U.N. Climate Meetings: A Critical Moment

By Valerie Volcovici, Kate Abnett

(Reuters) – This week’s U.N. meetings in New York offer countries a chance to tackle significant disparities regarding the global climate finance goals, yet uncertainty surrounding the U.S. presidential election threatens to hinder progress ahead of November’s U.N. climate summit.

Negotiators express hesitance to commit to positions prior to the Nov. 5 election results, which will shape climate policy for the U.S., the world's largest economy and historical polluter, for the next four years.

Delay in decision-making could jeopardize reaching new financing agreements before the current $100 billion pledge expires at year’s end, warn observers. “The elections are in the calculus of global climate talks,” says Michai Robertson, finance negotiator for the Alliance of Small Island States.

Governments are contemplating different scenarios depending on the election outcomes, which could range from Vice President Kamala Harris, who has endorsed substantial climate spending, to former President Donald Trump, known for promoting fossil fuels and climate denial. A third possibility involves a protracted election outcome, leaving the U.S. in limbo.

Robertson pointed out that the uncertainty of the U.S. election is influencing the positioning of various countries. While wealthier nations consider increasing their financial contributions, they prefer to wait and assess the U.S. direction first.

A Challenging Agenda

This week marks the last assembly of all countries before COP29, scheduled for Nov. 11 in Baku, Azerbaijan, just days after the U.S. elections. However, achieving agreement on new targets and expanding the donor base presents a challenge. Setting an overly ambitious target risks failure to fulfill it, potentially breeding mistrust among developing nations reliant on these funds, while a low target could leave many vulnerable populations underserved amid escalating global warming.

U.N. climate agency chief Simon Stiell estimates that annual financing needs could reach trillions to support poorer nations in transitioning to clean energy and adapting to a warmer climate. Failing to establish new targets by 2025 could endanger future climate negotiations, warns a senior official from Azerbaijan’s COP29 presidency.

Different Paths Ahead

Regardless of the presidential outcome, current U.S. climate negotiators face limitations in their pledge capabilities. A Harris presidency would likely ensure continuity, as she has advocated for Biden’s negotiating positions, including a commitment made at COP28 to contribute $3 billion to the global Green Climate Fund. Neither Biden nor Harris has offered a new financing target, but U.S. negotiators maintain that rapidly developing economies like China and Gulf oil-producing countries ought to contribute.

Historically, Trump’s presidency would entail withdrawing from the Paris Agreement and other key frameworks, isolating the U.S. from many international climate commitments.

Historical Context

The intersection of U.S. elections with U.N. climate summits is not unprecedented. The disputed 2000 U.S. election coincided with a climate summit that reached no consensus, forcing subsequent discussions to be held months later. An upset occurred just after the signing of the Paris Agreement, leaving U.S. negotiators unprepared after Trump's election.

However, negotiators this year acknowledge a heightened sense of urgency regarding climate action due to increasing global temperatures leading to severe climate events. They are also better prepared for possible unexpected outcomes compared to previous election cycles. Paul Bodnar, director of sustainable finance at the Bezos Earth Fund, notes that current circumstances reflect a greater readiness amid rising climate challenges.