Who Should Pay for the Planet’s Bill?

This fact sheet by the Institute for Economic Justice examines the inequities of global climate finance, arguing that current G20-led mechanisms often exacerbate debt vulnerability in developing nations through a reliance on loans and 'de-risking' strategies that prioritize private profit over public welfare.

• Developing countries face a significant funding gap for climate action, requiring between $5 trillion and $6.9 trillion to implement national climate plans by 2030. While developed countries initially pledged $100 billion annually by 2020, they failed to meet this goal; the target was later increased to $300,000 at COP 29 in Baku, Azerbaijan.
• Current climate finance structures often increase debt distress for vulnerable nations. For example, 96% of the financing for South Africa’s Just Energy Transition Plan (JETP) consists of loans rather than grants. Globally, 3.4 billion people live in countries that prioritize debt repayments over spending on health and education, with the poorest climate-vulnerable nations spending more than twice as much on debt servicing as they do on climate adaptation.
• The G20's 'de-risking' strategy uses public funds to absorb risks for private investors through guarantees or subsidies. This approach creates fiscal liabilities for governments and can lead to the privatization of essential infrastructure. In South Africa, this has resulted in fixed high-cost contracts with Independent Power Producers (IPPs) that guarantee tariffs for 20 years or more, maintaining high electricity prices for consumers.
• Climate change is linked to severe human rights violations and health crises. Between 2020 and 2025, an estimated 250,000 additional deaths occurred due to heat stress, malnutrition, diarrhoea, and climate-induced malaria. Furthermore, the World Food Programme predicts a 20% increase in global hunger and malnutrition related to climate change by 2050.
• The G20 agenda, influenced by South Africa, includes discussions within the Sustainable Finance Working Group (SFWG) and the Environment and Climate Sustainability Working Group (ECSWG). Key topics include addressing a $6 trillion annual climate finance shortfall identified by the India G20 presidency, reducing capital costs for developing countries, and exploring the use of carbon credits.

APA

Institute for Economic Justice (2025). Who Should Pay for the Planet’s Bill? https://iej.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/IEJ-G20factsheet6-Climate-Finance-web-1-1.pdf

Chicago

Institute for Economic Justice. Who Should Pay for the Planet’s Bill? 2025. https://iej.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/IEJ-G20factsheet6-Climate-Finance-web-1-1.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=Institute for Economic Justice |title=Who Should Pay for the Planet’s Bill? |date=August 2025 |url=https://iej.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/IEJ-G20factsheet6-Climate-Finance-web-1-1.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{instituteforeconomicjustice2025who, author = {{Institute for Economic Justice}}, title = {{Who Should Pay for the Planet’s Bill?}}, institution = {Institute for Economic Justice}, year = {2025}, month = aug, url = {https://iej.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/IEJ-G20factsheet6-Climate-Finance-web-1-1.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }