Towards a Political Compromise on the NCQG Contributor Base

The path towards a fair and effective New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) for climate finance has been fraught with intense global debate: Who should contribute, and how should contributions be assessed, particularly government funding? These questions have brought to the fore principles of equity and the notion of ‘common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities’ – core tenets of climate justice. With the stakes high, the NCQG’s structure will shape international climate finance and our collective response to the escalating climate crisis.

Most recent discussions around NCQG contributions focus on technical methodologies, specifically measuring countries’ financial capabilities by per capita income and respective responsibilities by cumulative emissions. While income and emission levels are important, they reveal the complexity of translating broad concepts such as capability and responsibility into actionable criteria. Income levels and historical emissions alone may not fully capture capabilities and responsibilities as reflected by considerations such as the distinction between luxury and subsistence emissions, varying levels of climate vulnerability, and debt distress.

Our policy brief aims to contribute to a balanced political compromise on the NCQG contributor base by departing from technical approaches and methodologies. We explore the strengths and limitations of current approaches to determine the contributor base and offer insights on additional capability and responsibility considerations that negotiators should weigh in their decision-making processes. With its nuanced perspective, our publication supports negotiators and leaders at the UN climate negotiations in Baku (COP29) in crafting a just, inclusive framework for global climate finance contributions.