Developed and developing countries are still far apart on loss and damage ahead of COP28

This research paper examines the negotiations surrounding the Loss and Damage Fund established at COP27, detailing the friction between developed and developing nations over the fund's governance, eligibility, and funding sources ahead of COP28.

• At COP27 in 2022, parties agreed to create a dedicated fund for loss and damage and "new funding arrangements for assisting developing countries that are particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change".
• Developed and developing nations disagreed on the fund's structure: developed countries preferred augmenting existing mechanisms like regional insurance pools and humanitarian aid, while developing countries, led by Egypt and the Alliance of Small Island Nation States, sought a "wholly dedicated fund".
• The African Group of Negotiators (AGN), represented by Zambia, and the Least Developed Countries (LDC Group) advocated for the fund to be a standalone entity under the UNFCCC's Financial Mechanism to ensure it follows principles of equity. Conversely, the US, France, and Canada supported using an existing entity like the Green Climate Fund (GCF) to avoid delays, with the US proposing the World Bank act as trustee.
• There is a significant divide regarding financial terms: the AGN seeks grants to avoid further indebting African countries, and some developing nations want at least USD 100 billion per year until 2030. The US advocates for grants and concessional loans without a specific financial target.
• The United States has explicitly rejected the use of the term "reparations" regarding climate finance, as it implies legal responsibility and liability for historic harms, which the US fears could lead to "potentially endless financial liability".
• Kenyan President William Samoei Ruto described the loss and damage conversation as "useless talk", arguing that national self-interest of contributor countries will "always win" over moral imperatives. He instead proposed a new green bank funded by a global carbon tax.
• The Loss and Damage Transitional Committee recommended that the fund operate as a Financial Intermediary Fund (FIF) hosted by the World Bank for an interim 4-year period. Developing countries expressed concern over the World Bank's loan-based approach and a potential 17% hosting fee.
• The final recommendations from the Transitional Committee do not commit developed countries to financial contributions, only "urges" them to do so, and contains no minimum payment amount. The US abstained from the vote due to concerns that the text could be interpreted as a concession of liability.

APA

Olivia (2023). Developed and developing countries are still far apart on loss and damage ahead of COP28. Africa Policy Research Institute. https://afripoli.org/developed-and-developing-countries-are-still-far-apart-on-loss-and-damage-ahead-of-cop28

Chicago

Olivia. Developed and developing countries are still far apart on loss and damage ahead of COP28. Africa Policy Research Institute, 2023. https://afripoli.org/developed-and-developing-countries-are-still-far-apart-on-loss-and-damage-ahead-of-cop28.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Olivia |title=Developed and developing countries are still far apart on loss and damage ahead of COP28 |publisher=Africa Policy Research Institute |date=1 December 2023 |url=https://afripoli.org/developed-and-developing-countries-are-still-far-apart-on-loss-and-damage-ahead-of-cop28 |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{olivia2023developed, author = {Olivia}, title = {{Developed and developing countries are still far apart on loss and damage ahead of COP28}}, institution = {Africa Policy Research Institute}, year = {2023}, month = dec, url = {https://afripoli.org/developed-and-developing-countries-are-still-far-apart-on-loss-and-damage-ahead-of-cop28}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }