What is the New Collective Quantified Goal
Introduction:
- During the recently concluded Bonn climate conference in Germany, which was supposed to set the political agenda for the pivotal Conference of Parties-28 (COP28) meeting in Dubai at the end of the year, it was necessary to examine and change the climate financing infrastructure. The meeting revealed a significant funding gap that needs to be closed in order to fund climate action. This is the result of an ongoing dispute about where and how to allocate funds for measures to address climate change between developed and developing countries.
Definition of the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG):
- The target of wealthy nations contributing “$100 billion per year until 2020” to developing countries was established by the Conference of Parties (COP) in 2009.
- However, since then, estimates have indicated that addressing climate change might cost trillions of dollars. The 2015 Paris Climate Agreement as a result established the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCGQ) for climate financing prior to 2025.
- The NCGQ is regarded as the “most important climate goal” as a result. It aims to firmly anchor the shifting needs and objectives of developing nations in the light of available scientific facts while raising the bar for wealthy nations’ commitment.
Absence of a new financial goal:
- The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development reported that out of the $100 billion annually pledged, rich countries provided $83.3 billion in 2020.
- These figures can be deceptive and 225% exaggerated.
- Furthermore, the $100 billion target stated in 2009 was seen more as a political objective because no attempt was made to define or specify the nature of “climate finance.”
- Due to the fact that developed countries’ economic growth has been accompanied by sharp increases in carbon emissions, they must assume increasing responsibility.
- Although funding for climate finance have increased significantly, these funds are hard to obtain, privately financed, delayed, and do not reach developing countries.
- Long waiting times and high interest rates are required for the poorest countries, adding to their debt obligations.
Developing countries are:
- Rich nations aim to expand the number of donors through NCQG. International contributions would be simpler as a result.
- The European Union is advocating global efforts rather than relying solely on funds from wealthy nations.
- According to the Environmental Integrity Group (EIG), a negotiation group made up of six nations, including Switzerland, other elements that developing countries have labelled as “technical” are actually quite political.
Developing countries include:
- The negotiators from Antigua and Barbuda claim that technical negotiators lack the authority to “expand donor base.”
- According to the Alliance of Small Island States, an intergovernmental organisation representing low-lying coastal and small island countries, expanding the donor base is a political issue.
- On behalf of the African Group of Negotiators, South Africa argued against the expansion of the donor base.
Conclusion:
- Nations have a finite amount of time to come to an agreement on the NCQG before 2024.
- The Sharm el-Sheikh Implementation Plan from the previous year estimates that at least $4 trillion to $6 trillion in investments will need to be made per year for the world to transition to a low-carbon economy.
- Some claim that rather than providing a single overall figure, the NCQG should define different targets (or sub-goals) for focus areas like mitigation, adaptation, and loss and damage.
- The focus is on boosting concessional financing, stopping debt accumulation, and enabling NCQG function more as a “process” towards an equitable and people-led transition than as a final destination.
