AS THE world hurtles towards unprecedented climate extremes, from raging wildfires to rising sea levels, the 29th Conference of the Parties (COP29) in Baku, Azerbaijan this November may well be our last, best chance to reverse course. Every year, world leaders gather under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, UNFCCC, to confront the growing climate crisis. However, despite nearly three decades of high-level meetings, tangible results remain elusive, and the climate crisis worsens with each passing year.
听
Why COP was started
COP was born out of necessity. By the early 1990s, the science of climate change was clear, with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change warning of the looming threats posed by global warming. The world needed a unified platform to address the rising emissions of greenhouse gases, which were heating the planet at an alarming rate. The UNFCCC, signed at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, provided the legal framework for global climate action. COP was designed as its decision-making body 鈥� a forum where countries would meet annually to review progress, agree on actions and strengthen commitments.
Think of COP as a giant group project at school. Different countries, like different students, have varying levels of resources, responsibility, and commitment. The goal is to work together to tackle one of the most urgent problems of our time: climate change. But while some countries are stepping up, others are failing to pull their weight. Climate change doesn鈥檛 hit with the force of an earthquake or a hurricane, but over time, its effects 鈥� more extreme weather, rising seas, and ecological disruption 鈥� are just as devastating, if not more.
The Paris Agreement, adopted at COP21 in 2015, marked a watershed moment. It set the world on a path towards limiting global temperature rise to below 2掳C, with a further aspiration of capping it at 1.5掳C. The agreement introduced nationally determined contributions, or NDCs, which allowed each country to set its own climate targets. In theory, this system would foster accountability and ambition, with countries revisiting and strengthening their pledges every five years.
However, despite this landmark agreement, progress has been painfully slow. Since Paris, each COP has seen only incremental advancements, with critical promises left unfulfilled and key initiatives stalled by political deadlock and bureaucratic inertia.
听
What COP has achieved
IT WOULD be unfair to dismiss the achievements of COP altogether. Over the years, these global meetings have succeeded in raising awareness about climate change and fostering international cooperation. The creation of the Green Climate Fund, the establishment of the Paris Agreement, and the formation of the Loss and Damage Mechanism to address the impacts of climate change in vulnerable nations are notable milestones.
COP has also provided a platform for the Global South to amplify its voice, drawing attention to the disproportionate impacts of climate change on developing nations. Bangladesh, for example, has been at the forefront of advocating for climate justice, highlighting how the poorest countries, which have contributed the least to global emissions, bear the brunt of climate-related disasters.
But here鈥檚 the catch: while these accomplishments are significant, they fall far short of what is needed. Emissions continue to rise, global temperatures are nearing dangerous thresholds, and many of the world鈥檚 most vulnerable communities remain underprepared for the climate impacts already in motion. It鈥檚 like having a great plan for a big school project, but only a handful of team members are doing their part.
听
What鈥檚 stopping faster progress?
SO, WHY is it that, despite the urgency and high stakes, progress is so slow? It comes down to a few key roadblocks.
听
Political short-termism
One of the most persistent challenges to global climate negotiations is political short-termism. Politicians, particularly in democratic systems, face intense pressure from electoral cycles, leading them to prioritise short-term goals like economic growth and job creation over long-term climate strategies. While ambitious climate policies 鈥� such as phasing out fossil fuels or imposing carbon taxes鈥攁re necessary, they often come with short-term economic costs, like job losses in traditional energy sectors or increased energy prices, which can make them politically unpopular.
As a result, governments frequently water down climate commitments or defer difficult decisions. Leaders may set lofty targets for 2050, knowing that the responsibility for meeting those goals will fall on future administrations. Immediate, tough decisions 鈥� such as transitioning away from coal or investing in renewable energy infrastructure 鈥� are often delayed, allowing the problem to fester.
听
Geopolitical tensions: major emitters in stalemate
Geopolitical tensions between major emitters such as the United States, China, and the European Union are another significant barrier to progress. These nations are responsible for the bulk of global emissions, but their climate priorities and economic interests often conflict.
For example, while the European Union has taken significant steps to reduce emissions and transition to renewable energy, the United States and China have historically been more hesitant. U.S. climate policies have fluctuated dramatically depending on the administration in power, while China鈥檚 reliance on coal for energy and economic growth has slowed its willingness to commit to deep emissions cuts.
This results in a diplomatic standoff. Countries are often reluctant to make bold commitments unless they are confident that others will do the same. The fear of losing economic competitiveness if they act alone leads to watered-down agreements, with nations unwilling to fully commit without guarantees of reciprocal action from others.
听
Global north vs global south: climate justice divide
The divide between the Global North (developed nations) and the Global South (developing countries) is another deep-rooted challenge in COP negotiations. Developed countries, which are historically responsible for the bulk of emissions, have largely built their wealth through industrialisation driven by fossil fuels. In contrast, many developing nations are still in the process of building their economies and argue that they should not bear the same burden for reducing emissions.
This tension plays out in discussions over climate finance, loss and damage, and responsibility for emissions reductions. Developing nations argue that wealthier countries should take greater responsibility, both by cutting emissions more rapidly and by providing financial support to help poorer countries transition to greener economies and adapt to climate impacts. Despite pledges from developed nations 鈥� including the long-standing $100 billion annual climate finance goal 鈥� many promises remain unmet, leaving developing countries without the resources they need.
听
Fossil fuel interests and lobbying: powerful forces of inertia
At the heart of the climate crisis is the world鈥檚 continued dependence on fossil fuels 鈥� coal, oil, and natural gas 鈥� which remain the primary source of greenhouse gas emissions. Despite overwhelming scientific consensus on the need to phase out fossil fuels, powerful economic interests tied to these industries have created a significant barrier to meaningful action.
Globally, governments continue to heavily subsidise fossil fuel industries. In 2022, global fossil fuel subsidies reached a staggering $7 trillion, according to the International Monetary Fund. This includes direct subsidies for extraction and production as well as indirect subsidies that fail to account for the environmental and health costs of fossil fuel use. These subsidies make fossil fuels artificially cheap and encourage continued use, even as the world inches closer to climate catastrophe.
For example, in 2023, the Biden administration approved the controversial Willow oil drilling project in Alaska, despite its commitment to the Paris Agreement. Similarly, the UK, while pledging to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050, approved new oil and gas exploration licenses in the North Sea. These actions contradict their climate commitments and undermine global efforts to reduce emissions.
Fossil fuel companies also exert immense influence through lobbying. A report by InfluenceMap found that the world鈥檚 five largest oil and gas companies spent over $750 million on lobbying between 2019 and 2021 to weaken or delay climate policies. This influence was palpable at COP27 in Egypt, where fossil fuel lobbyists outnumbered many national delegations, raising concerns about the ability of COP to serve as a neutral platform for meaningful climate action.
听
Bureaucracy and the complexity of COP negotiations
Finally, the structure of COP negotiations itself can be a barrier to progress. With 198 countries involved, each with its own economic interests, political agendas, and climate priorities, reaching a consensus is often a slow and laborious process. The need for unanimity or broad consensus on key issues means that agreements tend to reflect the lowest common denominator, resulting in vague commitments that can be interpreted differently by each country.
Moreover, the technical complexity of climate negotiations can also slow progress. Discussions around carbon markets, climate finance, and adaptation strategies often get bogged down in technical details, with countries disagreeing on the specifics of implementation. For example, Article 6 of the Paris Agreement, which governs international carbon markets, has been a sticking point for years due to disagreements over transparency, accounting rules, and the potential for double-counting emissions reductions.
听
How we can move forward
AS WE look ahead to COP29 in Baku, there is still hope that the talks can produce real change. Here are a few ways we can break the cycle of slow progress:
Making climate finance real: This year鈥檚 COP is being billed as the 鈥榝inance COP,鈥� which means the focus should be on unlocking the money needed to fight climate change. We need to move from vague promises to clear, concrete funding plans. Rich nations must fulfil their promises, and the private sector should be more involved. One solution is to create more investment opportunities for green projects, making it profitable for businesses to contribute to climate action.
Fixing the carbon markets: Carbon markets could work if they鈥檙e designed well. COP29 needs to agree on stricter rules and more transparency to ensure that these markets actually lead to real emissions reductions. It鈥檚 time to stop letting polluters buy their way out of responsibility.
Scaling up the loss and damage fund: The Loss and Damage Fund needs serious cash to help countries recover from climate disasters. Wealthy nations must step up, and innovative ideas like debt-for-climate swaps 鈥� where countries trade debt relief for climate action 鈥� could provide additional funding.
Focusing on adaptation: While we work to stop climate change, we also need to help countries adapt to the changes that are already happening. National adaptation plans are blueprints for how countries can protect themselves from the worst impacts, but they need funding and support to be implemented.
Phasing out fossil fuels: Finally, COP29 must confront the issue of fossil fuel subsidies head-on. Phasing out these subsidies and redirecting financial support toward renewable energy and green infrastructure is critical for the global energy transition. The International Energy Agency (IEA) has made it clear: no new fossil fuel projects can be developed if we are to meet our climate targets.
听
Moment of reckoning
THE world has heard enough promises. We鈥檝e seen enough ambitious targets with little follow-through. As COP29 approaches, it鈥檚 time for world leaders to move beyond words and deliver real action. The science is clear: we are running out of time to prevent the worst effects of global warming. What we need now is not more promises but action. The climate crisis is not waiting for us to catch up. Every delay makes the challenge greater, and every half-measure pushes us closer to the brink.
Let鈥檚 not take COP as a disaster tourism destination where leaders talk fancy.
听
Md Zahurul Al Mamun is a climate change researcher and analyst.
