The 62nd session of the Subsidiary Bodies (SB62) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) concluded in Bonn on Friday early hours with a palpable sense of frustration. The two-week talks, intended as a critical midway point ahead of COP30 in Belem, Brazil, in November, ended without substantial progress on key issues, particularly climate finance, leaving developing nations, including India, incensed over the failure to address their urgent needs.
The Bonn conference unfolded against a backdrop of escalating climate impacts, with 2024 witnessing 151 record-breaking extreme weather events and over 800,000 people displaced or made homeless due to climate-related disasters. Yet, the talks failed to bridge the yawning finance gap, a recurring thorn in the side of international climate negotiations. UN Climate Change Executive Secretary Simon Stiell captured the mood in his closing plenary address, urging parties to “go further, faster, and fairer” to keep the 1.5°C Paris Agreement goal alive. However, his words rang hollow as delegates departed with little to show for their efforts, particularly on the contentious issue of Article 9.1 of the Paris Agreement, which mandates developed nations to provide financial resources to assist developing countries for mitigation and adaptation.
Finance standoff
The finance debate dominated the Bonn agenda, with a flashpoint emerging early when developed countries attempted to remove references to Article 9.1 from the agenda, triggering a 30-hour procedural standoff. For developing nations, this move signaled a retreat from long-standing commitments, intensifying a trust deficit that has plagued negotiations for decades. India along with Like Minded Developing Countries (LMDC), G77+China, and Least Developed Countries (LDCs), fiercely resisted this dilution, emphasising that climate justice hinges on equitable financial support.
Rajashree Ray, Economic Advisor at Union Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC), articulated the nation’s stance during the closing plenary: “Lack of any progress on Article 9.1 is one of the foremost challenges related to climate finance. This is a global priority. This is a priority for the Global South. This is not possible without international cooperation and the developed countries meeting their obligations and ensuring the urgent implementation of Article 9.1.” India also raised concerns about unilateral trade measures, such as carbon border adjustments, which it argued contravene the principles of equity and common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities (CBDR-RC) under the UNFCCC.
The finance gap highlighted in the recent “Just Transition Report: Private Fantasies, Public Realities” by Oil Change International, released last week, backs India’s position. The report estimates a need for $5.7 trillion annually by 2030 for a just energy transition, yet only 38 per cent ($2.166 trillion) was tracked in 2023-2024. Critically, the Global South, home to 69 pc of the world’s population, received a mere 15 pc of this finance, amounting to approximately $325 billion annually. This stark disparity, coupled with the report’s finding that blended finance mobilised just 29 pc private investment globally (24 pc in low-income countries) against promised $4-7 per dollar of concessional public finance, validates India’s demand for predictable, grant-based funding. The projected $540 billion annual shortfall in the Global South by 2030, as per the International Energy Agency’s 1.5°C-aligned model, further amplifies the urgency
Procedural inertia
The Bonn talks descended into what many described as a climate meltdown, with procedural wrangling overshadowing substantive action. The attempt to sideline Article 9.1 was not an isolated incident; negotiations on the Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA) and response measures also floundered. Developing countries, including the African and Arab Groups, pushed for alignment with the Paris Agreement and deletion of duplicative language, but clashed with developed nations over indicator guidance and means of implementation (MoI). The failure to agree on GGA indicators, critical for vulnerable nations, risks setting back the process by a year, a setback Cristina Rumbaitis of the UN Foundation called “deeply disappointing.”
Mohamed Adow, Director of Power Shift Africa, echoed this sentiment, stating, “The slow pace on core issues like finance, adaptation, and just transition reveals a deepening trust gap between rich and vulnerable nations.” The COP29 outcome in Baku, where developed countries pledged only $300 billion annually by 2035 against the $1.3 trillion (including $600 billion in grants) sought by the Global South, loomed large over Bonn. Diego Pacheco, Bolivia’s climate negotiator and LMDC spokesperson, lamented “many, many unfulfilled promises,” accusing developed nations of obfuscating real issues and offering inadequate mobilisation targets.
The just transition dialogue saw some progress, with the UAE Just Transition Work Programme gaining traction, particularly on creating an enabling international environment. Khaled Hashim of G77+China noted satisfaction with advancements. However, the unresolved finance gap from COP29 cast a long shadow, reinforcing the report’s critique that private-sector-first approaches are failing to deliver the $420 billion annually needed for fair fossil fuel phase-out programmes, including worker support and economic diversification.
Ilana Seid, Chair of the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS), highlighted the inclusive yet inadequate outcome: “The pace of action remains far behind the accelerating impacts our nations are already enduring. Small island developing states should not be the collateral damage of other countries’ lack of climate action.” AOSIS called for enhanced, 1.5°C-aligned Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and operationalising the GGA with scaled-up, accessible finance, expressing concern over logistical uncertainties for COP30.
Lien Vandamme, Senior Campaigner at the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL), said, for 30 years, the negotiations have failed to deliver climate justice, undermined international law, and allowed the fossil fuel industry to shape the rules. Urgent and deep reform of the UN climate talks is critical.” This aligns with the growing sentiment that corporate influence and lack of accountability are derailing progress.
David Waskow, Director of the International Climate Initiative at the World Resources Institute (WRI), said with just few months to go before COP30, leaders need to start delivering: they need to put forward strong national plans to cut emissions and transform key sectors; scale up climate finance from all sources; and urgently implement and mainstream adaptation and resilience to protect lives, economies, and security. Persistent political tensions and competing agendas led to limited and uneven progress in Bonn.”
Path to COP30 and beyond
With COP30 five months away, the Bonn meltdown has set a challenging stage. The upcoming NDC Synthesis Report in September and Biennial Transparency Reports will expose ambition and implementation gaps, particularly around finance. Stiell urged negotiators to form “frontrunner groups” and stop deferring hard decisions, while courts like the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and InterAmerican Court of Human Rights (IACtHR), set to issue Advisory Opinions on July 3, may clarify state obligations, potentially pressuring COP30.
Harjeet Singh, climate activist and founding director of Satat Sampada Climate Foundation, added, “There is no climate justice without climate finance… Wealthy countries can find trillions for military spending and the fossil fuel industry, yet they sideline adaptation finance crucial for helping people suffering from losses and damages.”