP29 was the need for a sub-goal within the new collective quantified goal to ensure clear financial commitments for Loss and Damage. No agreement was reached, leaving a gap in terms of tracking progress and accountability for climate action.
At the same time, negotiators failed to agree on vital aspects of the Warsaw International Mechanism review, such as a voluntary guidelines on incorporating loss and damage in NDCs or details of a proposed “state of loss and damage” report. These discussions have been deferred to the Bonn Conference in June 2025.
COP29, while a step forward in the operationalisation of the fund, ultimately represented a missed opportunity in terms of securing the financial resources required to address the climate crisis. Voluntary contributions to the fund leave vulnerable countries exposed to uncertainty. The Bonn Conference in 2025 will be an important opportunity to revisit these discussions, particularly around financing for Loss and Damage. Additionally, South Africa’s hosting of the G20 summit in 2025 could provide a platform for furthering the cause of climate justice, especially as the Environment and Climate Sustainability Working Group has made this issue a key priority.
Authors:
Mathilde Benguigui,
Research and Policy Associate, The Advocacy Team
Jordan Nann,
Special Assistant, The Advocacy Team
