The G20 Rio de Janeiro leaders’ declaration aspires to chart a bold course to tackle the climate crisis. Although it emphasizes sustainable, inclusive and resilient development, its lofty rhetoric is undermined by a failure to address critical gaps, contradictions and systemic barriers. This declaration risks being yet another ambitious statement that fails to advance meaningful global action.
The language of the statement is full of promises to “encourage,” “recognize” and “support.” However, this stops short of binding commitments or enforceable mechanisms. Reiterating the goals of the Paris Agreement without concrete action or a timeline does nothing to mitigate the worsening climate crisis. This ambiguity perpetuates a familiar pattern in global climate diplomacy, where lofty ambitions go unfulfilled.
lack of water
Despite calling for change across the “whole economy”, the declaration lacks a clear framework for implementing its commitments. For example, its pledge to triple renewable energy capacity globally by 2030 is not supported by actionable steps to address financing gaps or infrastructure challenges.
The biggest omission from the declaration is the absence of water as a central theme. The global hydrology cycle, critical to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), is treated as an afterthought under water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH). This ignores the role of water for global common well-being, tackling hunger, poverty and climate resilience. Addressing water issues requires economy-wide change, not fragmented policies limited to specific sectors.
Achieving the goals of the Paris Agreement requires more than pledges; This calls for a strong green industrial strategy. Yet, the declaration failed to recognize the importance of aligning industrial policies with sustainability goals. There is a need for reform of trade frameworks, particularly through the World Trade Organization (WTO), to enable equitable participation in green development. Without systemic changes, developing countries will remain marginalized in the global energy transition.
give blame where it’s due
There is no substance in the declaration’s call for reform of the international financial system, which fails to address the harsh realities facing developing countries. In 2022 alone, these countries spent a record $443.5 billion servicing external public and publicly guaranteed debt, diverting needed resources away from critical sectors such as health, education and environmental initiatives. For the 75 poorest countries eligible for the World Bank’s International Development Association (IDA) financing, the situation is dire, with $88.9 billion in debt payments owed in the same year. This growing burden underlines the systemic inequities of a financial system that leaves vulnerable countries with shrinking fiscal space to address development and climate needs.
The availability of concessional financing needed for sustainable development in low-income countries remains grossly inadequate. While developed countries provided $115.9 billion in climate finance in 2022, ultimately surpassing the annual target of $100 billion set for 2020, this milestone came too late to address the urgency of the climate crisis. Furthermore, access to these funds is fraught with bureaucratic barriers and inequitable mechanisms, leaving many developing countries unable to effectively finance needed adaptation and mitigation strategies. This systemic failure reflects the financial system’s prioritization of lenders’ interests over the needs of the most vulnerable.
rhetoric on action
These challenges directly impact global climate action, as developing countries face the dual burden of debt repayment and the devastating consequences of climate change. Without access to timely and adequate financing, these countries are forced into a cycle of underinvestment in sustainable projects and reliance on expensive market debt. The result is an unsustainable debt cycle that undermines not only their economic sustainability but also the global ambition to achieve climate goals. The declaration’s emphasis on increasing green finance “from billions to trillions” ignores these deeper constraints, offering little more than rhetorical commitments.
The declaration missed the opportunity to demand structural reforms in multilateral development banks and central banks to align their strategies with Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and SDG targets. Central banks and financial regulators, who play a key role in managing climate risks, are barely mentioned. Their mandates should be expanded to take climate risks into account, ensuring that financial systems support sustainable development rather than perpetuate inequalities. Furthermore, demand for critical minerals to support the renewable energy transition risks turning resource-rich developing countries into mere suppliers, leading to increased environmental degradation and human rights violations. The declaration fails to address these risks or propose equitable mechanisms for resource governance.
Despite reiterating the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities (CBDR), the declaration does little to address the structural inequalities that burden low- and middle-income countries.
missed opportunities
Historical emitters are not held accountable for their disproportionate contributions to climate change, and there are no specific commitments from high-income countries to increase climate finance or emissions reductions.
Failure to prioritize appropriate changes is another missed opportunity. Although the declaration references this principle, it does not offer any actionable steps to support vulnerable communities or ensure equity in the global energy transition.
This announcement represents a significant missed opportunity to address the growing climate crisis with urgency and specificity. It acknowledges the need for adaptation and the establishment of a loss and damage fund but fails to provide a concrete framework for implementation. This oversight leaves vulnerable countries, particularly in the Global South, to bear the brunt of climate impacts without adequate financial or technical support. Despite the urgency highlighted at the UN COP29 climate talks in Baku, where financial mechanisms to support poor countries were central, the G20 commitments remain vague and lack actionable content.
Migration remains a dark spot
The absence of any mention of climate-induced migration is inexcusable. According to the World Bank, climate change could displace 216 million people in their own countries by 2050, creating an unprecedented humanitarian crisis. From sinking islands in the Pacific Ocean to desertification in Africa, millions of people are already being forced to leave their homes. Yet, the G20 is silent. This omission highlights a disturbing disregard for the socio-economic consequences of climate change and a failure to acknowledge the human costs of inaction.
The declaration’s call for circular economies and waste reduction has been weakened by the refusal of high-income countries to confront unsustainable consumption patterns. G20 nations are responsible for approximately 75% of global waste and most natural resource consumption, yet the document avoids binding commitments to curb these excesses. The emphasis on recycling and reusing is admirable but rings hollow without a reduction in overall consumption.
The G20 Rio Declaration bills itself as a comprehensive roadmap to tackling the climate crisis but falls short of its promises. Its reliance on vague commitments, lack of enforceable mechanisms, and failure to address systemic inequalities make it appear more performative rather than transformative.
To take meaningful action, the future G20 Presidency, particularly that of South Africa, must prioritize actionable commitments that address structural barriers to sustainability and equity. Bold leadership, systemic reforms and binding targets are needed to turn these aspirations into reality. Without these, the declaration risks becoming another footnote in the history of missed opportunities in global climate governance.
(Aditya Sinha is OSD of the Research Department of the Economic Advisory Council to the Prime Minister)
Disclaimer: These are the personal opinions of the author
