India has expressed dissatisfaction at the recently concluded UN Climate Change Summit’s CoP29. The country has pledged to resist any shift in focus from climate finance to mitigation.
Considering past decisions and national circumstances, India will submit its Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) next year. The country believes that discussing mitigation distracts from climate finance obligations and calls for a “balance in the climate discourse.”
India supports the UNFCCC and Paris Agreement as climate change frameworks, aligning with Bolivia’s statement on behalf of Like-Minded Developing Countries (LMDCs) amid severe global climate change effects impacting the Global South, the country said in a statement.
Delivering India’s statement, the Secretary (MoEFCC) and Dy. Leader of the Delegation, Ms. Leena Nandan said, “We feel disappointed by the fact that we continue to shift focus when the time has come to ensure that the mitigation actions are fully supported through provisions of adequate Finances as per CBDR-RC and equity considerations. CoP after CoP, we keep talking about mitigation ambitions – what is to be done, without talking about how it is to be done – in other words, the enablement of mitigation ambitions. This CoP started with a Focus on enablement through New Collective Quantitative Goals (NCQG), but as we move towards the end, we see a shifting of the focus to mitigation.”
India’s position on climate change includes:
NCQG: In its statement, India reiterated the need to acknowledge that developing nations will need to take national initiative to address climate change, according to their own needs and priorities.
It emphasized the importance of grant-based concessional climate finance for creating and implementing new NDCs.
The statement stressed the need for a document detailing the structure, quantum, quality, timeframe, access, transparency, and review of the $600 billion mobilization target.
NCQG’s focus on private sector investments is contradictory to the goal’s mandate to increase contributors, implement macroeconomic and fiscal measures, and propose a carbon price, the country said in the statement.
Mitigation:
India strongly opposed the draft text’s modification of the scope of the Mitigation Work Programme (MWP).
India has emphasized the need to acknowledge the detrimental effects of unilateral measures on climate action, particularly in terms of mitigation ambition and implementation.
India cautioned against altering the temperature targets, stating they must adhere to the precise Paris Agreement’s wording, referring to the introduction of 2030, 2035, and 2050 targets as prescriptive.
Just transition:
Just transitions are primarily initiated globally, with developed nations leading the charge in mitigation and providing necessary tools to developing nations.
India opposed the renegotiation of Dubai’s “Just Transitions” consensus, stating national governments must ensure domestic just transitions. However, developed nations should lead global mitigation efforts and provide necessary tools for developing nations.
“We have also repeatedly made the point that the repeated and ongoing inaction of Developed countries constricts the possibility of our domestic transitions, our right to development, and our overriding priority to pursue sustainable development,” the statement from India added. This point we have been making regarding our understanding of just transitions—which is also reflected in the Dubai decision—is ignored in the current text. These paragraphs are unacceptable to us. They reinterpret simple transitions and are prescriptive,” India said in its statement.
GST:
India does not agree with the results of the GST, as the Paris Agreement stipulates that GST should only encourage climate action.
The text, some of which is being negotiated on the UAE dialogue, has not been sufficiently connected to or integrated with the new chapeau on Enhancing Action, Support, and International Cooperation.
“The final text from the Parties’ negotiations reflected the opinions of each Party and served as a good starting point for additional discussions. The new options completely miss this. India is ignoring the results of the GST, as the Paris Agreement stipulates that GST should only encourage climate action. Der the section titled “Modalities of the UAE dialogue,” India said in the statement.
The text is mitigation-centric and unbalanced, and the UAE dialogue’s Timing and Format sections are unacceptable to India. The sentence suggests that developed countries are on track to increase their emissions by 0.5% from 2020 to 2030, compared to the 2019 level of 2.6%.
Adaptation:
India shared the following five points to assess the draft decision:
- Indicators on implementation methods must be included in the final product for this work on the global goal of adaptation to be significant.
- Additional attention is not necessary for transformational adaptation. Instead, it’s crucial to focus on different approaches, such as gradual adaptation and long-term adaptation, within the context of national circumstances.
- The information used for reporting on indicators should come from reports that the Party submits, not from databases that belong to third parties. This text can therefore be deleted.
- The language used in the creation of the Baku Road Map is essential to achieving the global adaptation goal.
- The indicators must show the GGA’s progress.
Summing up:
The Finance CoP, the Balancing CoP, and the Enabling CoP are the CoPs that have been reaffirmed in the conclusion. “If we fail here, we fail in the fight against climate change, for which the onus should be on those who are obligated to provide finance for climate action,” India said in the statement.
