As I write this on the plane on my flight from Frankfurt back to Durham, I’m reflecting on the whirlwind that was COP29 in Baku, Azerbaijan. It was a mix of inspiring ideas, urgent discussions, and the familiar frustrations that come with global negotiations. While there were moments of progress, it’s clear that much work remains to ensure equitable and effective climate action. In this blog, I’ll talk about the main highlights of COP29, including climate finance, ideas from the pavilions, and the importance of including gender in climate action.

Climate Finance

One of the central issues at COP29 has been climate finance. After widespread rejection of an initial $250 billion-a-year proposal, a late-night meeting among wealthier nations led to a revised $300 billion-a-year target by 2035. While this marks progress, it remains far short of the $1.3 trillion per year that vulnerable nations say they need to address the climate crisis.

What’s troubling is that many of the poorer countries most affected by climate change were not in the room during these critical discussions. As one negotiator put it from the Politico article that our classmate Felicia kindly shared with us, “This isn’t only about money—it’s about survival.” This phrase really stuck with me! The process left questions unanswered: Will the funding come as grants or loans? How can it avoid adding to the debt burden of developing nations? And how can it reach those on the frontlines who need it most?

Pavilions

Amid these tense negotiations, the pavilions offered a completely different energy. They were spaces of innovation and collaboration, showcasing solutions that could transform how we address the climate crisis.

One standout session I attended was a World Bank panel on climate solutions in agrifood systems. It focused on the potential of agriculture to become a force for environmental healing while ensuring food security. The discussion highlighted nature-based solutions, sustainable irrigation, and the need to shift subsidies toward low-emission foods. What struck me most was the idea that agrifood systems could be redesigned to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050—an ambitious but achievable goal with the right investments and political will.

The Gender Lens

One of the most powerful moments for me at COP29 was the “UN Women: Gender and Climate: Synergies and challenges” press conference.

According to the speaker, it was evident that gender had not been a priority for this year’s presidency, but thanks to relentless advocacy from feminist groups, she shared the good news that it was brought to the table in the second week of negotiations.

The speaker passionately outlined how the care economy—largely invisible and disproportionately shouldered by women—is central to resilience in the face of climate shocks. For the first time, at the time of the conference as the speaker was mentioning, the draft text included references to the care economy and informal sectors, but she also noted that ambition remains far from what is needed. She continued to say that the inclusion of this language feels like a small step forward, but there’s still a long way to go toward ensuring gender-responsive climate action.

What stuck with me the most was the staggering imbalance of power at COP29 that the speaker mentioned: fossil fuel lobbyists outnumbered the delegations of the 10 most vulnerable countries by a ratio of more than 1073 to 10. This imbalance undermines the credibility of the negotiations and highlights the systemic barriers faced by those who are most affected by the climate crisis. The speaker went on to say that the links between fossil fuel extraction and gender-based violence, particularly against Indigenous women, are undeniable, yet these issues are too often sidelined in climate discussions.

 

This blog is just the second chapter of my reflections on COP29, and I know I’ll have more to write as I process everything I’ve experienced and continue following the outcomes of the negotiations. While there is much to criticize, there is also much to fight for! The solutions are within reach, but the gap between what is discussed in the pavilions and what is agreed upon in the negotiation rooms must be bridged!