But the ghost of the past comes to haunt the present in two ways: in respect to broken promises on financial obligations (the $100 billion); but also, in terms of the slain moral order. The moral code of protecting the climate system, introduced in 1992 “on the basis of equity and in accordance with their common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities.” (UNFCCC, Art. 3, para. 1). This was retained, if downgraded to contextual preamble, in the Paris Agreement “guided by its principles, including the principle of equity and common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities, in the light of different national circumstances...” (2:2). But now, new replenishments to public climate finance are diminishingly small, and the Paris-dated reframe of calling in finance ‘from all sources’, and specifically the private sector, is becoming the most popular paradigm in town.
In this respect, COP30 is busily building a global carbon market to help meet the financing gap for the Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). This will be COP30’s historical marker. In a technical discussion on the means to fund the NDCs (with Emerging Markets and Developing Economies (EMDE) countries currently facing an annual financing gap requiring international support of $348 billion) enter stage left the Internationally Transferred Mitigation Outcome(s) (ITMOs), a conjured superhero of economics, manifesting 10 years on from their first appearance in article 6.2 of the Paris Agreement. ITMOs have the super-power of converting the overconsumption of carbon in the Global North using offsets, trading with a Global South entity who promises to not produce it, or to take it out of the atmosphere. These ITMOs can be traded in a new technical mechanism, validated and counted as a contribution to a country’s NDC (in carbon emissions reductions). For ITMO trading, developing countries must fall in line and become investable markets with business readiness and market alignment, delivering what is left of their sovereign assets (in low emitting mode), to the Behemoth of the market order.
The broken promise
Back in Copenhagen in 2009, developed nations vowed to mobilize $100 billion annually by 2020 to help developing countries adapt to climate impacts and pursue low-carbon growth. The figure became a cornerstone of the Paris Agreement. But the reality? The target was missed for years, and even when reports claimed it was ‘nearly met,’ much of the money was loans, not grants – adding debt to countries already burdened by climate disasters they did not cause. The pledge was never fully honored in spirit or substance. And now, at COP30 in Belém, the ghost of that broken promise stalks the corridors.
The illusion of progress
At COP29 in Baku, negotiators finally agreed on a New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG): $300 billion per year by 2035. On paper, it sounds like progress. In practice, it is a fig leaf. Climate vulnerable/developing countries estimate they need $2.4 trillion annually by 2030 and $3.3 trillion by 2035 to meet climate goals. The NCQG is not even a tenth of that. Worse, it is structured to lean heavily on private finance – risking more debt and volatility – while offering no guarantees of predictable, grant-based flows. The Baku-to-Belém Roadmap, unveiled with fanfare, promises $1.3 trillion annually by 2035 from ‘all sources.’ But it is non-binding, aspirational, and silent on enforcement. Another banquet, another illusion.
Crumbs on the table
Meanwhile, the pledges announced in Belém – $1.4 billion from the Gates Foundation for adaptation, $2.8 billion for sustainable agriculture, are symbolic not historic. In terms of climate finance that would meet the traditional quality benchmarks of being grant-based and ‘new and additional’ - there appears to be none specifically announced. Even the paltry $250 million available for disbursement to mark the operational opening of the Fund for Responding to Loss and Damage (FRLD) comes from prior commitments. Brazil’s Tropical Forest Forever Facility (TFFF), is aiming for $125 billion, but is in its infancy, with a glacial flow of commitments. These numbers barely register against the scale of need - crumbs on the table.
Why it matters
Climate finance is not charity; it is justice. The CBDR enshrined in the UN climate regime recognized that those who caused the crisis must lead in fixing it. Yet the architecture of climate finance increasingly shifts responsibility away from developed nations, relying on ‘mobilizing private capital’ as if markets alone can deliver equity. This is not just a technical debate – it is a moral abjection. Every unmet pledge has eroded trust, and trust is the currency of multilateralism. Without it, the Paris Agreement’s cooperative framework collapses. Even in meetings that are not ostensibly about finance - in discussions on the Global Stocktake (means of implementation and support), in debates about adaptation metrics, loss and damage, or the TFFF aspiration - the ghost whispers: “You said you would pay. You did not”:
Public climate finance has left stage right, and ITMOs will rule, but not without resistance from the environmental justice movement. The CBDR-RC is dead! Long live (haunt) the CBDR-RC! Or as Macbeth (‘developed’ countries) would exclaim: “Thou canst not say I did it: never shake Thy gory locks at me."
Call to action
The banquet in Belém is rich with rhetoric: just transitions, nature-based solutions, trillions by 2035. But until the ghost is laid to rest - until the historical commitment to pay up is honored in full - the feast will remain haunted. Here’s what must happen now:
- Scale up the NCQG rapidly: Treat $300 billion as a floor, not a ceiling.
- Make grants the backbone of finance: Debt is not adaptation; it is a trap.
- Bind the roadmap with teeth: Timelines, transparency, and consequences for non-compliance.
- Innovate with equity: Financial transaction taxes, fossil fuel windfall levies, debt-for-climate swaps - designed to protect the vulnerable.
- End the fossil fuel era with government action, and decommissioning bonds
Sidebar: The numbers that haunt COP
- Original pledge (Copenhagen 2009): $100 billion/year by 2020 → Missed.
- NCQG (Baku 2024): $300 billion/year by 2035.
- Roadmap aspiration: $1.3 trillion/year by 2035.
- Developing country needs: $2.4–$3.3 trillion/year by 2030–2035.
- Global System-wide investment needs to align to 1.5%: $7.4 trillion per year through 2030 (CPI, 2024)[1]
- New pledges at COP30: ~$4.45 billion concrete + $125 billion proposed forest finance.
“Until the ghost is laid to rest - until the historical commitment to pay up is honored in full - the feast will remain haunted.”
[1] Global-Landscape-of-Climate-Finance-2024.pdf