The 29th session of the United Nations Conference of the Parties (COP29) concluded in Baku, Azerbaijan, in the early hours of Sunday 24 November 2024, wrapping up two weeks of intense international climate negotiations. The ‘Finance COP’ will be remembered for securing landmark agreements on several key agenda items: a new collective quantified goal on climate finance (NCQG), the operationalisation of Article 6 after almost 10 years of hard-fought negotiations, and the successful operationalisation of the Fund for Responding to Loss and Damage. These are significant outcomes that will enable greater climate action and support communities adversely affected by climate change.
However, consensus could not be reached on many important matters, including the dialogue on implementing the global stocktake outcomes and the just transition work programme, as questions were raised around the level of ambition at COP29. Speaking to these shortfalls, the UN Climate Change Executive Secretary Simon Stiell concluded at the closing plenary,
we needed this to be an enabling COP – one which helped translate the pledges of COP28 into real-world outcomes to protect people, prosperity and the planet.
We outline the key outcomes from COP29 below – identifying areas of progress and areas for further discussion in 2025 – and highlight key takeaways for businesses.
Snapshot of COP29 outcomes
Climate finance: Among the most anticipated agenda items for COP29 was agreement on a NCQG. After deeply divided negotiations throughout the conference, Parties agreed on a new target of mobilising at least USD 300 billion annually by 2035, with developed country Parties to take the lead but with voluntary contributions from other parties encouraged. The Parties also agreed on working towards mobilising USD 1.3 trillion per year from all public and private sources by 2035.
International carbon market operationalisation: Significant strides were made at COP29 to operationalise Article 6 of the Paris Agreement, with critical agreements reached in Article 6.4 on methodologies, carbon removal standards, authorisations and implementation of the mechanism registry; and in Article 6.2 agreement was reached on authorisations, the application of first transfer, formats and sequencing for reporting, management of inconsistencies in reviews and tracking through registry infrastructure. Outside of the negotiations, there were practical developments to support implementation of Article 6, such as work on an Article 6.2 Crediting Protocol launched by Singapore, Verra and the Gold Standard, as well the World Bank’s release of a template Letter of Authorisation and Acknowledgement, highlight the growing momentum in implementing Article 6 mechanisms.
Mitigation and enhanced ambition: Parties were unable to agree to take work forward from COP28 on implementing the outcomes of the first Global Stocktake (GST), nor was there any progress in respect to the phasing out of unabated fossil fuels or tripling renewable energy, with the decision under the Sharm el-Sheikh mitigation ambition and implementation work programme (MWP) primarily focussing on opportunities in the cities, buildings and urban systems sector. Further guidance on the preparation of updated NDCs also remained elusive. Instead, these issues have been deferred to the next subsidiary body meetings in 2025.
Adaptation: There was incremental progress on the Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA) with a decision to launch the ‘Baku Adaptation Roadmap’ to progress work on implementation of the GGA at future climate negotiation meetings.
Loss and damage: A key achievement of COP29 was the full operationalisation of the Fund for Responding to Loss and Damage, with arrangements now in place for contributions to be received and the Fund anticipated to commence financing projects by late 2025. Additional pledges from Parties were made at COP29, with the final decision text emphasising the importance of converting these pledges into contributions as soon as possible.
Just Transition Pathways: COP29 concluded without an agreement on the Just Transition Work Programme (JTWP), highlighting significant divisions between developed and developing countries and the ultimate focus on NGCQ negotiations. Countries will need to continue negotiations on developing a work plan for the JTWP and promoting just transition pathways next year.
Climate change and biodiversity: While Parties have recognised that conserving, protecting and restoring nature and ecosystems is important for achieving the goals of the Paris Agreement, nature and biodiversity issues did not feature strongly in the key decisions at COP29. The private sector and civil society continue to lead the way in calling for strong climate and biodiversity outcomes.
Key Agenda Items at COP29
Reaching an agreement with respect to a NCQG was the top negotiating priority heading into COP29. This was critical because Parties had agreed at COP15 to set a new and stronger target prior to 2025. The previous climate finance target under the Paris Agreement was for developed countries to provide USD 100 billion to developing countries annually by 2020. This amount was only reached in 2022 and remains contested.
Following multiple rounds of draft texts and much debate among the Parties, the COP President presented a decision on the NCQG in the early hours of Sunday morning. The decision, which was adopted by consensus, sets out a target of mobilising at least USD 300 billion annually by 2035. This money will support developing countries in their climate mitigation and adaptation efforts. While this represents a tripling of the previous commitment, and is a strong foundation, the quantum was met with strong criticism in the closing plenary from developing nations who voiced their disappointment that the amount falls short of what is required.
The agreement nonetheless indicates that climate finance is being recognised by nations as a necessary investment in climate security. As highlighted by Simon Stiell, Executive Secretary of United Nations Climate Change, "this new finance goal is an insurance policy for humanity, amid worsening climate impacts hitting every country… But like any insurance policy – it only works – if premiums are paid in full and on time. Promises must be kept, to protect billions of lives”.
The negotiations at COP29 centred around the three key issues which Parties were tasked with focusing on: the quantum of the target, the contributors to the target and structure and the application or use of the funding.
The quantum: How much is the target?
The quantum of the new target was undoubtedly the most heavily debated aspect of the NQCG at COP29. Parties had discussed various options for the quantum, with many developing countries proposing an annual goal of up to USD 2 trillion, while developed countries largely sought a goal set from a floor of USD 100 billion per year.
After several draft negotiation frameworks, most of which included no proposed quantum, the final decision text contains the agreed targets:
A core goal of mobilising at least USD 300 billion per year by 2035 from primarily developed country Parties.
A broader goal, calling on ‘all actors’ to work together to achieve financing from all public and private sources of USD 1.3 trillion per year by 2035.
Progress towards the target will be closely tracked and reported, including through a biennial report from the Standing Committee on Finance. Notably, the draft decision also proposes (as a last-minute addition) a new ‘Baku to Belém roadmap to $1.3T’, with the intention of further ‘scaling up climate finance’ and producing a report for COP30 next year. This is derived from a plan announced days earlier by a group of Latin American, African, least developed and island nations, with the goal of setting out a realistic pathway to the USD 1.3 trillion annually that developing countries say they need.
The contributors: Who will pay towards the target?
The contributors towards the funding goal were also heavily negotiated, with Parties deliberating whether to expand the list of countries that must provide climate finance. As listed in Annex II of the UNFCCC, only 24 countries have been obliged to provide climate finance, including the United States, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Western Europe and, separately, the European Union.
The final decision text represents a compromise between positions, providing that, unlike the previous USD 100 billion finance goal, the NCQG can include ‘voluntary’ inputs from developing nations that have not previously provided official climate finance. Specifically, the draft decision ‘encourages’ developing country Parties to make contributions, including through a South-South cooperation, on a voluntary basis.
With respect to the structure of how finance is to be provided, developed country Parties had consistently argued for a ‘core’ of publicly provided and mobilized finance, surrounded by a ‘layer’ for investment. This approach had been rejected by developing country Parties, citing inequities in investment because of high costs of capital, diseconomies of scale, credit ratings and other impediments.
The final decision calls on ‘all actors’ to enable the scaling up of financing for climate action from all public and private sources to at least USD 1.3 trillion per year by 2035. The draft decision text also highlights that a significant increase of public resources should be provided through the operating entities of the Financial Mechanism, the Adaptation Fund, the Least Developed Countries Fund and the Special Climate Change Fund, with a view to triple annual outflows from those Funds from 2022 levels by 2030 at the latest.
It is worth noting that the NCQG decision largely mirrors that of the previous climate finance text, being funds from a ‘wide variety of sources’, including public funds, development banks and private finance ‘mobilised’ by government spending.
The application: What will the funding go towards?
Money provided pursuant to the NCQG will finance developing country Parties, with a focus on supporting the implementation of their NDCs, national adaptation plans and adaptation communities, and contributing to accelerating ambition. Such finance must reflect the ‘evolving needs and priorities’ of developing country Parties, especially those most vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change.
The original USD 100 billion climate finance target was designed to support two types of activities: mitigation and adaptation. The final decision text highlights that both adaptation and mitigation financing need to be increased significantly to achieve climate goals but notes, with particular concern, the need to urgently scale up climate flows for adaptation in developing country Parties.
Negotiations on the NCQG also considered whether funding should go further and support loss and damage as a third pillar in the NCQG. Despite the efforts of developing countries, the NCQG decision does not incorporate this third pillar and instead affirms the provision of climate finance should “aim to achieve a balance between adaptation and mitigation”. However, the decision does acknowledge the “significant gaps that remain in responding to the increased scale and frequency of loss and damage” and “the need for urgent and enhanced action and support for averting, minimizing and addressing loss and damage associated with climate change impacts”.
After the COP29 Presidency identified the full operationalisation of Article 6 as a key priority, Parties worked around the clock to agree the final building blocks required to make Article 6 fully operational. Article 6 of the Paris Agreement enables Parties to voluntarily cooperate in implementing their NDCs effectively establishing the scope to develop international carbon markets and mitigation outcome trading measures. It comprises three main approaches: cooperative approaches (Article 6.2), a centralised mechanism (Article 6.4) and non-market approaches (Article 6.8).
Article 6.2
While Article 6.2 has already been operational with Parties such as Switzerland, Sweden and Singapore actively entering into MOUs and framework agreements to pursue cooperative approaches with a number of developing countries, the final decision text for Article 6.2 provides important clarity on the processes for cooperative approaches involving Internationally Transferred Mitigation Outcomes (ITMOs). ITMOs must be authorised by the host country to enable corresponding adjustments to be applied to the units and used towards the NDC of the acquiring country. After much debate over many years about the process and timing of authorisations, along with whether changes to authorisations could occur, Parties landed on a decision that clearly identifies the three components of authorisation (the approach, ITMOs and entities) and sets out the content of those authorisations, which can be provided on a consolidated or sequential basis.
Parties will also be required to include specific information in their authorisations, including unique identifiers for the cooperative approach, the names of Parties or entities involved, the duration of the authorisation and specifications of the first transfer of mitigation outcomes. The decision also clarifies the approach to authorisation changes, noting these will not apply where ITMOs have been first transferred unless specified by the participating Parties and requiring each party participating in the cooperative approach to apply robust accounting to prevent double counting of any ITMOs and/or the corresponding mitigation outcomes.
In an important move to enhance transparency, the decision clarifies that the centralised accounting and reporting platform (CARP) will act as a public repository storing authorisations and any changes as well as recording consistency checks. Where inconsistencies arise, Parties are expected to resolve them promptly. However, the Article 6.2 decision only ‘requests’ Parties not to use ITMOs that are identified as inconsistent towards their NDC. Previous drafts had stated that Parties ‘shall’ not use such ITMOs.
Importantly, the decision clarifies the connection between the Article 6.4 mechanism registry, participating Party registries and the international registry, which will enable pull and view data on A6.4ERs and the transfer of those units as ITMOs. The secretariat has also been requested to provide additional registry services to Parties to enable issuance of mitigation outcomes as units, which will support greater participation from Parties that may lack national registry capabilities.
Article 6.4
After almost 10 years of discussions, the Article 6.4 mechanism, now called the Paris Agreement Crediting Mechanism (PACM), has been operationalised. The CMA reached early consensus on the first day of the conference to note the adoption by the Supervisory Body of two critical standards: one for the development and assessment of methodologies and the other for activities involving carbon removals. However, further work was required throughout the conference to finalise approaches to authorisations and connectivity between national registries and the mechanism registry.
The Article 6.4 decision clarifies the information that is required from the registry administrator to assign authorisation status to A6.4ERs and urges the Article 6.4 Supervisory Body and Secretariat to expedite the establishment of the mechanism registry and implement it in a manner that enables availability for use by all Parties participating in the PACM to track the issuance, authorisation, transfer and cancellation of A6.4ERs.
Clarity was also provided on transitioning Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) afforestation and reforestation projects. These may transition to the PACM provided they meet the rules, modalities and procedures for Article 6.4 and other requirements.
The Article 6.4 Supervisory Body's preliminary workplan for 2025 includes a number of activities to enable mitigation activities to be registered under the PACM, including the development of new methodologies and additionality standards alongside tools for investment analysis. The workplan also prioritises addressing risks of non-permanence and reversals through standards for post-crediting monitoring, risk assessments and compensation mechanisms.
Article 6.8
Progress was also made on Article 6.8, which focuses on non-market approaches (NMAs) to facilitate cooperation beyond carbon trading. On day seven, the CMA adopted a decision on the next phase of the NMA work program for 2025–2026. The second phase emphasises a learning-by-doing approach, integrating holistic actions such as biodiversity conservation and climate adaptation. The operationalisation of the NMA Platform during the first phase enables Parties to record and share NMAs, fostering international knowledge exchange and collaboration.
Mitigation Work Programme
Established at COP26 to “urgently scale up mitigation ambition and implementation in this critical decade” and formally constituted at COP27, the MWP has been criticised for slow progress. The MWP held in-session dialogues and high-level round tables throughout 2024 to progress discussions on key themes, with the focus at COP29 on pre-2030 ambition.
Unfortunately, COP29 did not substantially further the work of the MWP. While many Parties had wished to cement the COP28 GST outcomes and to use the MWP as a space to reinforce the call for high ambition in the next round of NDCs, ultimately agreement could not be reached on these matters.
Instead, the final draft text is largely procedural, with a strong focus on the theme of ‘Cities: buildings and urban systems’ and a summary of the findings, opportunities, barriers and actionable solutions that were set out in the annual report of the MWP. The decision also calls for Parties to submit topics for the global dialogues for 2025.
Global Stocktake and the UAE Dialogue
The UAE Dialogue on the Global Stocktake (GST) was established in 2023 as a means to track progress against the outcomes of the GST. Throughout 2024, Parties have been considering how to operationalise the dialogue, in particular whether the focus should be limited to matters related to finance or more broadly encompass all aspects of the GST outcomes, in particular those not covered under other CMA work programmes.
The draft decision text was presented to the final plenary but rejected by Parties who saw the text as backtracking on the language around mitigation agreed in the UAE. For example, the draft expressly referenced “reaffirms that transitional fuels can play a role in facilitating the energy transition while ensuring energy security” but did not expressly mention transitioning away from fossil fuels or tripling renewable energy. Parties were also unable to agree on processes to improve the second GST, which will commence in 2026.
This item will be considered at the June 2025 Bonn meetings.
Nationally Determined Contributions and reporting
Prior to COP29, Parties had been encouraged to announce their renewed NDCs under the Paris Agreement in advance of the submission deadline in early 2025. Three countries announced updated NDCs at COP29, being the UAE, Brazil and the UK. The UK led the way with an ambitious target to reduce its emissions to 81% below 1990 levels by 2035. The UAE and Brazil set targets to reduce their emissions by 2035 by 47% from 2019 levels and 59-67% from 2005 levels, respectively.
Early informal text on the MWP had emphasised the need for ‘new and ambitious’ NDCs to be submitted in 2025 and encouraged parties to submit ambitious new NDCs with economy-wide emission reduction targets, covering all GHG, sectors and categories and aligned with the Paris Agreement temperature targets and the latest science. The informal text also sought NDCs to be consistent with the outcome of the GST. Unfortunately, however, there was a lack of consensus on whether to embed the findings of the GST into the next round of the NDCs and ultimately, no substantive reference to updated NDCs was incorporated into the MWP decision text.
Thirteen Parties (including the EU, Germany, Japan, Netherlands, Singapore, Spain, Turkey) have also provided their first BTRs, which are due by 31 December of this year. These reports are intended to track countries’ progress on achieving their NDCs, though it is widely expected that many countries will submit their reports late.
Technology programmes
COP29 also considered the Poznan strategic programme, established at COP14, which seeks to accelerate development and implementation of greenhouse gas mitigation technologies by supporting innovation and technology transfer to developing countries. The final draft decision text on this issue requests the Secretariat to evaluate the programme, by assessing its progress, any challenges and identifying successes and learnings from its implementation. It also recommends the adoption of a draft text on the outcomes of this analysis at COP31.
Similarly, the SBI has been tasked at its 62nd session (June 2025) with considering how to elaborate on the Technology Implementation Programme, with a view to proposing a draft text for adoption at COP30. This programme was adopted in 2023 as part of the first GST and is intended to support technology implementation priorities in developing countries as well as address the challenges identified by the Technology Mechanism’s first assessment.
At COP28, Parties adopted the UAE Framework for Global Climate Resilience (UAE Framework) to guide collaborative efforts to progress the Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA). The UAE Framework established a two-year work programme called the UAE-Belem work programme on indicators for measuring adaptation progress. As the mid-way point of this two-year working programme, negotiations at COP29 were a critical opportunity for progress.
However, divergences between Parties quickly emerged during information consultations, in particular over whether there should be a dedicated indicator on ‘means of implementation’ of the GGA targets, whether the GGA should be established as a permanent agenda item and how the notion of ‘transformational adaptation’ should be incorporated.
Although there were few substantive outcomes from adaptation negotiations, the GGA text adopted during the closing plenary launched the ‘Baku Adaptation Roadmap’ confirming the GGA as an agenda item at future climate negotiation meetings. Notably, the text also highlights the need to develop indicators of adaptation and adaptive capacity that are relevant to specific ecosystems and highlight them, where appropriate, to Parties with similar geographical conditions. The text recognises that both incremental and transformational adaptation approaches are essential for protecting the well-being of people and the planet.
A key achievement of COP29 was the full operationalisation of the Fund for Responding to Loss and Damage Fund – a critical milestone following the achievements at COP27 and COP28.
At COP29, the Conference of the Parties considered the report produced by the third meeting of the Board of the Loss and Damage Fund in September and finalised the signing of several important agreements to achieve the full operationalisation of the Loss and Damage Fund. These include the Trustee Agreement and Secretariat Hosting Agreement between the Fund's Board and the World Bank, as well as the Host Country Agreement between the Fund's Board and the host country, the Republic of the Philippines.
With these achievements, the Loss and Damage Fund is expected to commence financing projects by the end of 2025, serving as a lifeline by providing critical and urgent support for those impacted by the devastating consequences of climate change.
Contributions
As of November 2024, a total of $USD 731 million has been pledged to the Fund by 26 contributors. This includes new contributions from:
Australia – with a $50 million contribution.
Sweden – who pledged an additional 200M kr (approximately USD 19 million) to the Fund, subject to government approval.
Japan – with a USD 10 million contribution towards the operationalisation of the Fund.
Following the signing of the establishing agreements, the Fund is now able to receive contributions. The final decision text with respect to the Loss and Damage Fund notes the importance of converting pledges into contributions in a ‘timely manner’ and urges the conversion of pledges as soon as possible. The Presidency is working with all countries that have pledged money to complete their contribution agreements as soon as possible.
Just transition was an area of significant focus at COP29, particularly for developing countries and civil society. Despite this, COP29 concluded without reaching an agreement on the JTWP.
During the Second Annual High-Level Ministerial Round Table on Just Transition on Thursday 18 November 2024 at COP29, parties submitted their views on questions relating to advancing just transition pathways, enhancing international cooperation and their expectations for the JTWP. The key issues raised that will inform just transition discussions moving forward are the challenges of:
Replacing economic dependence on fossil fuels for developing nations cannot be understated.
Creating whole new sectors of the economy in the limited period of time required to achieve the net zero transition.
Obtaining fair access to capital, trade agreements and deployment of technology.
Offering clear frameworks and guidance that allow nations to define their own just transition pathways in the context of sustainable development and eradication of poverty.
Protecting vulnerable communities from climate impacts.
The JTWP negotiations were overshaded by the NCQG negotiations and unresolved divisions between developed and developing countries. Negotiations were underpinned by divisions relating to phase down of fossil fuels and support for transitioning nations, questions of equity and financial support and trade measures such as carbon border adjustment mechanisms. Parties also diverged on the level of ambition for the JTWP.
This division bled into several rounds of draft decision texts produced for the JTWP, with the inability to meaningfully discuss the text and the divisions between the parties ultimately meaning that the final draft decision text could not be agreed and was not put forward for adoption.
While the JTWP discussions did not produce a decision on next steps, just transition concepts are expressly called out in key decision texts, including the NCQG and on gender and climate change.
Just transition negotiations will move into 2025 with further progress expected at COP30. We expect that COP30 will see a renewed focus on securing commitments to transition away from fossil fuels.
Despite the fact that the 16th Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity (see our Knowledge Insight on Biodiversity COP16) concluded just weeks before COP29, biodiversity and nature issues had a limited spotlight in the negotiations at COP29. It was, however, a key area of discussions across many of the Presidency sessions and side events.
Nature and biodiversity did take the main stage on the designated Nature & Biodiversity, Indigenous People, Gender Equality, Oceans, and Coastal Zones Day in week two. High level discussions took place between global leaders on how aligning financing, policy measures and public-private partnerships on climate and nature could strengthen efforts to meet the targets of the Paris Agreement targets and the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, while at the same time advancing sustainable development goals.
The private sector and civil society continued to lead the way in promoting the importance of nature and biodiversity in climate change negotiations. Notably, a group of over 100 NGOs, business coalitions, companies, indigenous organisations and individuals from across the world issued an urgent COP29 Nature Statement calling for Parties to properly recognize and finance nature’s role in addressing the climate crisis, or risk undermining global efforts to limit global warming to 1.5°C. Ultimately, no references to nature finance, ecosystems or biodiversity were included in the NCQG text.
Discussions on water and oceans were more productive, with the COP29 Declaration on Water for Climate Action being endorsed by over 50 countries at the time of writing. The Declaration encourages an integrated approach to combating the causes and impacts of climate change on water basins and water-related ecosystems and advocates for the integration of water-related mitigation and adaptation measures in national climate policies, including NDCs and NAPs.
An Ocean and Climate Change Dialogue in week one celebrated the Biodiversity COP16 decision to foster synergies between biodiversity and climate COP and saw representatives of Brazil proclaim the
‘doors are open’ for ambitious decisions on oceans at COP30, with oceans likely to form part of the action agenda next year. During the Dialogue, Parties shared their views on how to accelerate ocean-based climate action.
Alongside the finalisation of the Article 6 rules, various market stakeholders continued the push for improving the integrity of voluntary markets (including biodiversity and nature markets). Notably, the UK Government, a lead player in the International Advisory Panel on Biodiversity Credits, published its principles for voluntary carbon and nature market integrity.
The scaling up of nascent biodiversity and nature markets will be a key trend to look out for in 2025, with voluntary market schemes nearing the final stages of readiness that will enable new projects to register and begin crediting in 2025.
Key takeaways for business and implications for global climate action
COP29 delivered significant outcomes for the global climate change agenda and will further influence domestic policy and decision-making. It is important for businesses to familiarise themselves with the outcomes of COP29 and potential areas of future focus because these will inform expectations of the private sector and provide opportunities, to contribute to and benefit from the increasing flows in climate finance and policy settings for a decarbonising economy.
The agreement of the NCQG will drive the scaling up of climate finance flows, particularly into developing countries, offering further co-investment and blended finance opportunities. Private capital partnering with public capital can help to de-risk investments in developing countries where significant energy transformation is required to meet NDCs and global emissions reduction targets. The NCQG decision explicitly calls on private sector actors to deliver increased climate finance.
Other areas of importance for businesses include:
Availability of international carbon markets – now that the rules required to operationalise Articles 6.2 and 6.4 have been finalised, there will be new opportunities for the private sector to engage in cooperative approaches and support international emission reduction efforts. Particular attention should be paid to the growing numbers of bilateral agreements between countries in relation to Article 6. We also expect the first projects to be registered and begin crediting under the Article 6.4 PACM in 2025.
Just transition developments – just transition cuts across the full suite of issues sought to be addressed by the Paris Agreement and will remain a significant focus for future UNFCCC negotiations. Just transition also have significant implications for business practices that requires appropriate transition planning. In this context, the Investor Group on Climate Change published a report titled "Investor Expectations for Corporate Just Transition Planning" in the lead-up to COP29. This report:
Provides a framework for investors to evaluate and engage with companies on developing and implementing just transition plans.
Identifies practical tools and criteria for investors to assess the quality and scope of just transition plans.
Highlights that integrating just transition principles into corporate transition planning will help mitigate economic risks, supports sustainable practices and protects long-term financial returns.
Upcoming submission of revised NDCs – all Parties to the Paris Agreement are required to submit new and more ambitious NDCs by February 2025. The pressure on governments to decarbonise and implement ambitious policies to achieve this is critical and through updated NDCs businesses can obtain clarity about a national government’s approach to climate action and seek to engage with governments on implementing strategies and programmes. We expect that revised NDCs will seek to further incentivise emissions reduction activities across all sectors.
The role of the private sector in achieving international climate targets and decarbonisation in line with the Paris Agreement has never been stronger – as noted by the Sixth Assessment Report of the IPCC:
there is sufficient global capital to close the global investment gap but there are barriers to redirecting capital to climate action… governments through public funding and clear signals to investors are key in reducing these barriers, and investors, central banks and financial regulators can also play their part.