Written by Kusum Panta
Published Sept. 15, 2025
The North-South Debate in Global Climate Politics and Nepal’s Position
Kusum Panta
Abstract
The North-South debate in climate change is a major aspect of global climate politics. This debate outlines the differing perspectives between the Global North (industrialized countries) and the Global South (developing countries) regarding responsibility, capability, and impact of climate change. This paper aims to explore the major debates and highlight Nepal's position in the North-South debate based on statements made by Nepalese delegations at COP meetings and public hearings held by the ICJ.
Key words: North-South debate/divide, climate justice, GHGs, UNFCCC, Kyoto Protocol, CBDR-RC, Paris Agreement, COP, NCQG
The North-South debate in climate change is a long-standing and complex discourse that underscores differences in perspectives on responsibility, capacity, and vulnerability between industrialized nations of the Global North and developing economies of the Global South when addressing the climate crisis.
The Global North generally includes industrialized countries or economies like the United States, Canada, Western Europe, Australia. In contrast, the Global South encompasses developing Asia along with Latin America and Africa. “The Global South are primarily located within sub-tropical or tropical ecosystems, while global North occupy mainly temperate climates (Uddin, 2017).
However, this division extends beyond geographical location; it also reflects significant economic political differences as well as disparities regarding capacities impacted by changes due to climatic conditions faced across various regions worldwide.
Historically speaking, industrialized nations were responsible for most greenhouse gas GHG emissions. Their early onset during eighteenth nineteenth century was driven largely through extensive utilization fossil fuels resulting substantial growth both economically technologically. Nonetheless such progress came at considerable environmental expense given accumulated carbon over centuries serving main catalyst driving global warming phenomena.
On another note, though less economically advanced along with underdeveloped LDCs belonging specifically within Southern hemisphere contribute merely fraction of global cumulative emissions but are disproportionately affected by the consequences of climate change. Many of these countries rely on climate-sensitive sectors such as agriculture, forestry, and fisheries, making them highly vulnerable to extreme weather events, rising sea levels, changing precipitation patterns. Moreover, the fundamental injustice of climate change is that the countries that have contributed the least to the problem often suffer its worst effects (Schalatek, 2024)”. Furthermore, they often lack the financial resources, technological capabilities, and infrastructure needed to adapt to these challenges effectively.
The origins of the North-South divide can be traced back to the colonial era, when European powers and later the United States and Japan expanded their industries at the expense of colonies in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. The Industrial Revolution (18th–19th century) was powered by coal and fossil fuels, leading to economic growth in the Global North but also significant greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions that began altering the global climate. Colonized regions in the Global South, meanwhile, were largely resource providers for these industrialized economies, often facing deforestation, environmental degradation, and land exploitation without benefiting from industrial advancements.
Following decolonization after World War II, newly independent nations sought economic development but lacked the industrial infrastructure that developed nations had built over centuries. The economic gap widened as the Global North continued its rapid growth, driven by energy-intensive industries, while the Global South struggled with poverty, underdevelopment, and reliance on resource extraction.
In 1938, Guy Callendar published an influential study suggesting increased atmospheric CO2 from fossil fuel combustion was causing global warming (Callender, 1938). However, it was only in Stockholm Conference on the Human Environment, 1972 when the first global summit was held to address environmental issues. But in the conference, the developing nations argued that their primary focus should be economic growth and poverty reduction rather than restricting industrial activities to protect the environment. Principle 11 of the Stockholm Declaration is important as it states that “developing countries require financial resources to develop environmental safeguards (Stockholm Declaration, 1972). The principle recognized capacity differences between the developed and developing and support requirement for the developing world to mitigate and adapt to impact of climate change.
In the 1980s and 1990s, climate science advanced, and global reports highlighted how GHG emissions from industrial activities were accelerating climate change. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) established in 1992 introduced the principle of "common but differentiated responsibilities" (CBDR) to recognize that developed nations bore greater responsibility for historical emissions. In the same line, the Kyoto Protocol of 1997 recognized that “the developed countries are mainly liable for the present high levels of GHG emissions in the atmosphere as a result of more than 150 years of industrial activity and are bound to tackle this problem under the principle of CBDR (Uddin, 2017). Kyoto was the first international treaty setting legally binding emission reduction targets for developed countries (Annex I nations) who were required to reduce emissions while developing countries were exempt.
The industrialized countries refused to accept the responsibility for historical emissions have shown unwillingness to curtail emissions unless developing countries take action. So unlike Kyoto, the Paris Agreement required all nations, including developing ones, to commit to emission reductions. However, the debate over climate finance, technology transfer, and fair burden-sharing has persisted in the global climate politics.
The major issues in the North-South debate center around responsibility (and equity), ultimate goal of global climate politics, climate financing, and technology transfer.
In terms of responsibility, the global South argues that the historical emissions of the industrialized countries is the root cause of climate change and the global North must take the responsibility for addressing the impacts of climate change. Contrary to this argument, the global North argues that even the global South is responsible for emissions and that all countries must take responsibility of addressing climate change, regardless of historical emissions.
In terms of equity, the global South argues that the global North should bear a greater responsibility for addressing climate change, as their share of emissions is higher, have benefitted most from industrialization and have greater financial and technological resources to address climate change challenges. However, the global North argues that all countries should contribute to addressing climate change based on their current emissions and capabilities.
Looking at the arguments made by the global South and global North in terms of responsibility and equity, it is clear that the global South argues based on historical emissions whereas the global South argues for shared responsibility.
The North views the primary goal of global climate politics is mitigating and adapting to climate change impacts and improving the state of the global environment. To do so, the industrialized countries push for global commitments on emission reductions and advocate for universal participation in emissions reductions, clean energy investments, and regulatory frameworks.
The global South on the other hand emphasize on the right to develop, arguing that environmental restrictions should not come at the cost of economic growth. Their focus is on securing climate finance, technology transfer, and adaptation measures from the global North to mitigate and adapt with climate change impacts. The global South seek to correct historical injustices and demand climate justice through climate reparations.
The global North possesses the financial resources, technology and infrastructure to deal with the challenges of climate change. However, the global South is devoid of such capacities. Hence, the global South turns to the global North for financial support and technology transfer to mitigate and adapt to the impacts of climate change.
The global North has committed to providing financial support to developing countries, but the scale and distribution of this support has always been contentious. The global South has continuously argued that the financial support provided by developed countries is insufficient and that they need greater financial resources to address the challenges of climate change.
The North-South debate in climate financing was apparent in the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) negotiations in CoP29. The Global South advocated for substantial increases in climate finance to address escalating climate impacts. The Global North proposed more conservative figures, citing budgetary constraints and the need to mobilize private sector contributions. The final agreement settled on a target of $300 billion annually by 2035, a figure that many developing countries deemed insufficient to meet their pressing climate challenges (Waskow et al., 2024).
The North-South divide also exists in terms of access and control of technology. The global North not only possesses financial technology, but also the technology to mitigate and adapt to challenges of climate change. The technology, mainly controlled and patented by the global North is required for the global South to transition to clean energy and fulfill commitments of reducing emissions. The global North argues that IPR must be respected, and technology transfer should be market-driven, not a government-led transfer. While the global South demands IPR waivers and flexible licensing for climate-related technologies.
As a mountainous LDC with abundant water, forest and biodiversity resources but fragile topography, Nepal is facing the negative impact of climate change. Nepal has been facing climate-induced disasters leading to significant ecological, humanitarian and economic losses. As per statements made by Rt. Hon. Prime Ministers of Nepal in COP28 and COP26 respectively, Nepal has lost one-third of its glaciers and around 80% of Nepal’s population is at risk from natural and climate-induced disasters. Similarly, Hon. Minister of Foreign Affairs of Nepal at the ICJ held public hearing in the advisory proceedings on climate change stated that Nepal suffered an economic loss of 1.3 billion USD in 2024 alone due to climate-induced disasters.
Despite limited global carbon emissions, Nepal has been facing disproportionate impact of climate change and Nepal demands climate justice and reparations. Minister of Foreign Affairs at the ICJ held public hearing in the advisory proceedings on climate change clearly conveyed that it is grave injustice that Nepal has been penalized for mistakes Nepal never made.
At COP29, Rt. Hon President of Nepal urged the polluters to take responsibility for reducing emissions. However, Nepal has not only been pressing the polluters to take responsibility for their historical or current emissions but has realized its own responsibility to reduce its emissions and decarbonize its economy. Nepal has maintained 45% forest cover, is utilizing its hydropower potential to secure clean energy, has implemented Local Adaptation Plan of Action (LAPA) and has committed to reach net zero emissions by 2045.
Secretary of the Ministry of Law, Justice, and Parliamentary Affairs at the ICJ held public hearing in the advisory proceedings on climate change stressed on CBDR_RC principle which states that all countries have a common responsibility to address climate change, but their contributions should differ based on their historical contributions to the problem and their current capabilities. Nepal also urged for urgent implementation of the ‘polluters pay and compensate principle’ at COP29. Even though Nepal believes in shared responsibility of all countries to address challenges related to climate change, Nepal also believes that the polluters have greater responsibility. Nepal believes that global efforts will help to solve the climate crisis but the countries with high emissions definitely have higher responsibility to reduce their emissions and those with high historical emissions have responsibility to ensure climate justice.
For Nepal, the goal of global climate politics is to ensure better global environment for today and future. At COP27, the head of Nepal’s delegation urged for global action to tackle climate crisis to handover better planet for next generation.
Similarly, Minister of Foreign Affairs at the ICJ held public hearing in the advisory proceedings on climate change stated that climate-induced disasters pose a great threat to Nepal’s development agenda. In the same line, Rt. Hon. President of Nepal at COP29 also expressed that it is grave injustice towards Nepal that it has to divert its meagre resources from poverty alleviation to mitigation and adaption to climate change.
As a country with limited resources and vulnerable to impacts of climate change, Nepal’s climate politics is focused on mainstreaming challenges/impacts faced by mountainous countries, securing smooth access to climate finances and technology transfer and highlighting Nepal’s organic efforts for emissions reduction.
Thus, Nepal wants improved state of global environment and wants access to resources and technology from the global North to fulfill its commitments which can lead to better global environment.
Nepal has set ambitious targets to decarbonize its economy. To translate these targets into action, Nepal is facing serious financial and technological gaps and requires staunch support from the global community.
Nepal demands climate justice through smooth access to climate finance and reparations for loss and damage caused by climate-induced disasters. At COP29, Rt. Hon. President called for urgent operationalization of Loss and Damage Fund, compensation for climate-related loss and damage, grants for capacity building and technology transfer for climate justice and equity.
The North-South debate in climate change reflects differences in perspectives between countries in climate responsibility, capacity, and policy priorities. While the global North pushes for shared responsibility and universal commitments, the global South emphasizes on climate justice and equity. The challenge today in global climate politics is bridging the gaps between perspectives and finding a fair and just way to balance climate action with economic development while ensuring that those least responsible for the crisis are not left to suffer its worst effects.
References
Callendar, G. S. (1938). The artificial production of carbon dioxide and its influence on temperature. Retrieved from https://www.rmets.org/sites/default/files/qjcallender38.pdf.
Dahal, P. K. (2023). Statement by Prime Minister and Leader of Nepali Delegation Right Honourable Mr. Pushpa Kamal Dahal ‘Prachanda’ at the 28th Conference of Parties on Climate Change (COP28). UNFCCC. Retrieved from https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/NEPAL_cop28cmp18cma5_HLS_ENG.pdf.
Dauvergne, P. 2005. Handbook of Global Environmental Politics. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd.
Deuba, S. B. (2021). Statement by Rt. Hon. Sher Bahadur Deuba, Prime Minister and Leader of Nepali Delegation at the World Leaders Summit during the 26th Conference of Parties (COP 26) of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). UNFCCC. Retrieved from https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/NEPAL_cop26cmp16cma3_HLS_EN.pdf.
Deuba, A. R. (2024). The International Court of Justice (ICJ) holds public hearings in the advisory proceedings on Climate Change – Nauru; Nepal; New Zealand; State of Palestine and Pakistan [Video]. UN Web TV. Retrieved from https://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k1u/k1uuql5i9s?fbclid=IwY2xjawIaWdFleHRuA2FlbQIxMAABHaVV3xqL5DU8QgeQtbQnJmMhFgcbTpHKifpCqgHgxFfznGBrfkg_i9G0hA_aem_QvpatnaRuBnRlDmoEzixOQ.
Kandel, P. N. (2022). Statement by Dr. Pem Narayan Kandel, Secretary of the Ministry of Forest and Environment and head of the Delegation of Nepal to the COP27. UNFCCC. Retrieved from https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/NEPAL_cop27cmp17cma4_HLS_ENG.pdf.
Paudel, R. (2024). Statement by Right Honourable Mr. Ramchandra Paudel, President, and the Leader of Nepali Delegation at the CoP29 World Leaders Climate Action Summit. UNFCCC. Retrieved from https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/NEPAL_cop29cmp19cma6_HLS_ENG.pdf.
Report of the United Nations Conference on Human Environment. (1972). Retrieved from https://docs.un.org/en/A/CONF.48/14/Rev.1. Accessed on February 1, 2025.
Schalatek, L. (2024). COP29: Is the Loss and Damage Fund Becoming an Empty Promise? Project Syndicate. Retrieved from https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/rich-countries-undermining-cop29-climate-finance-negotiations-by-liane-schalatek-2024-11.
Uddin, Md. Kamal. (2017) Climate Change and Global Environmental Politics: North-South Divide. Environment Policy and Law. Vol. 4, pp. 3-4. DOI 10.3233/EPL-170022.
Waskow, D. (2024). Key Outcomes from COP29: Unpacking the New Global Climate Finance Goal and Beyond. World Resources Institute. Retrieved from https://www.wri.org/insights/cop29-outcomes-next-steps?utm_source=chatgpt.com.
Test yourself and practice for your government exam preparation from large set of questions and other resources.
