Climate finance is the money that should help fight climate change. When it comes to poor countries, it is also called climate aid.

This money should help poor countries repair some of the damage caused by climate change. In addition, it should, for example, enable the development of sustainable energy.

It starts with an old promise in Copenhagen. Thirteen years ago, a climate summit was held there, which was dramatic. Countries had to agree on a climate treaty with binding targets for all countries. The summit failed, and that treaty was not fulfilled.

But Copenhagen did not completely fail. There was agreement on financial support for poor countries. He mentioned a tangible amount: $100 billion. This is 101 billion euros. This amount will be available annually from 2020 onwards.

The promise was not fulfilled. In 2020, the counter remained at $83 billion. is over Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) last September. There will be one on Wednesday Report From Oxfam Novib.

Only $21 to $24.5 billion have been donated, says the development organization. Oxfam describes the rest as “overreporting”.

For example, the bulk of liabilities consists of loans. The fact that loans could be interchanged was agreed upon at the 2018 Climate Summit. But it immediately shows the following problem:

There are different definitions of climate assistance. Is investing in a wind farm important if that investment is also profitable? Such an investment might have been made anyway.

The problem here is that the 2009 deal was not clear. There was talk of “mobilizing” $100 billion. Some of this money has to come from countries, but also from companies.

Funding will come from a wide range of sources, public and private, bilateral and multilateral, including alternative sources of funding. official date from the year 2009.

The next problem is that 100 billion is not enough. The direct damage of climate change will already be by 2050 trillions. This loss is particularly threatening to developing countries Priceless to become.

During the upcoming Climate Summit in Sharm El Sheikh, the hope is not only that countries and companies will still raise $100 billion, but also that an agreement on higher climate support will be reached from 2025.

It would be too early to actually say a new amountClimate finance expert Peter Bao from Eindhoven University of Technology and Utrecht University says.

According to Bao, we still have a lot of open questions: “What tools are used? Do you calculate the mobilization of private finance? What are the needs of developing countries? What balance is struck between financing climate adaptation and reducing emissions? Do the new industrialized countries, such as also contribute South Africa, Korea and Chile?” recently wrote a file paper on climate assistance after 2025.

Confidence comes on foot and walks on horseback. Restoring trust may be more difficult than closing the tens of billions gap or setting a new goal. When mistrust prevails, cooperation becomes more difficult.

In a conflict between rich and poor countries, for example, it becomes difficult to discuss an intermediate problem: the fact that countries like China and India are developing, but now have very high total emissions. Only if the richer countries do what they promise can they also expect diplomatic support from others – including the poorest African countries.

If a funding breakthrough is not achieved in Sharm El Sheikh, climate negotiations on other topics are also expected to continue solid rock. And in the long run, we collectively pay the highest price.