Azerbaijan’s economy is highly dependent on fossil-fuel exports, making its economic prospects vulnerable to rising emissions-cutting ambition around the world.
As decarbonisation reduces global fossil-fuel demand and prices, the country will not be able to earn as much money from its oil and gas resources.
In a recent study, we looked at the policy solutions Azerbaijan could implement, in order to shift towards cleaner energy and diversify its economy away from fossil fuels to benefit domestic consumers, while remaining competitive in global markets.
Our results suggest that, while being adversely impacted by decarbonisation efforts in countries around the world, it is in Azerbaijan’s self-interest to implement domestic mitigation policies.
With proper sequencing and design of such policies, including a combination of fossil-fuel subsidy reform, a price on carbon post-2030 and use of collected revenue to cut taxes elsewhere, the country could achieve nationally determined contribution (NDC) targets, boost income growth and increase economic diversification.
Moreover, ambitious mitigation efforts towards net-zero by 2060 would yield substantial health co-benefits that could almost fully outweigh the direct economic costs of cutting emissions.
Vulnerability of the status quo
Net fossil-fuel exporting economies, such as Azerbaijan, not only need to implement domestic decarbonisation policies, but also face the consequences of global mitigation efforts if global climate targets are to be met. The latter could substantially impact the country’s future revenue flows from fossil fuel exports.
During the early 2000s, Azerbaijan’s hydrocarbon-fueled economy contributed to rapidly rising incomes and the development of domestic infrastructure. Between 2000 and 2014, per-capita gross domestic product (GDP) in the country increased more than 10-fold, transitioning Azerbaijan from a low-income to an upper-middle-income economy, according to the World Bank.
However, over the past decade, GDP growth has slowed down, while the country’s diversification efforts have not led to major transformations in the structure of the domestic economy, with fossil-fuel activities still playing a central role. Fossil-fuel subsidies in the country remain large and they continue to distort domestic energy markets, according to the International Energy Agency.
Between 2016 and 2021, Azerbaijan ranked 115 out of 133 countries in terms of the “economic complexity” of its exports – a measure of how diverse a country’s export basket is – according to the Growth Lab at Harvard University.
The figure, below left, shows that its export basket is among the least complex in the world – even among oil and mineral exporting comparator countries, only Nigeria ranks lower than Azerbaijan.
In addition, the country is highly vulnerable to the future energy transition, being characterised by both high exposure and low resiliency, as shown in the figure below right.
Azerbaijan has the second least complex export basket in the world, leaving it highly vulnerable to an energy transition
Economic risks
Without pro-active domestic policies, our research suggests that Azerbaijan risks facing major economic losses from the global energy transition.
Mitigation efforts around the world can substantially reduce a country’s “resource rents” through declining global fossil-fuel demand and prices, as shown in the figure below.
Results from our study suggest that if countries around the world implement NDC-consistent climate policies, then GDP in Azerbaijan could decline by up to 3.3% in 2060, relative to a reference scenario, which reflects a continuation of the current trends, policies adopted by 2021 and the energy projects that are already in the pipeline.
Households’ welfare, a measure closely related to changes in real income, as well as their investments, might be impacted even more adversely – by 5.1% and 6.7%, respectively, in 2060.
The country would see significant and growing reductions in export earnings from fossil fuels, as shown in the second figure below. Resources such as labour and capital, freed by declining fossil-fuel extraction activities would be reallocated to cleaner sectors, such as services and manufactured goods, which would see a modest expansion in output and exports. However, this would only partly compensate for the reduction in fossil-fuel export revenues, as shown in the figure below.
Global climate action could significantly hit Azerbaijan’s economy
In our NDC mitigation scenario, most of the reduction in economic activity in Azerbaijan is associated with fossil-fuel extraction sectors, as shown in the lower two figures above. Supporting service activities, such as trade, are also impacted substantially. The construction sector would also see a contraction in value-added and investments, due to reduced volumes of investment in the economy overall.
In terms of the government balance sheet, if the rest of the world implements NDC-consistent mitigation policies, then Azerbaijan would see a decline in tax revenue of up to 4% in 2060.
Domestic mitigation is a win-win
Transitioning to a “green” economy is listed as one of the key pillars of the 2021 presidential order titled: “Azerbaijan 2030: National priorities for socio-economic development”.
The country has a target of reducing its greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to 35% below 1990 levels by 2030 and 40% by 2050, based on its updated NDC from 2023. (Its emissions are currently around 5% above 1990 levels.)
At the same time, between 2010 and 2023 GHG emissions in the country have increased by more than 39%, complicating the ability to achieve the mitigation goals.
In addition, Azerbaijan’s 2050 commitment of cutting emissions by 40% relative to the 1990 level is not only conditional on international support, but could be also deemed as substantially less ambitious than the country’s fair contribution towards global climate goals. Recent research, separate from ours, suggests the latter would imply reducing emissions by around 65% by 2050.
Our research suggests that achieving the stated 2030 targets and further strengthening the country’s mitigation ambition in the long-run would bring important economic benefits.
Our estimates suggest that a combination of fossil-fuel subsidies reform, the introduction of a carbon price post-2030 and recycling of the additionally collected revenue via reduced taxes elsewhere – on labour, capital and land, for example – would allow the country to achieve domestic NDC targets while boosting economic growth and investment, as shown in the figure below.
If the country were to implement such policies, Azerbaijan’s GDP could increase by over 1% in 2040 and by over 2% in 2060, relative to the scenario where all countries achieve their NDCs, while Azerbaijan does not implement climate-mitigation policies, i.e. follows the baseline pathway. There would be an even more substantial increase in investment of almost 6% in 2060.
On the policy implementation side, our results suggest that the elimination of two-thirds of fossil-fuel subsidies in Azerbaijan would be sufficient to achieve the 2030 NDC target.
Additional mitigation efforts would be needed to comply with NDC targets post-2030, for example, carbon prices of around $40-$50 per tonne of carbon dioxide (/tCO2 post-2045).
Azerbaijan could boost its GDP through climate action
If additional revenue from energy-subsidy reform and carbon pricing were used to reduce taxes elsewhere, such as taxes on labour, capital and land, this would help to support non-fossil-fuel activities, contributing to the diversification of Azerbaijan’s economy, as shown in the third figure above.
The share of energy-intensive manufacturing in the country’s GDP would decline by around 0.6 percentage points starting from 2035, similar in magnitude to the reduction in the share of carbon-based electricity generation.
These two groups of activities would be primarily substituted by carbon-free electricity and service sectors, reducing Azerbaijan’s exposure to the global energy transition.
Importance of considering a bigger picture
Apart from reducing GHG emissions, domestic mitigation policies would also lead to changes in air pollution levels.
As suggested by earlier studies, reduced air pollution levels could result in lower mortality rates and reduce the overall costs of mitigation.
In addition to air pollution changes under the NDC and net-zero by 2060 mitigation scenarios, in our study we also consider a hypothetical case where, within a net-zero climate policy scenario, households reduce the use of wood biomass for domestic heating and cooking – by 50% and 60% respectively in 2030 and 2060, relative to business as usual. (In the figure below, we refer to this scenario as “NetZero with reduced wood burning by HHs”.)
Our results suggest that the improved air quality observed across mitigation scenarios allows for saving between 120 lives in Azerbaijan in 2030 (NDC scenario) and 1,300 in 2060 (net-zero scenario) lives in Azerbaijan.
When the case of reduced wood-burning by households is considered, the number of saved lives increases to 1,200 (net-zero in 2030) and 3,800 (net-zero in 2060).
When these mortality reductions are translated to monetary equivalents using the “value of statistical life” (VSL), the corresponding health co-benefits reach 0.2%-0.6% of households’ welfare in 2030 and 0.5%-2.2% of welfare in 2060, as shown in the figures below.
Health co-benefits could more than offset the cost of Azerbaijan reaching net-zero
Our findings show that households would be better off under the NDC scenario, with air pollution co-benefits increasing the boost to their welfare already generated by mitigation policies.
While there would be direct mitigation-related economic costs to households in the net-zero scenario, health co-benefits would offset 60% of this in 2030 and 80% in 2060.
Moreover, reaching net-zero in 2060 while reducing wood burning by households would bring additional health benefits, with substantially greater economic value than the costs of mitigation.
Policy implications
Several important policy insights follow from our analysis.
First, while being exposed to the declining global fossil-fuel demand and prices that are expected to accompany decarbonisation efforts in countries around the world, our research suggests it is in Azerbaijan’s self-interest to implement domestic mitigation policies.
Our findings support earlier studies that suggest lower risks of “stranded fossil-fuel assets” and overall economic costs for those that move to diversify their economy early, compared to latecomer countries in the context of climate mitigation.
Second, electricity and gas prices are currently well below their economic costs, due to the presence of implicit subsidies. Considering the current windfall earnings from energy sector revenues, Azerbaijan is well-positioned to proceed with the subsidies’ phase-out, as international experience shows that successful pricing reforms are often implemented when fiscal pressures are low.
Our research suggests that a gradual but steady phaseout of fossil-fuel subsidies by 2030, followed by the introduction of economy-wide carbon pricing of at least $25/tCO2 by 2035 is the economically most efficient path to incentivise a clean-energy transition and improve energy efficiency.
From the policy perspective, such a transition would entail a gradual deregulation of gas, electricity and fuel prices, as well as a strengthening of regulators and market mechanisms in price setting – areas where Azerbaijan has achieved limited progress in recent years.
Third, our results support the important role of decisions on the use of revenues collected during the implementation of mitigation policies, either through the elimination of fossil-fuel subsidies or carbon-pricing.
We find that recycling revenue through a reduction in other taxes, rather than direct transfers to households or subsidies to renewable energy, is more economically efficient.
Finally, our results suggest that broader environmental impacts and co-benefits from decarbonisation are an important part of the equation when weighing the economic impact of mitigation policies. This includes reductions in air pollutant emissions, which further lead to improved air quality and declining mortality.
When properly accounted for, such co-benefits could substantially reduce the overall cost of mitigation and even result in net welfare gains in Azerbaijan. Complementary policies on the reduction of wood-burning in the country could result in even more substantial health co-benefits.
The post Guest post: How COP29 host Azerbaijan could boost growth through climate action appeared first on Carbon Brief.
Guest post: How COP29 host Azerbaijan could boost growth through climate action
When heavy storms triggered a fault on a major power line in Indonesia’s Sumatra in late May, blackouts plunged homes and businesses across the island into darkness, leaving millions to cope without power in the humid heat for up to a day.
Failed traffic lights caused chaos on the streets of Medan, one of the country’s biggest cities, and restaurants and shops had to shutter or throw out food after fridges stopped working. Four people were reported to have died from carbon monoxide poisoning from generators.
A power outage caused by damage to cables on a high-voltage transmission line, the first of two to strike Sumatra in a fortnight, highlighted the huge challenge facing Indonesia and much of neighbouring Southeast Asia – the maintenance and upgrading of inadequate grid capacity that industry analysts say is proving an obstacle for billions of dollars in planned clean power investments.
Experts told Climate Home News the Galang–Simangkuk transmission line, which was relatively new and only began operating seven years ago, should have been able to withstand the storms that caused transmission towers to collapse in early June.
“It should not have had these grid failures,” said Wai-Shin Chan, Hong Kong-based head of research at Asia Research & Engagement, a consulting firm, warning that climate change would bring more frequent episodes of extreme weather.
“The grid resilience is really not there,” Chan said.
The Indonesian Air Force helped state-owned utility PT Perusahaan Listrik Negara (PLN) transport emergency power towers to restore electricity supplies within 24 hours, but the two incidents could cause longer-lasting damage to investor confidence – hurting the delivery of much-needed reliable clean electricity supplies.
PLN did not respond to a request for comment.
-
Indonesia’s failing Just Energy Transition Partnership is a cautionary tale
The government has abandoned its plan to shut down a major coal plant, which was a key part of the deal, raising doubts about the donor-backed approach -
EU, UK lead push for electrification as “powerful weapon” against fossil fuels
A group of dozens of countries seeks to build momentum for a COP31 pledge to electrify 35% of global energy use by 2035 as an alternative to fossil fuels
Grid bottlenecks and projects stuck on hold
With electrification high on the agenda of the COP31 climate talks later this year, there is growing global focus on the need to bolster grid infrastructure to cope with increased electricity use and more renewables in the power mix.
In Southeast Asia, energy experts say inadequate grid capacity and maintenance is already proving a major factor in the region’s stuttering rollout of new clean energy projects.
About 50% to 60% of renewable energy projects in Vietnam, Thailand and Indonesia were cancelled or stalled between 2021 and 2025, according to a recent report by consultancy Bain & Company and Standard Chartered. In Indonesia, 48% of announced projects were subsequently dropped or delayed during that period.
Progress in the region is also being hampered by issues ranging from unclear power purchase agreement (PPA) structures, a failure of power policies to keep up with investor needs, permitting and licensing approval delays, grid connection constraints, limits to private sector involvement in electricity markets, and policy and tariff uncertainty, energy experts said.
Some renewable energy projects have also faced opposition due to their environmental impact and issues related to land rights.
But Bain researchers found grid infrastructure was the biggest bottleneck for Southeast Asia’s energy transition, with about $18 billion per year needed in investment for modernisation and upgrades.
The International Energy Agency (IEA) has warned that electricity grid and storage investment in the region was higher in 2015 at $15 billion compared with $12 billion in 2025, even as electricity demand and renewable energy growth accelerated.
“It’s a concern for long-term power development in the region,” Chan said.
“If these risks – grid curtailment, policy uncertainty, permitting and PPA – are not adequately addressed, investors just don’t have the confidence to hit the final investment decision button,” he added.
A stuttering energy transition
Ramping up progress on solar, wind, hydro and geothermal projects is vital for Southeast Asian nations to hit their targets on cutting planet-heating carbon emissions.
Indonesia has pledged to reduce emissions by 31.9% by 2030 compared with business-as-usual levels, or by 43.2% with international support, on the way to reaching net zero by 2060.
Renewables accounted for about 18% of Indonesia’s energy mix in April 2026 according to local media reports, falling short of the country’s initial 23% target for 2025, with the majority of its energy needs met by coal, oil and gas. In 2025, a new National Energy Policy postponed achieving the target to 2030.
“The region carries significant weight in global terms, given its share of world population and energy consumption,” said Joseph Jacobelli, an impact investor and author of Asia’s Energy Revolution and Powering the Unstoppable Green Shift.
“Every delay in renewable energy deployment extends dependence on fossil fuels and pushes net zero targets further out of reach,” he said.
There are cost benefits of increasing renewables in the overall power mix, too.
In many parts of the region, new renewable power – especially solar and onshore wind – is cheaper than building new fossil fuel generation. The global energy shock unleashed by the Iran war has highlighted the energy security benefits of renewables, though it also raised concerns about coal backsliding in countries including Indonesia.
Surging oil prices exposed Southeast Asia’s vulnerability to fossil fuel supply disruptions, causing energy prices to soar and widespread fuel shortages that led the World Bank to downgrade the region’s growth projection.
“This situation pushes us to accelerate [the energy transition], we must move faster,” Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto said in March, adding that the government was focused on solar projects that would deliver a total installed capacity of up to 100 GW.
At the same time, progress on moving away from coal has been sluggish. Both Indonesia and Vietnam signed up for Just Energy Transition Partnerships (JETPs) – a funding initiative set up by the G7 to help developing nations shift away from coal – though a lack of favourable financing is holding back these plans.
The US withdrew from its JETP deals with the two countries last year, reflecting President Donald Trump’s wider energy policies, and Indonesia abandoned plans to close a major coal power plant.
Lack of finance, or lack of faith?
But a shortage of financing to bring new renewables projects online is not the cause of foot-dragging in Indonesia, where installed solar capacity reached only about 20% to 30% of the government’s 2020-2025 target, Bain researchers said.
Of an estimated $540 billion in green capital expenditure announced across Southeast Asia’s power and electric vehicle value chains between now and 2030, only about $315 billion is on a credible path towards deployment under current conditions, according to the report.
Between 2022 and early 2026, more than a quarter of the 452 new solar projects announced in Southeast Asian countries were postponed or cancelled, according to Global Energy Monitor‘s Global Solar Power Tracker.
In Indonesia, the Batam Bintan Karimun solar farm was initially expected to come online by 2024 but was cancelled in 2023 for unknown reasons, Kasandra O’Malia, a project manager at Global Energy Monitor, told Climate Home. The project also included plans for Southeast Asia’s largest associated battery storage facility.
Another high-profile Indonesian development that has stalled is a 3,500 MW solar and storage project proposed on Riau Island to export clean electricity to Singapore. While not formally abandoned, there have been few updates to this project since April 2022.
“This execution gap is not really to do with money – there is available capital – but the finance is not being deployed effectively because the risks have not been adequately redressed,” Chan said.
In a bid to foster investor certainty, Indonesia’s government approved a new 2025-2034 Electricity Supply Business Plan (RUPTL) for PLN in May 2025, replacing years of delays over the country’s power development roadmap.
As well as aligning government policy, streamlining permitting, simplifying purchase procedures and targeting 70 GW of new generation, with renewables accounting for the vast majority of additions, the plan includes the construction of about 47,800 kilometres of new transmission lines and substations with a total capacity of 108,000 megavolt-ampere, spread across Indonesia.
The Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources, several domestic and international renewable energy developers, and the Indonesia Renewable Society, did not respond to requests for comment.
Another way to soothe investors’ nerves would be for governments to use public money to de-risk investments, but there is little appetite for this approach in the region, Chan said.
A more effective tool would be ensuring stable, investment-friendly energy market policies and regulations, said Alnie Demoral, a Manila-based energy analyst at climate think-tank Ember who previously worked with solar developers and investors.
Renewable energy developers, investors and authorities can spend years negotiating the project’s costs, permitting and whether grid connection will be available to bring clean power online, she said.
Often the longest discussions focus on the power pricing tariffs that governments set for renewable energy producers. Changing policies or disagreement on underlying cost assumptions can stall or delay a project before it reaches financial close, she added.
“Governments have to do their part by making sure the investment environment is stable,” Demoral said.
“But this is a two-way process. The private sector and developers must also ensure that their assessments of the project are based on robust assumptions.”
AI data centres add to the strain
At the same time, rapid growth in power-hungry AI data centres is putting extra strain on the region’s overstretched grids.
AI data centres, which use much more power than regular data centres, are becoming one of the largest drivers of new power demand in Southeast Asia as governments in the region jostle for more multibillion-dollar investment in the sector.
-
Explainer: Will AI data centres make or break the energy transition?
As grids struggle to meet soaring electricity demand for AI data-crunching, big tech is under pressure to cover the costs of boosting power supplies – which may be dirty or clean -
UN asks AI companies to reveal full environmental impacts
UN chief António Guterres says big AI firms should disclose the emissions, water and energy use of their data centres amid community opposition
The slow pace of renewable energy deployment and grid modernisation, coupled with ongoing reliance on fossil fuels in the electricity mix, will make it difficult for the region to meet a new, fast-growing source of additional demand without increasing emissions.
Emissions from data centre power use in Indonesia are expected to quadruple between 2024 and 2030, according to Ember.
AI data centres operate around the clock and will often use any power that is available – be it renewables or fossil fuels, said Chan, urging policymakers to first ensure they can meet the power needs before courting data centres.
Many new AI data centres are planned for areas with insufficient high-voltage transmission capacity, according to the Bain report, suggesting that countries should focus on new high-voltage lines, larger substations and stronger interconnections between regions.
The researchers note that AI data centres also typically take about one to three years to build, while major electricity transmission lines and grid updates can take five years or more, adding that power grid investments must happen before renewable energy or AI projects.
“Growth in data centres and AI is already adding pressure to constrained grids,” said Christina Ng, the Kuala Lumpur-based co-founder of Energy Shift Institute, an Asia-focused, independent energy finance think-tank.
“The risk is that new demand is met through high-emitting electricity if clean power and clean grid investment do not keep pace.”
Main image: A technician walks next to solar panels that partially provide electrical power to the Grand Mosque of Istiqlal in Jakarta, Indonesia (Photo: REUTERS/Willy Kurniawan)
The post Southeast Asia’s fragile grids threaten billions in clean energy investment appeared first on Climate Home News.
Southeast Asia’s fragile grids threaten billions in clean energy investment
Climate Change
Greenpeace welcomes renewed solar push, urges global leadership away from fossil fuels
SYDNEY, Wednesday 5 August 2026 — Greenpeace has welcomed Minister Chris Bowen’s commitment to expanding Australia’s solar discount at his National Press Club address today, a move it says unlocks the potential of Australia’s commercial rooftops, and underscores how homegrown renewables strengthen energy security and affordability in an increasingly volatile world.
The announcement comes three months before Minister Bowen is due to take the reins of UN climate negotiations, and shortly ahead of the Pacific Islands Forum and Pacific Pre-COP — two moments that will test Australia’s determination as incoming COP31 President of Negotiations and bring global attention to Australia’s fossil fuel exports.
Dr Simon Bradshaw, COP31 Lead at Greenpeace Australia Pacific, said: “Homegrown, decentralised renewable energy is the path to energy security, affordability, and to protecting communities from escalating climate disasters.
“We commend Minister Bowen for building on Australia’s world-leading progress in shifting homes and businesses beyond fossil fuels. Now the Australian Government has a responsibility to help drive stronger progress globally, and to tackle Australia’s burgeoning fossil fuel exports.
“Right now, as the northern hemisphere burns and Australians grow anxious at the prospect of another dangerous El Niño summer, all efforts of Australian families and businesses in shifting to renewable energy are being undone by the pollution from Australia’s exported coal and gas.
“COP31 is a unique opportunity for Australia to work with its big energy trade partners like South Korea and Japan towards a prosperous shared future beyond fossil fuels.
“Continuing to approve new fossil fuels, like Woodside’s mammoth Browse gas project, would be an historic act of recklessness at a pivotal moment in the world’s energy transition and response to the climate crisis.
“Australia must get squarely behind longstanding Pacific leadership on climate change, fight to protect the all-important goal of limiting warming to 1.5°C, and ensure that COP31 builds further momentum in the global transition away from fossil fuels.
“As we heard today, Australia is making real strides in its own energy transition. It’s time to match that domestic resolve with the kind of global leadership the Australian Government has promised, and that communities here, in the Pacific and worldwide are depending on.”
-ENDS-
Media contact
Kate O’Callaghan on 0406 231 892 or kate.ocallaghan@greenpeace.org
Greenpeace welcomes renewed solar push, urges global leadership away from fossil fuels
Benito Müller, Anju Sharma, Jen Allan, Matthias Roesti and Luis Gomez-Echeverri.
Every November, tens of thousands of people descend on the world’s annual UN climate conference. Presidents and prime ministers, negotiators, business executives, campaigners, journalists, celebrities and lobbyists converge on one city for two frenetic weeks, all convinced they need to be there.
Everyone with a stake in climate action feels they must be present. Any suggestion of a smaller, more focused conference is quickly met with concerns about exclusion. But it is time to ask an uncomfortable question: has the fear of missing out (FOMO) become one of the biggest obstacles to effective international climate cooperation?
The story in numbers
When governments first met under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in the 1990s, the annual Conferences of the Parties (COPs) attracted only a few thousand participants. Even the Kyoto conference, which produced the first legally binding emissions agreement, hosted fewer than 10,000 people.
Since then, analysis by ecbi reveals a striking trend: after each major treaty COP, the participation at the next COP approximately doubled (see chart below).
Why?
Part of the answer is success. As climate change has risen up the political and economic agenda, more actors quite rightly want to engage. But our analysis reveals that a less acknowledged force is also driving the spikes in participation: FOMO.
As more heads of state attended, ministers concluded they had to be there too. As ministers arrived in greater numbers, government delegations expanded. Businesses, investors, researchers, campaigners, journalists, city leaders and philanthropies reached the same conclusion: if everyone important is going to COP, we cannot afford to stay away.
The result is a self-reinforcing cycle. The larger COP becomes, the more indispensable attendance appears, because presence signals relevance.
The negotiating community has barely grown
The headline attendance figures tell only part of the story. At COP28, more than 42,000 Party badges were issued to official national delegations. However, only 1,581 delegates had also attended the technical negotiating session in Bonn just five months earlier. Fewer than 4% of Party delegates formed the core negotiating community.
Comment: The UN climate process was built for negotiation – now it must support implementation
This core negotiating community has remained remarkably stable: across the five COPs since Paris, between roughly 1,300 and 1,600 delegates consistently attended both the June negotiating session and the annual COP.
The negotiating community has not become twenty times larger, but the COP has.
One COP, three different events
Today’s COP has, in fact, evolved into three very different events rolled into one.
The first is the formal negotiating session, where governments agree rules, guidance and decisions under the Convention and the Paris Agreement.
The second is a global political summit, where leaders announce initiatives and demonstrate political commitment.
The third is a vast climate expo, where businesses, cities, researchers, financial institutions and civil society showcase solutions, build partnerships and engage the public.
Each of them serves a valuable purpose, but the problem is that they have become bundled together by historical accident rather than institutional design.
Bigger is not always better
The consequences of “mega-COPs” are becoming increasingly difficult to ignore.
The countries most vulnerable to climate change are increasingly less able to host COPs and thus lose the ability to have their voices properly heard. Hosting a modern COP now requires enormous financial resources, extensive security operations and accommodation capacity that many countries simply do not possess. Even wealthier nations have become more reluctant to take on the burden.
Inside the venue, size creates its own inefficiencies. Climate negotiations often advance through informal conversations: a chance meeting in a corridor, a discussion over coffee, an impromptu conversation between delegates who discover common ground. Those opportunities become rarer when participants spend hours navigating enormous venues and crowded security checkpoints.
Comment: COP presidencies should focus less on climate policy, more on global politics
Observer access is constrained by overcrowding. National delegations increasingly include large numbers of non-government participants, sometimes outnumbering officials from government ministries. Meanwhile, businesses, campaigners and journalists compete with negotiators for the same space and attention.
The very scale of the event also creates a reputational problem. A gathering of 60,000 or more people inevitably creates expectations of dramatic political breakthroughs every year. Yet much of today’s climate diplomacy involves steady, technical progress. When those quieter achievements are judged against the expectations generated by a mega-event, disappointment in the UN climate change process becomes almost inevitable.
Time to unbundle
Not everything must happen in the same place at the same time. Negotiations, political leadership and implementation partnerships each deserve their own space. They should become separate events.
Routine governing body sessions, involving the roughly 5,000 participants directly engaged in the formal process, could be held in Bonn, where the UN climate secretariat is based. Political summits could be convened separately when leaders’ intervention is genuinely needed. Climate expos could continue to rotate with the COP Presidency, providing dedicated opportunities for businesses, investors, cities, researchers and civil society to showcase solutions and forge partnerships.
Such an approach would strengthen, not weaken, participation. Negotiators would benefit from a more focused and effective working environment. Host countries would face a far more manageable logistical and financial challenge. Climate-vulnerable countries would once again have a realistic opportunity to host key meetings and shape the global agenda. Businesses, investors, cities and civil society would gain greater visibility by engaging in forums designed for partnership, innovation and implementation, rather than competing with formal negotiations for space and attention.
Comment: Not another COP-out: We must rewrite the rules of the UN climate talks
Today’s mega-COPs evolved incrementally, one seemingly sensible decision at a time, until their sheer scale began to undermine many of the objectives they were intended to serve. The fear of missing out now risks becoming one of the biggest barriers to the reforms needed to make the process more effective.
The greatest fear now is not missing out on the next COP, but missing the opportunity to redesign the process so it can deliver on its ultimate purpose: tackling the climate crisis.
Benito Müller is managing director of Oxford Climate Policy and director of the European Capacity Building Initiative (ecbi).
Anju Sharma is a climate policy specialist with Oxford Climate Policy.
Jen Allan is a senior Lecturer at Cardiff University and strategic advisor at the International Institute for Sustainable Development.
Matthias Roesti is a postdoctoral researcher studying the political economy of climate change at the University of Pennsylvania’s Environmental Politics Lab.
Luis Gomez-Echeverri is a former senior staff member with UNDP and UNFCCC and currently an emeritus research scholar at the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, working at the intersection of climate and development.
The post Is FOMO undermining climate diplomacy? appeared first on Climate Home News.
-
Greenhouse Gases12 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Climate Change12 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Renewable Energy10 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
-
Greenhouse Gases1 year ago
嘉宾来稿：探究火山喷发如何影响气候预测