Michael Button
Senior Policy Manager - Real Economy
The decision to exclude heavy-emitting nations from the Summit left some wondering if the bar of ambition was set too high. Domestic elections and the nature of the Paris Agreement may also have influenced the event, writes Michael Button.
The UN Secretary General, Antonio Guterres is known for his impassioned speeches warning of the worst effects of climate change. This year he spoke with actions as well as words, excluding the heaviest-emitting nations from the Climate Ambition Summit in New York on 20 September.
Taking place alongside the UN General Assembly, the summit set out to “showcase mover and doer leaders”. Those not on the invite list included the world’s three heaviest emitters: the United States, China and India, with their absence leaving many asking if expectations were set too high.
As a result, it was a relatively quiet week for climate when compared to past General Assemblies. Similar summits have previously been the springboard for major national announcements, including in the run-up to COP26 in Glasgow. This year the UK Prime Minister chose not to attend, instead announcing a new loosening of net zero targets around internal combustion engines and gas boilers – a rollback in ambition that did not go unnoticed at meetings in New York.
Those not on the invite list included the world’s three heaviest emitters: the United States, China and India.
The cyclical nature of the Paris Agreement’s ambition ‘ratchet’ mechanism and upcoming elections in the UK, the US, and the European Parliament might go some way to explaining the relatively subdued event. The upcoming COP President’s role in the oil and gas industry seemed to have dampened spirits, too. That being said, there were still important announcements.
The larger question is whether this high ambition and high bar approach by the UN Secretary General risks excluding key players, and high emitters, from the conversation when the world needs them to transition to net zero the most.
Emerging targets
One important announcement came from Brazil, which reinstated stronger greenhouse gas commitments with a new climate plan to cut emissions by 37-48% by 2025 and 50-53% by 2030, compared to 2005 levels.
This commitment was first made in 2015 but weakened by the previous President, Jair Bolsonaro. It builds on the new President Lula’s pledge to rectify the nation's nationally defined contributions and bring an end to deforestation by 2030. Though welcome, the target may receive some scrutiny for the unusual choice of benchmark year.
Colombia and Panama joined the Powering Past Coal Alliance (PPCA). First launched by Canada and the UK at COP23 in 2017, the initiative now includes more than 50 national governments and 70 organisations as members. Colombia’s decision is particularly important given its position as the sixth-largest coal exporter in the world, while Panama looks to build on its status as a carbon-negative nation by phasing out coal power generation.
Elsewhere, contributions to the UN Green Climate Fund fell short of hoped-for increases. France announced a 4% increase, a reduction in real terms versus 2019, while the UK offered a slight boost on its 2019 pledge. The ambition of the fund looks less certain after these below-expected increases, though some nations including the US are still to announce contributions. Australia also announced that it would rejoin the fund, which it left in 2018 under the previous Liberal Party government.
Separately, the Danish government announced an increase in capital investment for its development finance institution, the Investment Fund for Developing Countries, which currently allocates 268m EUR to climate finance. By 2030, Denmark aims to increase this to between 670-940m EUR, funded by increased state contributions and access to its re-lending scheme.
Cyclical nature
While undoubtedly significant announcements, these do not add up to the level of ambition or climate finance many were hoping to see, and the absence of the world’s largest emitters left many concerned. Some nations did not attend because they could not, others because they could not speak.
Though certain fossil fuel policies in the US, China and India do not meet the expectations set by the Paris Agreement, if those nations do not decarbonise then net zero cannot succeed. Combined they contribute around 42% of global emissions, according to Climate Watch.
The cyclical and undeniably slow nature of international negotiations also means that not every year can be a milestone moment. Countries are next due to update their Nationally Determined Contributions in 2025, so it was unlikely that significant new emissions cuts would be announced this year.
Some nations did not attend because they could not, others because they could not speak.
2024 also sees elections in the UK, the European Parliament, the US and India to name a few. Net zero policies are increasingly being tested as a dividing line or “wedge” in some countries’ pre-election rhetoric and pulled into cost-of-living debates. As a result, it may well be that potential leaders will be guarded in their climate language and ambitions until elections are completed.
This will cause frustration for climate campaigners, scientists, concerned citizens, and investors alike. Reaching the 1.5°C goal requires consistent momentum and increasing ambition, and global temperature increases do not wait for election results.
In this respect, the outcomes of the upcoming COP28 conference in Dubai are every bit as important as previous conferences.
If you’d like to take part in our policy working groups and be the first to see insights and analysis, why not speak to our team today or get in touch to find out more about becoming a part of IIGCC.