COP-28 UNFCC Summit: A COP Like No Other – Analysis


Humanity has opened the gates of hell”, warned António Guterres, the UN secretary general in September 2023 as temperature broke records around the world this summer. And again on December 13/24, he hailed delegates at the COP-28 climate summit in Dubai, as two weeks of fraught talks ended.

Rhetoric was rife at the opening of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC) conference, COP-28 with the Secretary General of the United Nations, António Guterres, calling for an end to the burning of fossil fuels: “Not reduce, Not abate, Phase out”. For the first time, the outcome recognises the need to transition away from fossil fuels,” he said. “The era of fossil fuels must end, and it must end with justice and equity.”

This urgency found no salience finally in the first global stock, attended by nearly 200 countries and 85,000 participants, with 55,000 documents tabled. COP-28, in Dubai has come to an end a day later than scheduled, has managed to address fossil fuels, which were rightly described by a delegate as the elephant in the room – fossil fuels by name first time. It was for the first time in its 28 years of climate negotiations that the Conference of the Parties of the UNFCC pledged to transition away from greenhouse gas-emitting fossil fuels like oil, gas and coal by 2050 to keep the temperature rise within the 1.5°C mark.

The final draft declaration of the COP-28 summit takes into account the observations of the Global Stocktake report and calls for “increasing climate action and access to finance for communities and countries threatened or affected by fragility or conflict, or facing severe humanitarian needs; to strengthen knowledge and programmatic solutions for climate action in such settings; and to foster collaboration at multiple levels and across regions and humanitarian, development, climate and peace actors to address the multi-dimensional challenges of climate change”.

That it has taken an oil-producing country to introduce such a commitment into a COP outcome for the first time is remarkable. Sultan Al-Jaber, the president of COP-28 and  chief executive of the United Arab Emirates’ national oil company, Adnoc, was widely criticized over possible conflicts of interest, almost defies belief and was jubilant as he gavelled through the ‘UAE consensus. Scientists have voiced mixed reactions to a pledge to “transition away from fossil fuels” made by the world’s governments at the end of the COP-28. “It’s major,” says Lisa Schipper a developmental geographer at the University of Bonn, Germany. Previous end-of-COP declarations have failed to mention fossil fuels in this way as at COP-26 in Glasgow, delegates pledged to “phase down” unabated coal, which was regarded as a first at the time.

However, the path to this ambitious goal is tough and will test the commitment of the nations to walk the talk. The changeover necessitates a redesigning of policies, subsidies and regulations by countries worldwide. Achieving net-zero emissions by mid-century entails a drastic overhaul of the way businesses are powered and electricity produced and consumed. Despite all efforts switching towards to renewable and other green energy sources in recent decades, over three-fourths of the global energy is still produced from coal, oil and gas.

Along with technological support for carbon capture and renewable energy adaptation, investment worth billions of dollars is necessary for ‘transitioning away’ in a just and equitable manner for the developing world. But even as COP-28 saw the Green Climate Fund pledged by rich nations rise to a record $12.8 billion, it remains to be seen if they would deliver on their promises or the Global South would be again left high and dry by unkept promises of aid. A shortfall in finance is the biggest hurdle to the conversion of ambitions into reality. With 2023 being the hottest year ever recorded, arresting climate change has gained urgency. It is up to the comity of nations to fully honour the path chosen at COP-28.

COP summits usually lay bare differences between the developed world and the developing nations on how to move forward on combating climatic change. COP-28, notwithstanding the agreement of ‘transitioning away’ from fossil fuels, is no exception. Without a very firm ‘action programme’ with clear identification of finance, it will be difficult for the world to achieve net-zero carbon emissions by 2050, as agreed at COP-28. Any tangible action programme depends on developed countries acknowledging their contribution to global warming and being willing to fund the developing world to access superior technologies.

Disputed Agreement on Fossil Fuels

The final COP-28 text calls on parties to be: “Transitioning away from fossil fuels in energy systems, in a just, orderly and equitable manner, accelerating action in this critical decade, so as to achieve net zero by 2050 in keeping with the science.” The text, which was agreed on the morning of 13 December 2023 after several all-night negotiating sessions, “shows that they are actually listening to the science”. However, this was only an incremental improvement from a draft on Monday that caused outrage for dropping language to “phase down” or “phase out” fossil fuels, which more than 100 of the 200 attending countries had expressed support for. But the “transitioning away” rather than “phasing out” fossil fuels, is still disappointing, as ‘transition’ could be interpreted in different ways. It doesn’t mean eliminating, whereas ‘phasing out’ fossil fuels, is about ‘the end.  

 “Phasing out” fossil fuels would mean putting a complete stop to fossil-fuel burning through goals such as reaching net-zero carbon emissions by a specific year. “Phasing down” fossil fuels involves gradually cutting down on fossil fuel burning without setting targets for the amount and deadline to achieve net zero.

The final text was able to secure a majority consensus within the 200 attending countries to include language to “transition away” from fossil fuels, which are responsible for nearly 90 percent of global carbon dioxide emissions, according to the UN.

It also calls to “phase down” the “unabated” use of coal. Targeting “unabated” coal use is contested as it allows unfettered levels of coal burning as long as the carbon dioxide it generates is more frequently removed from the atmosphere and stored underground–which climate experts say is insufficient for reducing the impact of emissions.

“The absence of explicit ‘phase-out’ language in the draft is significant, as it is a more measurable and definitive term, sending a strong message globally about a total shift away from fossil fuels. The current terminology – ‘transitioning away’ – is somewhat ambiguous and allows for varying interpretations.

Most of the members wanted a stronger wording that would include ‘phasing down’, a term disliked by China, India and members of OPEC (Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting Countries). However, they settled for ‘transitioning away’. It was reassuring for many small island nations and the European bloc that at least ‘fossil fuels’ were named in the text of the accord. However, there was no hint of numbers and timelines regarding the reduction in the use of fossil fuels. Although the adoption of the first deal on fossil fuels is a win, experts also say its details are flawed. “The resolution is marred by loopholes that offer the fossil fuel industry numerous escape routes, relying on unproven, unsafe technologies.

Azerbaijan will host COP-29 in 2024, and COP-30 is scheduled to be held in Brazil in 2025 with the hope of further advancing the reduction of fossil fuels in the energy system. However slow and tortuous the progress on the climate front may be, there seems to be no other way than that of the UNFCCC summits, where consensus is the mode for making decisions and reaching agreements. It has become clear that the only way is to patiently nudge people into agreeing to the imperatives of climate action.

The requirement under UN rules that countries unanimously agree on text is a “fatal flaw” in the COP process.  At COP-28, former US vice-president Al Gore, a long-time environmental campaigner, urged member states to consider taking decisions agreed on by 75 per cent of nations. It’s almost ludicrous that we are asking the leaders of fossil fuel production to shepherd humanity into a safe climate future.

The text agreed on Wednesday is in contrast to a version released on Monday that called for “reducing both consumption and production of fossil fuels”. That was criticized as not being strong enough in a rare sign of unity from the representatives from different parts of the globe. However, delegates from the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) — which are among most vulnerable to climate change — said in a statement that they weren’t in the room when the final deal was agreed. “We were working hard to coordinate the 39 small island developing states that are disproportionately affected by climate change, and so were delayed in coming here.”

AOSIS is advocating a target that would see global emissions peak by 2025. “It is not enough for us to reference the science and then make agreements that ignore what the science is telling us we need to do. This is not an approach that we should be asked to defend,” its statement says. Mizan Khan, an environmental scientist at the International Centre for Climate Change and Development, based in Dhaka, Bangladesh, says that most climate-vulnerable countries, including Bangladesh, wanted at a minimum, language on phasing out fossil fuels. But he adds that COP meetings rarely produce strong decisions because decisions are made through a consensus of more than 190 countries.

The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, the agency that organizes COP meetings, headlined its press release: ‘Beginning of the end of the fossil fuel era’. However, hours after the agreement, Saudi Arabia’s energy minister Abdulaziz bin Salman was reported in Al-Arabiya newspaper as saying that it would not affect the country’s exports of crude oil. The deal includes a commitment to “transition away” from these fuels. It’s a painful compromise: oil cartel OPEC had tried to steer the wording away from the sources of emissions, preferring a focus on yet-to-be-invented ways of making them cleaner. Others, particularly the island nations facing obliteration by rising sea levels, wanted a clear call to ‘phase out’ the hydrocarbons at the root of climate change. Like all compromises, this one leaves many disappointed. “The fossil fuel era is ending. It is a question of when, not if.”

‘Loss-and-Damage’ Fund Approved

The principle for a loss and damage fund had been agreed at COP-27 last year in Egypt. This COP started with this huge bang. But COP-28 has otherwise been disappointing when it comes to promises on climate finance. Early hopes were raised by commitments to a ‘loss and damage’ fund — money for low and middle-income regions that are facing irreversible climate-related destruction.

This year’s COP meeting started optimistically with another historic deal in which rich countries pledged more than US$700 million to a new ‘loss and damage fund’ to support nations most affected by climate change. The fund is meant to support vulnerable communities and developing nations which are struggling to cope with the impact of climate disasters such as the destruction of crops caused by floods. However, developed nations have been criticised over the amount of money they are willing to extend.

Also agreed was a pledge to treble renewable energy capacity by 2030. So far, it has collected around US$700 million in pledges. But that is just a tiny fraction of $4 trillion, the estimated annual cost of climate impacts. In September, a group of developing countries had asked for at least $100bn to be committed to the fund. The UAE pledged $100m, which was matched by Germany. Italy and France promised more than $108m, while the United Kingdom pledged $50.8m. The United States and China, despite being the world’s largest emitters, extended only $17.5m and $10m, respectively.

Aside from gathering pledges, attendees at this year’s summit discussed how to operate the fund in a meaningful manner, while its board is expected to meet in January to finalise the framework and begin operations.

Global Finance ‘Unsupportive’ of Renewables

Like some of the previous COPs, more than 100 countries at this year’s summit endorsed tripling reliance on renewable energy sources to reduce the world’s dependency on fossil fuels. However, such goals are difficult given the financial pressures on developing nations.

Rising interest rates in advanced economies mean that the high levels of debt developing countries have are becoming ever more expensive to service. Debt repayments leave poorer nations with little to invest in sectors such as health or climate change mitigation. About 70 nations are in “debt distress”, according to an International Monetary Fund report released in August, meaning they have defaulted on loan repayments or are on track to default.

The global financial system must be restructured debt for developing countries to enable them to sufficiently invest in climate change measures. “There is tremendous recognition of the fact that the international financial architecture as a system has to really move in order to reinforce and unlock progress within the COP process.

There is agreed text on how to provide funds to countries to adapt to the impacts of climate change, but Schipper calls this “super-vague”. The meeting needed to set actual targets or specific financial commitments, but it did not do this. From a scientific perspective, Schipper describes the COP-28 text on climate adaptation as a “very dangerous straitjacket for adaptation finance”.

Romain Weikmans, who studies climate finance based at the Université Libre de Bruxelles in Brussels, adds that “the big chunk of the climate finance” discussion will now take place next year at COP-29, which will be in Baku, Azerbaijan.

Paris Agreement Progress Discussed

The final report of the first stocktake exhorts “a tripling of renewable capacity by 2030” a target already embedded in India’s NDCs post-Glasgow and a “doubling of energy efficiency” from 2 percent to 4 percent per year by 2030. The latter pointing to the urgency for accelerated electrification of transport—an adjunct to the renewable energy growth story. Transitioning away from fossil fuels in energy systems by 2050 is unexceptionable.

The sticking point remains the affordability of abandoning existing fossil fuel assets and investing in yet-to-mature and scale-up clean energy alternatives. Transitional fuels can play a role in facilitating the energy transition while ensuring energy security. Natural gas and coal both come in this category. Nevertheless, to carry forward and retain the COP-26 generated fervour against coal, there is a separate, albeit muted, call for “accelerating efforts towards the phase-down of unabated coal power.

This patchwork of noble sentiments also pleads for accelerating zero- and low-emission technologies …including removal technologies such as carbon capture and utilization and storage, particularly in hard-to-abate sectors. This opens a door for carbon-intensive transition fuels, like coal, if their tailpipe emissions are curbed once carbon sequestering metrics become standard and the financial viability of these tailpipe carbon capture technologies improves via scaling up.

The continuing ifs and buts about the future partly reflect the shallow strategy crafted during COP-21 in Paris in 2015, of preferring an end-of-meeting consensus, over the forging of procedural substance. Paris took the easy way out from negotiating contentious differential transition metrics for countries by allowing self-determined metrics. This was a notionally equitable approach since it continued the laissez-faire regime which had allowed advanced countries to denude the global carbon budget by misusing their first-mover advantage. Unsurprisingly, the results during 2015-2020 are less than satisfactory. Regulatory ambiguity inevitably dulls investment. The final stocktake report notes that “policies implemented by the end of 2020 are projected to result in higher global greenhouse gas emissions than those implied by the nationally determined contributions, indicating an implementation gap.

The need for new climate plans and more robust, multilateral climate change mitigation projects has become even more pressingin light of growing gaps in meeting Paris Agreement goals. Some 196 countries have signed the binding international agreement, which was adopted in 2015. COP-28 concluded the first assessment of progress each state has made towards reducing emissions for the agreement’s central tenet – limiting the global temperature rise to 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial levels. Adhering to the Paris Agreement is “crucial” for motivating countries to devise renewed climate plans and “bring us closer to where we need to be. The next global assessment of Paris Agreement targets is expected to take place at COP-33 in 2028.


Al-Jaber Accused of Denying Climate Science: The Abu Dhabi national oil and gas company chief hit out against what he said were “repeated attempts to undermine” his presidency. He said his questioning of climate science in a leaked video was “taken out of context with misrepresentation”. Jim Skea, chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, said al-Jaber “has been attentive to the science as we have discussed it and I think has fully understood it”.

OPEC Pressures: OPEC issued a letter to its members on December 6 to “proactively reject any text or formula that targets energy i.e. fossil fuels rather than emissions”. Saudi Arabia, the largest oil producer, is the de facto head of the 24-member country group. The secretariat also labelled campaigns against fossil fuels as “politically motivated”.

Protests on the Sidelines: Although the UAE prohibits demonstrations, several groups held protests on the sidelines over issues including the Israel-Gaza war and the holding of political prisoners in the UAE. In September, COP’s presidency agreed to allow “climate activists to assemble peacefully” at the summit.

Melodi Photo: Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his Italian counterpart, Giorgia Meloni, took social media by storm on the second day of the summit with a selfie – the latter posted to her X account with the hashtag “Melodi”.


Clear Vision on What to Come:

The language of COP-28 has been about achieving 1.5° and how we keep that in reach. The shared aspiration will endure and will ensure to close the ambition gap, finance gap, and adaptation gap. Collectively, we had the opportunity to create the blueprint of what should represent a COP of the future, an innovative, multi-stakeholder-led process that really makes real-world impact.

Financing Technology and Start-Ups Needed:

Ninety percent of the greenhouse-gas (GHG) abatement that we need could come from proven technologies. However, to limit global warming to 1.5°C, these technologies need to scale exponentially by 2030. It is imperative to highlight the role of start-ups in furthering innovation and achieving the scale needed. At present only 10 percent of venture capital (VC) funds go to climate tech. Only start-ups can deliver this new technology, and our agenda was to facilitate a place at COP where finance and innovation can collide. 

COP Not Just a Place for Announcements:

Big announcements are only relevant if they are accompanied by accountability. And collaboration, facilitated by COP, can help assure commitments become reality. The importance of the $30 billion ALTÉRRA Fund, which is allowing us to develop a completely new way of seeing climate and investing into climate, creating a new climate economy. But announcements like this alone don’t mean much—they need to be a part of a larger framework. We need to be inclusive and not just add new initiatives, but expand on previous initiatives by growing numbers of engagements. Moreover, building and driving real change with the money that is being delivered is a crucial next step.

Cross-Industry Collaboration Critical To Success:

To achieve the global goal of 1.5°C, a siloed approach cannot persist. To mobilize the capital required for the net-zero transition, one cannot think about climate finance only from a governmental perspective. To unlock the trillions, we need to have everybody around the table—philanthropies, the banks, the venture capitalist investors. This is how we define a new climate economy.

What’s next at COP-29?

After several rounds of negotiations at COP-28, Azerbaijan was announced as the host of COP-29, scheduled for November 2024. Activists have already begun to criticise the decision over the country’s oil production and human rights record. Azerbaijan is not part of OPEC but closely collaborates with the group in the OPEC+ offshoot which has 11 additional countries.

COP-28 and India:

An inter-ministerial delegation from India attended the 28th Session of the UN Climate Change Conference (COP-28) held in Dubai, United Arab Emirates from 30th November’2023 to 13th December’2023. The major outcome from COP-28 included the decision on Outcome of the First Global Stocktake, ratcheting-up global climate ambition before the end of the decade. These global efforts will be taken up by the countries in a nationally determined manner taking into account the Paris Agreement and their different national circumstances. 

Another major outcome of COP-28 is the agreement n the operationalization of the Loss and Damage Fund and its funding arrangements. The decision on Loss and Damage Fund adopted at COP-28 approved the Governing instrument of the Loss and Damage Fund and decided that the Fund will be serviced by new, dedicated and independent secretariat. It was also decided that the Fund will be supervised and governed by the Board. The Fund is accountable to and functions under the guidance of the Conference of Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties to the Paris Agreement (CMA).  

Since the decision, an amount of around USD 700 million to date has been pledged by several countries, including United Arab Emirates, Germany, United Kingdom, European Union, Japan. The purpose of the Fund is to assist developing countries that are particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change in responding to economic and non-economic loss and damage associated with the adverse effects of climate change, including extreme weather events and slow onset events. The detailed decision text on Loss and Damage Fund adopted at COP 28 can be accessed at webpage

Another major outcome related to Loss and Damage is the decision on Santiago network for averting, minimizing and addressing loss and damage to catalyse the technical assistance of relevant organizations, bodies, networks and experts for the implementation of relevant approaches associated with climate change impacts. The host of the Secretariat for the Santiago Network was finalized at COP-28. The joint consortium of the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction and the United Nations Office for Project Services have been selected as the host of the Santiago network secretariat for an initial term of five years, with five-year renewal periods. Countries including Canada, Japan, Spain, Switzerland and the United States of America have announced their financial contributions to the work of the Santiago network.

On the other hand, developing countries, including India, must recognise the necessity of undertaking climate-resilient development independently and focus on research to develop technologies that can help achieve emission reduction targets. India, for example, is moving in the right direction as per the Paris agreement of 2015. India has to achieve its short-term and long-term targets under the Panchamrit action plan — non-fossil fuel energy capacity of 500 GW by 2030, fulfilling at least half of its energy requirements via renewable energy by 2030 and reducing carbon dioxide emissions by 1 billion tonnes by 2030.

By the end of 2030, India aims to reduce carbon intensity by 45 per cent, with a target of achieving net-zero emissions by 2070. Indian emissions in 2022 were only 8 per cent of the global volume, whereas China led with 32 per cent (11.4 billion metric tonnes of carbon), followed by the US with 14 per cent (5.1 billion metric tonnes of carbon). The European Union contributes 8 per cent to the global total. Going by the per capita emissions, the US leads with 15.32 tonnes, followed by Russia (11.45 tonnes) and China (7.44 tonnes); Indians’ share is less than 2 tonnes. Though India refused to sign the ‘phase down’ agreement on coal, it is nevertheless on the right path. In due course, the use of coal for energy will decline substantially, aligning with the target of reducing emissions. It is thus evident that world leaders need to consider inter-generational equity when devising practical, firm and implementable solutions to meet the targets for limiting the temperature increase to 1.5°C.

The situation, however, remains grim. Apart from the agreement on fossil fuels, which this writer views as a face-saving formula to prevent the collapse of dialogue, there is a lack of substantial measures on how to set and monitor targets, particularly in terms of increasing climate funding for poor and developing countries. The fact is that in many locations around the world, temperatures have already surpassed the 1.5°C threshold.

In India alone, the average temperature has risen in the range of 0.7-1°C at many locations, according to data collected by the Indian Council of Forestry Research and Education for the period from 1930 to 2010 from around 90 meteorological stations located in forest areas. The data revealed massive changes in forest vegetation. Based on past experiences, the COP-28 declaration may once again turn out to be verbose and vacuous if the UNFCCC secretariat does not come up with a sound and time-bound programme without waiting for COP-   29. For this, world leaders must meet soon to assess and heed the forecasts of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), and formulate a collective action programme, as the earth and its inhabitants are waiting for the humanity to act without fail.

India, being a prominent representative of the Global South, needs to think and act innovatively. It should take the lead by chalking out a format for south-south cooperation, addressing financial needs and helping each other in sharing and developing technologies. If concerted efforts are made by India, China and the oil-rich countries, a workable programme can be developed. India should also focus on planning for climate resilience at the district and block levels, laying emphasis on water conservation and forest management. Integration of primary sector activities into the plans should be emphasised for better climate change adaptation and mitigation.

But the question is?  Is this historic deal will spell the eventual end of gas, oil and coal? Or will it be one more step on the road to hell? In the world of climate talks, these two are not mutually exclusive. The text that was gavelled on Wednesday morning, known as the “global stocktake”, enjoins countries for the first time to embark on a de facto phase-out of fossil fuels. But it cannot require them to do so and it contains “a litany of loopholes”, according to the small island states that are most vulnerable to the impacts of the climate crisis, that will hamper the world from cutting greenhouse gas emissions drastically enough to limit global heating to 1.5C (2.7F) above pre-industrial levels.

It may seem incredible, but it has taken 30 years of nearly annual climate summits to come up with an agreement that includes clear directions on the future of fossil fuels. For 30 years, the world has been forced to avoid the elephant in the room: the overwhelming source of the climate breakdown we are experiencing, fossil fuels. Oil-producing countries, abetted by many rich countries, having reluctantly agreed to talk about the climate, refused to allow legally binding treaties to make the link with fossil fuels explicit.


There is a need for a realistic assessment of how the global economy can be weaned off fossil fuels. The production and transportation of goods and people are hugely dependent on fossil fuels. An efficient and economic use of fossil fuel resources could serve as a starting point. The modern industrial economy over the past 200 years has been unintended wastefulness, which is only partially true. The industrial mode triggered by science and technology was so exhilarating that little attention was paid to negative consequences. The mining sector, especially coal, stands as a clear testament to the toll on the health of miners. That dreaded occupational disease, pneumoconiosis, was the outcome. It is only now that human health has become a factor in climate talks. How industrialisation and crowded urban spaces created health hazards remain to be probed. The Covid-19 pandemic exposed the dark side of densely populated cities.

The unchecked expansion of industrial civilisation has given rise to the climate crisis. Finding solutions to this problem is not easy. Countries cannot easily break away from existing systems. China and India, for instance, opposed singling out coal, contending that they cannot yet relinquish its use to sustain the development of their economies. India was also not in favour of mentioning methane emissions due to its key sector, agriculture, as well as dairy farming. The OPEC members did not agree to restrictions imposed on petrol, diesel and natural gas on the plea that renewables cannot be solely relied upon to power key sectors like energy and transport. These arguments cannot be dismissed as pretexts to evade responsibility and reluctance to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

The harsh fact is that renewables are not yet in a position to run the entire economic engine, although their presence has increased substantially. India’s share of renewables in the energy basket has reached the 40 per cent requirement as promised in the Paris climate summit in 2015. India has shown keen interest in solar power and actively advocated for its development. However, it has not yet reached the critical position of replacing coal and gas to fuel thermal and fertiliser plants. Besides, in the transport system, renewables make a meagre contribution.

Transitioning away from fossil fuels, there is a need for innovation to improve the efficiency of sources of renewable energy. One of the renewables, nuclear power, shows promise, although there are concerns about the hazards of nuclear waste and the dangers posed by radiation through its use. Despite these apprehensions, it remains one source that promises continuous power generation.

It is not enough to set targets for increasing the use of renewables without drawing up exigency plans in case of disruptions caused by climatic factors. Hydropower will have to be reconsidered due to the change in monsoon patterns and the reduction in the volume of waters in rivers, potentially rendering hydroelectric projects defunct. It becomes necessary to contemplate a global grid for solar power, given the local fluctuations in sunlight due to seasons.

The most important issue is the storage of energy generated from renewable sources, apart from nuclear power. There is a need to invest in research and plans for building an energy system based on renewables, and this would require international cooperation. It would be a bad idea to embrace renewables without considering potential disruptions. Climate action cannot be confined to containing the global temperature rise to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. It must also address how to help billions of people adapt to the changed conditions.    

Dr. Gursharan Singh Kainth

Dr. Gursharan Singh Kainth is Founder–Director of Guru Arjan Dev Institute of Development Studies

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *