Reflections from COP29: Insights and implications

For a COP first timer, one of the biggest takeaways was the contrast between the formal negotiations and the energy of the side events. Inside the negotiation halls, the discussions were highly technical, often slow-moving and filled with diplomatic language. Outside, the activists, researchers, Indigenous leaders and practitioners brimmed with a different kind of urgency: stories of lived experiences, innovative solutions and calls for immediate action.

New global climate finance target – a step forward but insufficient

One of the most anticipated outcomes, the establishment of a new global climate finance target for 2025 and beyond, built upon the previous USD 100 billion per year commitment.

The agreement, which introduced a new collective quantified goal for climate finance , includes USD 1.3 trillion per year to be mobilized from all actors and a specific USD 300 billion commitment for developed countries.

While these figures represent a significant increase, they fall short of the actual financial needs of vulnerable nations, who are on the frontlines of climate change impacts.

The financial agreement, despite being historic in scale, lacks enforceability and concrete mechanisms for delivery. It does not, for instance, specify how private-sector investment will be mobilized, nor does it address the issue of delayed or insufficient disbursement of climate funds.

Furthermore, there is no clear link between these financial pledges and commitments to phase out fossil fuels. Without explicit conditions tying funding to emissions reduction strategies, there is a risk that the increased financial flows will not translate into substantive climate action.

Carbon markets – progress with caveats

There were advancements in negotiations regarding Article 6, which governs carbon markets under the Paris Agreement and outlines the rules for crediting mechanisms.

And after two weeks of technical discussions during COP29, consensus was reached on the rules, modalities and procedures for the trade and accreditation of carbon credits via the Paris Agreement Crediting Mechanism .

A core question (and concern) remains: Can market-based mechanisms really be effective in achieving real emissions reductions?

The reliance on carbon markets as a primary tool for financing climate action raises questions about equity. Developing countries struggle to compete in a market-driven framework. Carbon offset markets have been criticized for allowing high-emitting countries and corporations to continue polluting while purchasing credits rather than reducing emissions at their source.

Ensuring that carbon market mechanisms are inclusive and equitable will be necessary to foster trust and meaningful participation. The private sector, which is expected to take on a key role in scaling up carbon market activities, will require robust frameworks to ensure transparency and environmental integrity.

Companies engaged in voluntary carbon markets will need to navigate increasing scrutiny and compliance requirements as market-based approaches evolve, potentially incorporating biodiversity credits and hybrid financing models.

Establishing clear guidelines and standards will be essential to prevent the proliferation of low-quality credits and uphold the environmental goals of the Paris Agreement.

NDCs – higher ambitions needed

With the 2025 deadline for updated nationally determined contributions (NDCs) approaching, the reluctance to make more ambitious targets, as seen at COP29, reflects broader structural barriers to deep decarbonization.

Governments are up against pressure from industries that continue to rely on fossil fuels. Without strong domestic policies and incentives, transitioning to a low-carbon economy remains challenging. Deep decarbonization requires a systemic approach, one that calls for a near-total elimination of carbon emissions across the energy, industry, transport and agriculture sectors.

Additionally, developing countries require substantial financial and technical support to align their NDCs with global targets. COP29 failed to deliver a roadmap for aligning national policies with long-term decarbonization goals, leaving much of the heavy lifting to future summits.

Voluntary carbon market – promises and pitfalls

The voluntary carbon market (VCM) was prominent in COP29 discussions. Governments and corporations presented it as an essential tool for climate mitigation even as skepticism persists.

One major challenge with voluntary carbon credits is a lack of standardization and trust. While government-mandated compliance markets are characterized by oversight and enforceable rules, VCMs are optional and largely unregulated. This leads to questions about their integrity, transparency and impact.

Governance bodies such as the Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market are working to strengthen quality benchmarks, but slow adoption and fragmented approaches continue to undermine confidence in VCMs.

Corporate buyers are also becoming more cautious. With increasing scrutiny of greenwashing, companies are hesitant to invest in voluntary credits without robust guarantees of permanence, additionality and social co-benefits.

Many companies are shifting towards insetting, nature-based solutions and direct emissions reductions, which is further weakening the demand for offsets.

Voices from the ground – critiques and concerns

Representatives of Indigenous Peoples (IPs) and local communities (LCs) at COP29 voiced a very real and familiar concern: Carbon markets risk commodifying their lands without fully recognizing their rights and autonomy.

Even when IPs and LCs are consulted, they do not feel empowered. Persistent issues, such as inequitable benefit-sharing and insufficient safeguards against land grabs, continue to undermine the VCM’s promise as a tool for sustainable development.

Accessing climate finance remains an uphill battle hindered by bureaucratic red tape and opaque decision-making processes. Indigenous leaders expressed frustration at being offered a seat at the table only to find that the menu had already been decided.

Strengthened integrity – the need and RECOFTC’s role

Since the release of the draft Core Carbon Principles by the Integrity Council , significant progress has been made towards a more credible and transparent carbon crediting framework.

These principles are a critical step in addressing concerns about greenwashing and the effectiveness of carbon markets. As these take root, continuous engagement, refinement and rigorous implementation will remain vital.

RECOFTC supports the evolution of the principles and broader efforts to establish a high-integrity VCM. We also work to ensure stronger safeguards for IPs and LCs, clearer free, prior and informed consent requirements and greater recognition of community-driven climate solutions.

Free, prior and informed consent must be a continuous process rather than a one-time formality. Consultations should be dynamic, evolving with IPs’ and LCs’ perspectives, and ensuring that their engagement is meaningful. Addressing power imbalances, fostering diverse participation and ensuring transparent representation of community interests are essential to an equitable carbon market.

The power of discourse – our advocacy matters

Negotiations can feel distant and bureaucratic. One of the real strengths of COP lies in its ability to bring people together. One of the most valuable aspects of attending a COP, I found, is the engagement with experts, practitioners and community leaders working at the intersection of climate policy and implementation.

Following COP29, the road ahead continues to be challenging considering climate action, demand-side dynamics, evolving regulations and shifting investor priorities. With high-integrity carbon markets, advancement requires coordinated efforts from governments, businesses, civil society, and IPs and LCs.

RECOFTC remains deeply engaged in this evolving discourse. We understand that carbon market integrity is not a fixed target but an ongoing process, one that requires vigilance, adaptation and collective action.

As new frameworks take shape and market mechanisms evolve, we will continue to advocate standards that prioritize IPs and LCs, uphold environmental justice and ensure that carbon markets drive meaningful climate mitigation and adaptation.

###

Mamta Lama is programme officer at RECOFTC.

RECOFTC’s work is made possible with the support of the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation and the Government of Sweden.