The thirty-year journey of climate change negotiation is nothing but gradual dilution of mandate of climate justice. The first Conference of Parties (COP 1) under UNFCCC was held in Berlin on 28 March to 7 April, 1995, which was attended by 117 countries. The 30th COP was held in Belem, Brazil from 10 November to 21 November, 2025. The meeting was extended for a day to arrive at consensus on Belem Package, which was released on 22 November, 2025. In between these two events, climate justice has been a notable casualty.The US is the second largest emitter of carbon in the world after China. However, no official delegation from the US participated in Belem negotiations as, the Trump Administration II has declared to leave Paris Agreement (2015) again in 2025. It should be mentioned that the during the first Trump administration (2017-2021), the US left the Paris Agreement, but it was restored by Biden administration. Though global climate change negotiations over last three decades have scored some notable gains like Kyoto Protocol, 1997; Bali Plan of Action, 2007; and Paris Agreement, 2015, they are not likely to hit the target of restricting global temperature to 1.5 degree centigrade as stipulated under Paris agreement. However, the most significant flip side of these negotiations is the gradual dilution of climate justice, undermining the interests of global south, mainly the poor developing countries. This has resulted in growing differences between the rich developed countries and countries of global south over the core issues of negotiations like adaptation, mitigation, financial resources, and transfer of technology. These differences undermine the consensus building on these issues in each COP meeting and thus undermining the effectiveness of global climate change efforts.
What is Climate Justice?
Climate Justice is nothing but an extension of idea of justice in climate change management. According to the UNDP (2023) ‘climate justice means putting equity and human rights at the core of decision-making and action on climate change’. Climate justice is a dimension of the broad notion of Global justice. In simple terms, climate change refers to special consideration for the vulnerable nations and communities in the process of climate change management. The idea of special consideration emanates from two facts:
First, though all nation and community are affected by climate change, but all nations and communities are not affected equally by climate change. The developing and poor countries and poor communities within nations are more affected in comparison to rich and affluent nations and communities. According to UNDP (2023) estimates, between 2010 and 2020, human mortality from floods, droughts, and storms was 15 times higher in highly vulnerable regions, compared to regions with very low vulnerability.
Second, though the present crisis of climate change is the result of the general outcome of the ongoing development process of development, all nations and communities are not equally responsible for equally responsible for this crisis. An Oxfam Research notes that in 2019, the richest among us were responsible for more carbon emissions than 5 billion people—the equivalent of 66 percent of humanity. To be more specific, it is wealthy polluters—rich industrialized countries and in particular carbon billionaires—that are driving staggering levels of carbon emission (OXFAM:2025).
Thus, the idea of climate justice is based on the recognition that those who contribute the least to carbon emission are worst affected by global climate crisis. In other words, the poor countries and communities are paying the price of a climate crisis for which they are least responsible. Hence the poor countries and poor communities within nations need special consideration in global climate change efforts. The special consideration may take the form of transfer of financial resources and technology from rich to the poor nations and prioritizing adaption over mitigation, so that vulnerable nations and communities are cope with the climate crisis and make their own contribution in the management of this crisis. This also entails that climate justice is both a right and responsibility at the same time. It is a right of vulnerable countries and communities for they have least contributed to climate crisis but they are worst affected by this crisis. Climate justice is also a responsibility of the rich and developed countries to help poor and vulnerable more, because rich nations bear more historical responsibility for this crisis.
This also entails that in its broader framework, climate justice works at two planes; global and domestic. At global level, the rich nations are supposed to help the poor nations to enable them to cope with the crisis of climate change. At domestic level, each country is supposed to devise such strategies and mechanism as to help poor communities and groups so that they also cope with the adverse impacts of climate crisis.
Evolution of Idea of Climate Justice
The idea of climate justice has been in vogue as a point of discourse among scholars for long time since 1980s in the form of environmental justice. The term ‘climate justice’ was used for the first time in academic literature by Edith Brown Weiss (1989) in context of intergenerational equity in her study ‘In Fairness to Future Generations: International Law, Common Patrimony, and Intergenerational Equity’ (Sage Publishing: 2002). But it did not refer to the need of climate justice with reference to poor and rich countries. As a radical alternative to official climate change negotiations (COP), the first Climate Justice Summit was organized in 2000 by an NGO known as Rising Tide Network during the COP6 Summit held in Hague, Netherlands. The summit claimed that people in the developing world were the real victims of climate change but who had not got a voice in the process (The Guardian: 2014). The idea of climate justice is also inherent indirectly in the climate change negotiation framework, UNFCCC) from the beginning since 1992. However, the climate justice was not specifically mentioned in the official climate change negotiations till 2015. It was during the COP 21, held in Paris in November, 2015 that the idea of climate justice was specifically mentioned by the Indian Prime Minister Modi during his address to the conference. Modi said that the Paris conference aims to “look beyond climate change and focus on climate justice.” He further added, “The prosperous still have a strong carbon footprint, but the world’s billions at the bottom of the development ladder are seeking space to grow” (Walt and Task: 2015). Since then the word climate justice finds the mention in climate Change negotiations and documents, though on the ground, it remains still unrealized and even diluted and sidelined at times by the developed countries.
Climate Justice and Climate Change Negotiations
The ongoing climate change negotiations in the form of annual Conference of parties are mandated by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC).
UNFCCC and Climate Justice
The idea of climate justice is inherent in the UNFCCC. The draft of UNFCCC was adopted during the Rio Earth Summit, June 1992, but it was formally passed by the UN General Assembly in July, 1992. UNFCCC is not a binding treaty but it is a global framework for addressing the challenge of climate change. It has 26 Articles and two Annexes (UNFCCC: 2025). The three core elements of UNFFCC are:
- Article 2 mentions the targets of UNFCCC and future negotiation as ‘stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system. Such a level should be achieved within a time-frame sufficient to allow ecosystems to adapt naturally to climate change. This objective is translated as preventing the rise of global temperature not beyond 2 degree centigrade in comparison to pre-industrial levels (1850). This limit was reduced to 1.5 degree centigrade during the Paris conference in 2015.
- Article 7 makes the provision for the Conference of Parties (COP) to be held on annual basis to realize the goals of UNFCCC.
- Aricle 3 outlines the principles and norms to be followed in the climate change management process under the UNFCCC. It says, the Parties should protect the climate system for the benefit of present and future generations of humankind, on the basis of equity and in accordance with their common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities. Accordingly, the developed country Parties should take the lead in combating climate change and the adverse effects thereof. Article 3(2) further elaborates this principle as it provides, ‘The specific needs and special circumstances of developing country Parties, especially those that are particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change, and of those Parties, especially developing country Parties, that would have to bear a disproportionate or abnormal burden under the Convention, should be given full consideration’.
The above provisions under Article 3 of UNFCCC are essentially related to climate justice, without using this phrase. The developed countries are called for taking the lead in the global climate change efforts and support the vulnerable developing countries in the spirit of equity and their special needs. In brief, the fundamental norms of the UNFCCC embody the spirit of climate justice.
Also, in order to further embolden and operationalize the idea of climate justice, the UNFCCC provided two Annexes. ANNEX I provides the list of 36 countries including European Union to take lead in the carbon reduction. Annex II, sub-set of Annex I provides a list 25 richer countries including the EU (members of OECD), which would not only cut the carbon emission but also provide financial support to the developing countries to help them in the climate change efforts.
This was the original mandate of UNFCCC and the future negotiations to be conducted under this framework.
Kyoto Protocol, 1997: Climate Justice on Paper
During the third COP held in Kyoto in 1997, Kyoto protocol was signed as binding treaty for industrialized Nations for the developed countries included in the Annex I of the UNFCCC. It provides that the ANNEX I countries would reduce their carbon emission by 5 percent in comparison to 1990 levels by the year 2012. The COP held in 2012 in Doha provided for the second commitment for these countries for the period 2013-2020. The Kyoto Protocol was also provided for the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) wherein the industrialized countries were allowed to launch carbon reduction programmes in developing countries to meet their carbon reduction targets under Kyoto Protocol (UNFCCC; 2025a).
Though the spirit of UNFCCC norms was kept alive only on paper in Kyoto protocol and was neglected in its actual implementation. The US, the leading emitter of carbon did not ratify the protocol. Canada left the Kyoto protocol. And many countries which remained in the protocol did not meet their targets. Also, the CDM mechanism was misused as the Official Development Assistance (ODA) was invested and counted under the carbon reduction projects. The ODA is given by developed countries to developing countries for development and hence it cannot be used under climate change targets. Though, Kyoto protocol still remains in force.
Bali Action Plan, 2027: Turning Point in climate Change
The Bali Action Plan was adopted during the COP13 meeting held in Bali, Indonesia in December, 2007. It is a turning point in climate change negotiations as far as climate justice and concerned. While Kyoto Protocol imposed binding obligation for carbon reduction on rich countries, the Bali Action plan brought in developing countries for making their own efforts in climate change under the deliberation on ‘Shared Vision’. The shared vision refers to a long-term vision for action on climate change, including a long-term goal for emission reductions. Bali Action Plan identified four core issues in climate change negotiations: Mitigation, Adaptation, Technology and Financing (UNDP:2008). These four issues are still acting as core pillars around which climate change negotiations are conducted. While the commitments by developed countries under Kyoto Protocol remained unfulfilled, the expectation of commitment from developing countries under Bali Action Plan initiated a process wherein developed and developing countries developed deep differences around the four core issues in future negotiations.
Paris Agreement, 2015 and After: Sidelining Climate Justice
The Paris Agreement signed during the 21st COP in 2015 is the third milestone in the climate change negotiation after Kyoto protocol and Bali Action Plan. It is also the second binding treaty after the Kyoto protocol. Under the Paris agreement, each country including developing countries were asked to submit their climate change actions known as Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and update them at every five years. Thus, the focus was on encouraging every country to share the global efforts in climate change, but there was not substantive consideration for the concerns of poor and developing countries like focus on adaptation, transfer of technology or provision of financial resources- the very issues which are at the heart of climate justice.
A review of the performance of the core issues of climate change negotiations having bearing on climate justice further proves the gradual dilution of spirit of climate justice in these negotiations.
1.Finance and Technology Transfer
Finance for climate change has been a core issue of climate change negotiations since the Bali Action plan. Under the mandate of UNFCCC, the rich countries were obliged to give financial support to developing countries in view of their historical responsibility and development status, but there has been abysmal deviation on this count. The idea of Green Climate Fund was proposed for the first time during the Copenhagen climate negotiations in 2009, which was finally approved and operationalized in 2015 during Paris conference. Under this fund, the developed countries were obliged to contribute $100 billion towards climate change efforts. The funds were to be used by developing countries for adaptation and mitigation. A study by South Centre (Williams:2019) shows that by the year 2019 only 34 percent financial target were achieved under the Green Climate Fund. The $100 billion target was missed in 2020 and was realized only in 2022, when the cost of climate operation far exceeded the available funds. Green Climate Fund will continue till 2025 and post 2025 arrangements were discussed at Baku negotiation in 2024 (COP29), under the new finance mechanism called the NCQG (New Collective Quantified Goals). The developing countries including India demanded $1.3 trillion climate finance by the year 2035, but the developed countries committed only $300 billion, which is far below to the requirement. India launched her protest on this point during the last session of COP 2029 in Baku. Even the realization of $300 billion is still uncertain. During the Belem conference (COP 30) held in 2025, the Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA) was finally approved, which envisages mobilization of double finances for adaptation by the year 2030 and triple finances by the 2035. Given the background history of climate finances, this ambitious goal will be hard to meet.
In order to make just transition to clean future the developing countries need the transfer of clean technology from developed countries. Since the green technology lies in the private companies of the rich nations and protected by patents, it has been a non-starter mechanism. However, some developing countries like India are making efforts to transfer clean technology available to them through mechanism like International Solar Alliance (ISA). However, its scope is limited. The ISA was launched by India and France during the Paris conference in 2015.
2. Adaptation vs Mitigation
Adaptation refers to those mechanisms which save the countries and communities from the harmful impact of imminent crisis of climate change. Mitigation refers to those processes which address the root cause of the climate change like afforestation. Since developing countries, particularly poor nations and Island countries face the imminent threat of climate change and are highly vulnerable to its impact due to their limited capacity, they favour the programmes of adaptation. But the developed countries are more interested in mitigation programmes as they are not worried about the immediate impact of climate crisis due to their high capability to absorb such impacts. The issue of adaptation vs Mitigation has been a bone of contention between developing and developed countries in climate change negotiations, ever since these issues were brought into the mainstream of negotiations in Bali summit in 2007. For the first time some developing countries managed to adopt Global Goal of Adaptation during the Belem COP30 in 2025. But mobilizing the financial resources for this ambitious programme is an uphill task.
3. Dilution of Principle of Common but Differentiated Responsibility (CBDR)
The principle of CBDR has been a cardinal guiding principle of climate change negotiations under the UNFCCC mandate. This principle rests un the premise that all countries are not equally competent to bear the consequences of climate change and equal contribution to address this challenge. Also, the developed countries have higher responsibility in view of their ‘historical responsibility’ in creating climate crisis. Even now the per capita carbon emission is many times high in terms of global average in developed countries. The average global per capita carbon emission is 4.7 tonnes. But the United States, Australia, and Canada around 3 times higher emission than the global average. Oil producing rich countries also have very high average of per capita carbon emission. On the other hand, the countries of Sub-Saharan Africa have 0.1 tonnes per capita carbon mission (Ritchie and Roser; 2024). India’s per capita emission is 2.07 tonnes, which is less than half of the global average. Yet developed countries are not willing to admit their historical responsibility in present climate crisis. The non-recognition has led to gradual dilution of principle of principle of CBDR, which is at the heart of climate justice. Though after three decades of stalled negotiations, countries finally agreed to establish a Loss and Damage Fund during the Sharm al Sheikh Cop 27 summit in 2022, which was operationalized during the COP 28 summit in Dubai in 2023, but its future progress remains uncertain in view of the US withdrawal from the Climate change negotiations in 2025 and lack of willingness on the other developed countries to contribute finance to this fund. This fund is designed to provide financial support to developing countries that are already facing the unavoidable consequences of climate change – from rising sea levels and desertification to extreme weather events and infrastructure collapse (Anderson: 2025). Instead of helping the poor countries to overcome their vulnerability in face of climate crisis, the European Union is using carbon emission as another barrier to stall the exports from the developing countries. This is the very purpose of the recently launched Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM)to be implemented by the EU in 2026.
Conclusion
The idea was climate justice was the core principle included in the UNFCCC for future global efforts by global community to address the climate change crisis. This was explicitly inserted in UNFCCC in the form of ‘common but differentiated responsibility’. It was also the mandate of UNFCCC that the rich countries would extend financial and technological support to developing countries for their adaptation and mitigation efforts. Till the Kyoto Protocol, 1997, the developed countries were willing to adhere to these norms and principles. However, after Bali Action plan and in subsequent negotiations, the rich countries gradually sidelined these principles. The poor record in contributing finances to the Green climate Fund, reneging from the principle of historical responsibility, lack of any progress on transfer of clean technology to developing countries, giving priority to mitigation over adaptation, withdrawal of the US from climate change negotiation, and using carbon emission as trade barrier against developing countries by the EU (CBAM), among other things, effectively undermined the idea of climate justice in three-decade long climate change negotiations. The ideal of climate justice is more followed in neglect than observance.
REFERENCES
Anderson, Kara (2025) What is Cop 27 Loss and damage Fund? Greenly. Available At: https://greenly.earth/en-us/blog/company-guide/what-is-the-cop27-loss-and-damage-fund
OXFAM (2025) What is Climate Justice? OXFAN. Available At: https://www.oxfamamerica.org/explore/issues/climate-action/climate-justice/
Ritchie, Hannah and Max Roser (2024) Co2 Emission. Our World in Data. Available At: https://ourworldindata.org/co2-emissions#:~:text=In%20fact%2C%20some%20European%20countries,does%20in%20an%20entire%20year.
Sage Publishing (2002) Chapter 9, Environmental Justice, Climate Justice, and Green Job Movement. Sage Publishing. Available At: https://us.sagepub.com/sites/default/files/upm-binaries/47779_ch_9.pdf
The Guardian (2014) The First Climate Justice Summit: A Pie in the face of Global North. The Guardian, 16 April, 2014. Available At: https://www.theguardian.com/global-development-professionals-network/2014/apr/16/climate-change-justice-summit
UNDP (2008) The Bali Action Plan: The Key Issues in Climate Negotiations. An Environment and Energy Group Publication, UNDP. Available At: http://content-ext.undp.org/aplaws_assets/2512309/2512309.pdf
UNDP (2023) Climate Change is a matter of Justice-Here is Why, Explainers. Available At: https://climatepromise.undp.org/news-and-stories/climate-change-matter-justice-heres-why
UNFCC (2025a) Kyoto Protocol. UNFCCC, United Nations. Available At: https://unfccc.int/resource/docs/convkp/kpeng.pdf
UNFCCC (2025) The Text of United nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Available At: https://unfccc.int/resource/ccsites/seychell/conven/text.htm
Walt, Vivienne and Aaron Task (2015) India’s Modi Demands ‘Climate Justice’ at Paris Summit. Fortune, 30 November, 2025. Available At: https://fortune.com/2015/11/30/narendra-modi-climate-justice/
Williams, Mariana (2019) The State of Play of Climate Finance- UNFCCC Funds and 100 Billion Question. Climate Policy Brief, South Centre. Available At: https://www.southcentre.int/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/CPB21_The-State-of-Play-of-Climate-Finance-UNFCCC-Funds-and-the-100-Billion-Question_EN-1.pdf
Leave a Reply