ON DAY FIVE, A $1.3 TRILLION TEST OF CLIMATE FINANCE AMBITION STALKS SB62 TALKS IN BONN
BY SAADA MOHAMED
The SB62, the mid-year climate negotiations summit, rarely makes headlines. But on its third day, something significant happened that could shape the future of global climate finance. For the first time since COP29 in Baku, the outgoing Azerbaijani presidency and Brazil’s COP30 presidency convened an in-person consultation with Parties and stakeholders on the much-anticipated “Baku to Belém (B2B) Roadmap”, a proposed pathway to mobilising $1.3 trillion in climate finance annually by 2035. SAADA MOHAMED, our Finance expert following the negotiations in Bonn, shares her thoughts on the progress so far, and how the future looks like.
The $1.3 trillion figure for climate finance we have been talking about for more than a year isn’t plucked from the sky. It represents a complementary target to the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG), and it’s intended to reflect both the urgency and scale of what’s needed. The idea is that climate finance should no longer be measured in scraps or summit soundbites, but in trillions, and with intention. But even before the conversation began, the process was off to a bumpy start. Several delays in finalising the official SB62 agenda meant the B2B consultations were postponed more than once. So when the doors finally opened for this session in Bonn, there was more than a little pent-up energy in the room.
What’s at stake here?
Climate finance has long been the Achilles’ heel of climate talks. The previous promise of $100 billion per year, first made in 2009 and only recently (and questionably) fulfilled, left a trail of mistrust. Now, with the bar raised to $1.3 trillion, expectations are high but fragile. The UNFCCC Executive Secretary Simon Stiell minced no words, saying: “Climate finance is neither a favour nor charity but an investment in global stability.” He made clear that concessional and grant finance must form the backbone of the B2B roadmap, not just debt-inducing loans or private sector pledges with strings attached.
The Global South has questions
The developing countries in the room were sharp and direct. First, they cautioned that the $1.3 trillion figure should not be treated as a distant aspiration or feel-good target, but must be the baseline. A starting point. Something to build upon as science and climate impacts evolve. More importantly, they insisted that the roadmap be rooted in inclusiveness, transparency, and the principles of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities (CBDR-RC). The concern is that without a fair burden-sharing framework among developed countries, the roadmap could quietly shift responsibility back to the most vulnerable, the very people who did the least to cause the crisis.
Can we survive business-as-usual theatrics?
The discussions also spotlighted something often swept under the rug at climate talks: the structural barriers in the global financial system. High cost of capital, lack of fiscal space, and a labyrinth of access requirements have all acted as silent saboteurs of climate action in the Global South. The room echoed with calls for the B2B roadmap to confront these “dis-enablers” head-on. That means:
Setting targets for grant-based and highly concessional finance, especially for adaptation and Loss and Damage.
Scaling up non-debt-creating instruments.
Creating fiscal space for developing countries.
Streamlining access channels to ensure money reaches where it's needed — not just where paperwork is perfect.
What this roadmap should actually do
At its core, the B2B roadmap must centre the needs and priorities of developing countries. It must connect the dots between lofty finance goals and what’s actually written in countries’ climate plans, from Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) to National Adaptation Plans (NAPs), adaptation communications and just transition strategies. That means ensuring the roadmap supports mitigation, adaptation, Loss and Damage, and sustainable development. It should be seen not as a technocratic checklist, but as a bold political commitment, one that aligns with poverty eradication, economic resilience, and a just transition across all sectors.
In a nutshell
The first B2B consultations in Bonn may have been delayed, but they arrived at a critical moment. With political and economic headwinds blowing strong, and trust in short supply, the question is no longer whether $1.3 trillion is needed. It’s whether there’s the political will to make it happen, and whether the architecture for delivery will reflect justice, equity, and reality on the ground. Because if Baku to Belém is to be more than a catchy phrase, the roadmap must be credible, inclusive, and transformational. Otherwise, it risks becoming yet another destination climate finance talks never quite reach.
Do you agree? Let us know what you think. Send an email to info@powershiftafrica.org. Read more updates from the SB62 talks our www.powershiftafrica.org/blog.
