Why are we still waiting for justice on loss and damage?

Remember the fanfare two years ago when rich countries promised new money to respond to the destructive impacts of the climate emergency? Well, the paltry climate finance deal at COP29 contained precisely zero concrete commitments on loss and damage. Chiara Liguori on how the hopes of poorer countries and communities were raised – only to be brutally dashed.

Remember the excitement two years ago when states decided to create a fund to support people lower-income countries battered by escalating losses and damages caused by the climate crisis?

That landmark decision at COP27, in Egypt, was the culmination of 30 years of unmet demands from the countries most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change and from campaigners. It was hailed as a historic moment, a lifeboat for all the people left displaced, hungry or sick by the impacts of the climate crisis. Some even hoped it could finally provide reparations to people for all the harms caused by the biggest-polluting nations and corporations. Unfortunately those hopes were dashed.

Why we needed security of funds specifically for loss and damage

It is crucial to provide overall sufficient funding to lower-income countries and to explicitly include action and funding commitments for loss and damage, alongside mitigation and adaptation. What’s the difference between these terms? As this Chatham House explainer puts it: “Loss and Damage normally refers to the destructive impacts of climate change that cannot be or have not been avoided by what is known as ‘mitigation’ (reducing greenhouse gas emissions) or ‘adaptation’ (adjusting to and building resilience against current and future climate change impacts).”

The “loss” refers to things that are irreversibly lost such as lives, a way of living or historical site, while the “damage” refers to things that can be repaired or recovered such as buildings, crop yields or health. So funding for loss and damage can help save lives, livelihoods and protect culture, and identity, as well as ecosystems.

So a clear financial promise in the new climate finance goal to be decided at COP29 was vital to ensure any new fund for loss and damage would not have to depend on occasional and unpredictable voluntary pledges and that both adaptation and loss and damage responses – both traditionally underfunded – would be adequately backed.

We had been hoping for the next step from COP28…

Communities and campaigners had been hoping the summit would take the next big step after COP28 in Dubai last year, when countries agreed the overall shape, governance and way of functioning of the fund for loss and damage, after a year of heated negotiations.

The problem was that the fund was actually designed to only receive voluntary contributions from states, ignoring the obligation of rich countries that have polluted for much longer to pay into it. As a result, the initial pledges states made at COP28 were not nearly enough to meaningfully support the communities devastated by spiralling climate impacts. They totalled less than $700m, about 0.2% of the total annual estimated costs.  

So this year at COP29 there was one clear way to ensure predictable and stable funding for loss and damage. States needed to agree an ambitious new global climate finance goal that would fully support lower-income countries to protect people facing climate impacts.

…But COP29 miserably failed to deliver

Sadly, what was agreed at COP29 completely missed the mark. Lower income countries were bullied into accepting at the last minute a climate finance goal of only $300bn per year. This is a pittance in comparison to what is really needed, and there is not even the commitment to provide this money in grants rather than loans, adding additional burden to countries who are already overwhelmed by debt. And to add fuel to fire, the goal does not even include a clear commitment to provide finance for loss and damage.

Behind this result, there is a lot of déjà vu. Rich countries deployed their traditional tactics to avoid footing the bill. They cited legal reasons, limited amount of money in public coffers, among others. And we saw similar tricks in other loss and damage negotiations tracks to evade their responsibility to pay. Now we know that their agreement in 2022 to set up a loss and damage fund didn’t mean they were ready to pay what they owe.

So now we must hold rich nations to their promise

So, what’s next? Do communities in low-lying island states have to accept losing their land and identity with no remedy provided? Do parents in marginalised communities in flood-prone areas have to resign to their children missing out on education opportunities, or being prematurely married or trafficked because they can’t provide for them?

No. Because those same communities are the best and fiercest advocates of themselves. Indigenous Peoples, trade unions, women’s rights organisations, youth activists, disability justice groups, and other organizations fighting for climate justice will continue to organise and mobilise for their rights and their future, still engaging with the COP process but also looking beyond. And it is the responsibility of Oxfam and other rights-based international NGOs to have their back on this.

We will escalate the pressure in the capitals of rich countries who need to pay. We will continue to show leaders how they can mobilise the funds they need in ways that don’t affect lower income people in their own countries.

We will deepen our engagement with other international initiatives that are due to bring clarity on the legal obligations of countries, such as the ongoing processes seeking authoritative legal opinions from the International Court of Justice and Interamerican Court of Human Rights. 

I believe the climate justice movement will keep mobilising and win. And we will win because we and the world have no choice. The survival and wellbeing of all of us, and particularly the most marginalised, depend on it. Together, we will closely monitor the progress of the new fund for loss and damage, to ensure it finally delivers for those who were harmed and neglected for too long.

Find out more about Oxfam’s work on Loss and damage in Chiara’s recent blog: How should governments support people hit by climate damage? Five practical lessons from Kenya…