Weaving the Belém package: the role of adaptation finance at the SBs in Bonn

|

English Version

There is a growing sense that adaptation finance is going to be an important element of the final ‘package’ at COP 30. In turn, SB62 in Bonn will be a critical moment to understand how this package might come together. While there is no specific negotiation on adaptation finance, adaptation is a central theme across finance negotiations and finance has become increasingly prominent in adaptation negotiations.

This creates challenges for coherence across negotiation streams, but is not surprising. The Paris Agreement has entered its implementation phase and many developing countries still lack the financing necessary to deliver on their National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) and the Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA).

Adaptation finance was discussed at length during negotiations on the new collective quantified goal on climate finance (NCQG) agreed at COP 29. Despite the new goal recognising the need “for dramatically scaling up adaptation finance”, developing countries still lack confidence in the predictability and quality of adaptation finance flows.

This is understandable given recent significant cuts to development assistance budgets by major donors and the Adaptation Fund’s continued failure to reach its fundraising targets. The COP 26 outcome had ‘urged’ developed countries to double their adaptation finance from approximately US$20 billion to US$40 billion by 2025, but there is no pathway beyond this and data confirming its delivery is not scheduled to be available until 2028.

For negotiations in Belém to be considered a success, Brazil will likely need an outcome that sends a strong signal of collective commitment to adaptation and its financing. Various ideas have been floated so far ranging from new collective targets to calls for nationally determined adaptation finance targets and decision language providing a stronger hook for accountability. However, the absence of a single home for adaptation finance means the overall outcome will likely need to be woven across multiple agendas. SB 62 in Bonn will provide an opportunity to begin reading (and influencing) the tea leaves regarding how this might occur.

Important events and negotiation items relevant to adaptation finance include:

• The Global Goal on Adaptation: Negotiations will focus on indicators for monitoring progress towards the 11 targets in the GGA framework. Negotiators currently have a list of 490 indicators developed by a panel of experts and must conclude with no more than 100 at COP 30. A key issue dividing developed and developing countries has been the extent to which indicators for finance and other means of implementation will be included in the final set.

Will we see signs of convergence at SB 62 now the experts have weighed in?

• National Adaptation Plans: Negotiations on NAPs failed to reach a substantive outcome at COP 29. One of the issues dividing Parties has been finance, namely the balance of attention given to public and private finance and differentiation between Parties regarding provision of finance. The stakes on these issues were higher when the NCQG was under negotiation; will progress be unlocked now the new goal is locked in?

The stakes on these issues were higher when the NCQG was under negotiation; will progress be unlocked now the new goal is locked in?

• The Sharm el-Sheikh Dialogue on the scope of Article 2.1c and its relationship with Article 9 (SeSD). After two years discussing the alignment of global finance flows with climate action, Parties are set to decide at COP 30 on what future work will occur on Article 2.1c under the CMA. Adaptation has received support across negotiating groups during the SeSD and is again a focus topic for the workshop at SB 62.

Could adaptation be a starting point for convergence on the forward work to be agreed in Belém?

• Baku to Belem Roadmap to 1.3T: The COP 29 and COP 30 Presidencies will produce a report in Belém that aims to galvanise efforts to mobilise the US$1.3 trillion in finance from all sources to developing countries by 2035 called for in the NCQG decision. Public expectations for the Roadmap have grown steadily since COP 29, and consultations at SB 62 with Parties and civil society will provide an opportunity to guide its development.

Will a strong focus on adaptation and clear steps towards improving the quality and quantity of adaptation finance emerge as a common ask for the Roadmap?

• Negotiations on the Adaptation Fund: The Adaptation Fund will transition away from the Kyoto Protocol to only serving the Paris Agreement once shares of proceeds (SoPs) from Article 6.4 carbon markets become available. Negotiations to facilitate this, however, have been stalled for several sessions. Questions about the future Board composition lurk in the background and Annex I seats remain vacant due to apparent blocking of nominations by Russia.

Will the finalisation of Article 6.4 negotiations at COP 29 unlock progress? Could this pave the way for new pledges later in the year to keep the Fund running smoothly until SoPs ramp up in future?

• COP 30 Presidency activities: The COP 30 Presidency will be running a swath of events during SB 62.

Will Brazil offer insights into their vision for the COP 30 package and where they see badly needed progress on adaptation finance coming from? Is a cover decision still off the table?