while providing targeted support for the poorest”. The term ‘inefficient’ pro- vides the biggest loophole for selective interpretation by each member, and presents a challenge for monitoring. The G20 Research Group tracked pro- gress towards this commitment from 2009 to 2016 and again in 2020, and found compliance averaged a low 55%. Moreover, the G20 members continue to provide record amounts of finan- cial incentives and subsidies to fossil fuel companies, allocating a staggering $1.4 trillion in 2022, citing geopolitical and health crises as justification. In 2021, the G7 and G20 both committed to advance the transition away from coal by ending the provision of international public financing for new unabated coal power generation by the end of that year, including through official development assistance, export finance, investment, and financial trade and promotion sup- port. The G20 had very low compliance with this commitment, with 33%. As subsets, G7 countries had higher compli- ance, with 69%, and the BRICS members of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa made little to no progress at all. Overall, from 1975 to 2024, the G7 has given an average of 458 words to climate finance at each of its annual summits, and its commitments on the subject have taken an average of 2% of the total of all subjects. Despite being a younger institution, the G20 mirrors the G7. The G20, at its annual summits from 2008 to 2023, averages almost the same per summit with 452 words, and its climate finance commitments also take an aver- age of 2%. Catalysing the change There are many actions the G7 and G20 members should take to further boost climate financing and catalyse a decrease in fossil fuel funding. Experts around the world have made numerous recommendations to the G7 and G20 on how to advance these mission-critical goals. These wealthy clubs have access to the best and the
G20 PERFORMANCE ON CLIMATE FINANCE, 2009–2023
G7 PERFORMANCE ON CLIMATE FINANCE, 1991–2024
Commitments (%)
Compliance (%)
Conclusions (%)
these recommendations, it is due to political factors rather than practical ones. Various estimates put the need for climate finance between $5.8 trillion and $13.6 trillion. The G7 and G20 must stop making excuses and lead here.
brightest minds and control the world’s most powerful financial institutions and government coffers. Leaders have heard the recommendations time and again, and control the resources to execute them. If they do not implement
Æ BRITTANEY WARREN ½çÞééÖãÚîÒÖççÚãÈÀÎÞèéÝÚÙÞçÚØéäçäÛØäâåáÞÖãØÚÖãÙèêèéÖÞãÖ×ÞáÞéîÜäëÚçãÖãØÚÛäçéÝÚÂáä×ÖáÂäëÚçãÖãØÚËçäÜçÖâìÝÞØÝÞãØáêÙÚèéÝÚ Â ÍÚèÚÖçØÝÂçäêåÂ#ÍÚèÚÖçØÝÂçäêå½ÍľÎÍÚèÚÖçØÝÂçäêåÖãÙéÝÚÂáä×ÖáÃÚÖáéÝ¿ÞåáäâÖØîËçäÜçÖâ×ÖèÚÙÖééÝÚÐãÞëÚçèÞéîäÛÏäçäãéä ÎÝÚÞèØäÖêéÝäçäÛÍÚØäãěÜêçÞãÜéÝÚÂáä×ÖáÂäëÚçãÖãØÚäÛ¾áÞâÖéÚ¾ÝÖãÜÚÖãÙÝÖèåê×áÞèÝÚÙäãÖØØäêãéÖ×ÞáÞéîâÚÖèêçÚèÞãèêââÞéØäâ - âÞéâÚãéèÖãÙäãéÝÚ ąèÜäëÚçãÖãØÚäÛØáÞâÖéÚØÝÖãÜÚãÖéêçÚ×ÖèÚÙèäáêéÞäãèÖãÙÝÚÖáéÝÎÝÚÝÖèåê×áÞèÝÚÙ èé¾ÚãéêçîÂÖçÙÚãäÛÀÙÚã ¼¾áÞâÖéÚ¾ÝÖãÜÚ¾äáäêçÞãܽääà ÖÔ¼ØçÚÖéÞëÚåçäßÚØééäØäêãéÚçåäèéÖåäØÖáîåéÞØØáÞâÖéÚãÖççÖéÞëÚèìÝÞØÝÞèÖëÖÞáÖ×áÚÖéìììáêáêØäâ . @brittaneywarren : www.g7g20.utoronto.ca
53
Made with FlippingBook - Online magazine maker