Content:

1. Preparing for worse
2. Takeaways from COP29
3. Reflections on Baku’s ‘NCQG outcome’

Preparing for Worse

Context: Cyclone Fengal caused widespread devastation in Tamil Nadu and Puducherry, resulting in 16 deaths, affecting 7 million families, and submerging over 2.21 lakh hectares of farmland

Relevance : GS 3 (Disaster Management )

Practice Question : On light of cyclone Fengal’s havoc evaluate disaster preparedness of india . Mention important challenges and solutions .(250 Words )

• Landfall causing huge issue in Tamil Nadu and Puducherry .
• Infrastructure Strain: The South Pennai river, typically dry, saw an unprecedented flow of 2.4 lakh cusecs, worsening floods.
• Relief Measures: Tamil Nadu sought ₹2,000 crore in central assistance; Puducherry announced ₹210 crore in aid.

Broader Implications

• Unpredictable Northeast Monsoon: Vital but increasingly erratic, affecting regions like northwestern Tamil Nadu.
• IMD Observations: Average of four cyclonic storms per season anticipated; frequency and intensity increasing due to climate change.

Challenges

• Urban flooding in Chennai and rural agricultural losses highlight infrastructure and livelihood challenges.
• Encroachments and poor maintenance of water bodies exacerbate flood risks.

• Relief efforts focus more on short-term measures than long-term resilience.

• Delayed publication of critical reports hampers planning.

Immediate and Long-Term Solutions

Structural Interventions:

• Strengthening Bunds and Waterways: Regular silt removal and embankment reinforcement.
• Urban Planning: Clear encroachments and improve drainage systems.
• Infrastructure Resilience: Build robust flood-resistant infrastructure.

Policy and Governance:

• Flood Risk Mitigation Report: Implement and publicise recommendations.
• Data-Driven Planning: Use IMD forecasts for region-specific disaster management.

Community-Centric Actions:

• Agricultural Support: Provide financial relief and promote resilient practices.
• Early Warning Systems: Enhance disaster communication channels.

Way Forward

Building Climate Resilience:

• Transition from reactive to proactive disaster management.
• Public awareness campaigns on climate risks and preventive measures.

Regional Collaboration:

• Collaborate with neighbouring countries like Sri Lanka and Maldives on forecasting and disaster response to mitigate impacts.

Takeaways From COP29

Context : COP29 Held in Baku, Azerbaijan, with a strong emphasis on climate finance to meet Paris Agreement goals.

Relevance : GS 3 (Environment )

Practice Question : Explain key take aways of Baku conference . Discuss expectation from upcoming conference at Belém, Brazil . (250 Words )

• Key Focus Areas:
  • Mobilising climate finance for developing nations.
  • Advancing global carbon markets under Articles 6.2 and 6.4.
  • Reviewing and strengthening Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs).
  • Phasing out fossil fuels.

• Parallel Event: G20 Summit in Brazil also prioritised climate finance.

Key Outcomes of COP29

Disappointments in Climate Finance

• Inadequate Commitment: $300 billion annually through 2035 is far short of the $1.3 trillion needed.
• Private Finance Uncertainty: Volatile investment flows and bias towards high-return economies.
• Public Finance Limits: Developed nations’ commitments remain constrained by fiscal challenges.
• Structural Gaps: Reliance on MDBs and carbon markets insufficient for large-scale needs.

Positive Developments

• Advancements in Carbon Markets:
  • Finalised rules for bilateral carbon credit trading (Article 6.2).
  • Frameworks for global carbon markets (Article 6.4), benefiting renewable energy sectors.
• Updated Emission Pledges: New targets from EU, Canada, U.K., Brazil, Norway, and Mexico.
• Coal Phase-Out Plan: Indonesia to retire all coal and fossil fuel plants by 2040.
• Focus on Clean Energy Transition: Emphasised at G20 and COP29.

Unresolved Issues

• Phasing Out Fossil Fuels: Lack of global consensus on all fossil fuels.
• 1.5°C Dilemma: Feasibility of limiting temperature rise to 1.5°C is in question.

Implications :

For Developed Countries:

• Need to balance green investments with international commitments.
• Addressing economic growth and fiscal constraints is critical.

For Developing Countries:

• Challenges: Insufficient financial support and dependence on volatile private finance.
• Opportunities: Leveraging carbon markets for renewable energy investments.

For Global Climate Governance:

• Lack of financial ambition undermines CBDR-RC principles.
• Slow fossil fuel phase-out highlights need for stronger cooperation.

Way Forward

• Immediate Actions: Increase public finance contributions and implement Article 6.4 frameworks for global carbon markets.

• Long-Term Strategies: Invest in carbon removal technologies and enhance multilateral cooperation for ambitious targets.

• Key Recommendations for India: Maximise participation in global carbon markets and advocate for equitable financing focusing on adaptation and resilience.

Reflections on Baku’s ‘NCQG outcome’

Context : The “Finance COP,” focused on the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) to update climate financing commitments.

Relevance : GS 3 (Environment )

Practice Question : Explain opportunities and challenges of NCQG outcome. Suggest key measures to address concerns raised by developing countries on NCQG outcome.(250 Words )

Background

• Climate Urgency: The IPCC highlights the necessity to limit global warming to 1.5°C. Current policies risk a rise of 3.1°C.
• NCQG’s Foundation: Established at COP21 to replace the outdated $100 billion annual pledge from Cancun in 2010.

Climate Finance Needs and Challenges

• Developing World’s Perspective:
  • High upfront costs for cleaner technologies need financial aid.
  • Strained government budgets in developing countries require external support.

• India’s Example: Significant budget allocations for green initiatives underline the need for both domestic and international financial support.

• Systemic Challenges:
  • Debt dependency strains economies and limits private investment.
  • Higher borrowing rates in developing countries hinder affordable climate finance.
  • OECD countries dominate global financial flows, restricting equitable distribution.

The NCQG Outcome at COP29

• Pledges and Commitments:
  • $300 billion annually until 2035, with public resources tripled via mechanisms like the Adaptation Fund.

• Shortcomings:
  • The $300 billion is inadequate compared to the $1.3 trillion annual demand by developing nations.
  • Reliance on private capital undermines transformative action.
  • Disregards principles of equitable burden sharing and climate justice.

Broader Implications

• Missed Opportunity: Fails to meet the urgency and scale of required climate action.
• Undermining Trust: Developed countries’ reluctance to meet commitments weakens trust.
• Delayed Action: Slow fund mobilisation risks misalignment with climate timelines.

The Way Forward

• Strengthening Cooperation: Prioritise Common but Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities (CBDR-RC) and centralise climate justice in negotiations.
• Focus on Equity: Prioritise public grants over loans and strengthen mechanisms for equitable fund distribution.
• Developing Nations’ Role: Maintain unity in demanding fair climate finance and advocate for frameworks supporting transformative action.