Final Outcomes of COP29 Spark Hope and Frustration from Water Experts

The negotiations in Baku were a vivid reminder of the deep divisions between developed and developing countries regarding who will bear the costs of climate change. Throughout the tense discussions, calls for “trillions, not billions” from protest groups from the Global South and indigenous communities echoed throughout the stadium.

After difficult and prolonged discussions, delegates finally reached a deal establishing a new goal of at least $300 billion annually for climate finance by 2035. Although this triples the previous $100 billion target, it remains far from the US $1.3 trillion that developing nations had sought.

The new goal includes contributions from both public and private sources, including loans, which many developing countries say will increase their debt burdens. The Least Developed Countries (LDC) Group condemned the deal, calling it “a staggering betrayal of the world’s most vulnerable.” 

Maggie White, Senior Manager of International Policy at the Stockholm International Water Institute (SIWI), echoed their frustration. “The deal is again on the backs of the poor and the most vulnerable, who are suffering the most from climate change. On the one hand, the conference did deliver, but it needs more confidence and stronger ambition.”

Michael Kakande, founder of Resilient40, contributed submissions to the negotiations as part of a team from the Global South. He expressed deep disappointment with the final outcome, pointing out that the finance target “barely covers the needs for necessary climate adaptation efforts, estimated at US $215–387 billion annually by 2030,” let alone mitigation. Kakande also emphasized the absence of a clear mechanism detailing who will pay and how much, raising doubts about whether countries will even meet the US $300 billion commitment.

Failing to honor these financial commitments, Kakande continued, could have dire consequences. “In Baku, ministers have been negotiating the price of survival against climate change. Should we lose hundreds of thousands or millions more lives at the expense of geopolitics?”

A Win for Multilateralism?

Despite the shortcomings, some experts argued that the deal represents a win for multilateralism, highlighting the significance of keeping negotiations alive and achieving an agreement at all. White expressed relief that the talks did not collapse entirely. “I feel that multilateralism was saved, the Paris Agreement was saved,” she said. “The fact that developing countries didn’t walk out and that there was a quorum meant that they stuck up for multilateralism and that they still see the added value in it for them.”

White added there is still hope that additional resources could be mobilized to meet the growing needs of developing countries. In the final days of COP29, the World Bank and other multilateral development banks committed to mobilize $120 billion annually by 2030. 

However, she continued, the next steps will be crucial. “What will be important going forward from COP29 in Baku to COP30 in Belem, Brazil will be implementation. We need to see more robust Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) that include water solutions as a means of reinforcing climate resilience. With stronger NDCs, we can make a stronger case for the finance that is needed.”

The UAE Global Framework for Climate Resilience and the Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA) were central to the COP29 discussions, aiming to protect communities from the worst impacts of climate change. This includes ensuring that water and sanitation systems can withstand the shocks of a changing climate. A key challenge at COP29 was to begin defining measurable indicators for tracking adaptation progress. With nearly 9,000 potential indicators on the table, negotiators face the difficult task of narrowing the list before their deadline at COP30. Simultaneously, they must avoid placing excessive reporting burdens on countries already stretched thin.

While most countries agreed on the need for global indicators, a few advocated for a more localized approach, a stance that did not align with the water community’s priorities. “We’ve fought hard for a global agreement with global targets, and those targets must come with global indicators,” said Jose Gesti, Water for Climate Pavilion Envoy to the Global Goal on Adaptation work. 

Gesti welcomed the compromise reached at COP29, where negotiators agreed to create a set of no more than 100 globally applicable indicators. These indicators will form a menu from which countries can select those most relevant to their national contexts. Gesti views this as a positive compromise, preserving the interests of the water community and allowing stakeholders to advocate for advancing resilience through water ministries.

Additionally, Gesti noted, “There should also be potential data sources for each indicator and the mechanisms needed to develop data standards.” This effort will result in a consolidated list of indicator options, including technical reports (with a focus on water) and recommendations on the use of these indicators. These reports are scheduled for publication no later than four weeks before the Bonn Climate Conference in June 2025.

COP29 marked the conclusion of over a decade of negotiations with the operationalization of carbon markets, clarifying the rules for international trade in carbon credits under Article 6.2 of the Paris Agreement. This agreement establishes the framework for countries to authorize carbon credit transactions and manage tracking registries, ensuring transparency and environmental integrity. Trading could begin as early as 2025, once technical details are finalized. The agreement is viewed as a significant step forward, providing countries with flexibility to meet their emissions targets while financing low-cost mitigation efforts.

Carbon markets allow countries and companies to “offset” their own carbon emissions by investing in projects that reduce emissions elsewhere, often in developing countries. These projects can include renewable energy initiatives, reforestation, or the protection of wetlands, for example. Supporters argue that carbon markets create a win-win situation: wealthy countries can meet their climate goals while directing billions of dollars into emissions-reducing projects that help developing nations transition to cleaner, more sustainable economies.

However, concerns persist about their effectiveness. A study released during COP29 revealed that less than 16% of carbon credits issued represent genuine emissions reductions. Transparency and accountability within the carbon market, particularly regarding the actual environmental impact of these credits, remain contentious issues.

White acknowledged the advancement on carbon markets but emphasized the need for regulation: “There’s a strong need to control and regulate and make sure these carbon markets are being managed ethically.”

Michael Kakande, on the other hand, expressed concerns that carbon markets could harm vulnerable regions: “The carbon markets as a whole are going to further increase the vulnerabilities of our local communities given the lack of legal policy frameworks on the African continent.”

It is unclear how the new carbon markets will impact the water sector, and further research is needed. However, since 2010, water-related carbon projects have generated more than 45 million in issued emission reduction credits. A report issued earlier this year estimated “a total global potential for carbon credits generated from water-related projects to be more than 1.6 billion tonnes of CO2 equivalent per year.”

While progress on climate finance and fossil fuel transition remained limited at COP29, the water sector celebrated some significant wins.

A key highlight was the launch of the Baku Declaration on Water for Climate Action, a move that could reshape global efforts to tackle climate-related water stress. Signed by COP29 President Mukhtar Babayev and UNEP Executive Director Inger Andersen, and endorsed by 50 countries, the declaration recognizes that water is “at the heart of climate change.” It also establishes the Baku Dialogue on Water for Climate Action, a platform hosted by UNEP which will ensure continuity in water discussions across COPs.

Maggie White celebrated the declaration, noting that incorporating water into  multilateral climate talks was once seen as impossible due to concerns about local control and sovereignty. “It’s a solid declaration that brings water into the conversation at every COP. This could pave the way for integrating water into future negotiations.”

Additionally, White highlighted the growing success of the Water for Climate Pavilion, which expanded to include over 70 partners this year. The Pavilion not only facilitates coordination within the water community but also educates the sector on engaging with climate policy. While 40 sessions on water were hosted in the Water for Climate Pavilion, an additional 90 water-related sessions were held across the conference –  in spaces across diverse areas like food, oceans, and country-specific initiatives.

Despite these successes, White stressed the need for further action: “The water sector needs to be more vocal and present, particularly when it comes to policy influence. Our messages must extend beyond the Pavilion, reaching negotiation spaces and working groups. There’s still much to be done and we must continue pushing forward.”