.png)
Written by Sthandiwe Msomi, SAYEC Communications Manager
By virtue of South Africa being the only African state in the Group of Twenty (G20), our country bears the weighty responsibility of tabling issues that truly matter to our people. Countries and multilaterals in the G20 serve as major trading partners, sources of humanitarian aid, and kingmakers in global trade and geopolitics. These dynamics (and many more) offer our country a unique opportunity to convene important stakeholders to propose policy solutions that benefit the African continent to a greater degree. At this juncture, it is imperative to advocate for climate and economic justice for our continent. While we can argue over the overwhelming laundry list of issues that plague our continent, solving these two issues holds potential for multiplier effects on other social, political and economic sectors.
There has been a clarion call, from various ends of the progressive spectrum, to hold developed economies accountable for pollution and climate disasters that have been induced by fossil fuel led industrialisation. Research done by Carbon Brief revealed that the United States is responsible for carbon emissions exceeding 509 gigatons of carbon dioxide (GtCo2) from 1850 to 2021. The US’ carbon emissions total at an estimated 20% share of global trade. The US is followed by China, Russia and Brazil in cumulative carbon emissions (as illustrated in Figure 1). Interestingly the UK ranks in 8th position for cumulative carbon dioxide emissions. However, it is important to consider the pollution, deforestation and climate disasters caused by the British empire in their colonies (especially on the African continent) in pursuit of our critical minerals during the colonial era. These accounts may not be represented as carbon emissions emanating from within the UK’s geographical present day land mass.
Figure 1: Countries with the largest cumulative carbon emissions 1850-2021
Each Conference of the Parties (COP) in the past few decades has dealt the Africa continent a huge blow. Our leaders are tasked with crafting Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) that seem to shield developed countries from the adverse effects of their industrialisation trajectory (one that the people of our continent have not benefited from). COP29 alone left the African Group of Negotiators with nothing but a public climate finance commitment of $300 billion USD against a target of $1.3 trillion USD. Considering that Africa requires an estimated $3 trillion USD to implement programmes that will realise our collective NDCs, the $300 billion USD commitment from developed nations is underwhelming.
Adding insult to injury is the perception of carbon credits as a valid form of climate action by developed nations. The simple purchase of carbon credits in carbon markets by conglomerates is not enough to finance the just transition agenda on our continent, nor does it offset the continued emission of carbon dioxide still taking place. Carbon credits from African countries are often undervalued trading for as little as $5 USD per ton in voluntary carbon markets (VCM). This has left an area such as the Congo Basin left to still absorb at least 1.5 billion tons of carbon dioxide while developed nations buy “carbon credits” to seemingly reduce their carbon emissions.
Similarly, the continued influence of highly globalised and financialised capitalism has hijacked climate change efforts. Green and climate bonds are debt instruments designed to finance environmentally sustainable projects, such as renewable energy or sustainable infrastructure. These bonds have derived their validity as vehicles of climate finance from key provisions in article 9 of the Paris Agreement in COP21. While it is a commendable effort to mobilise financial resources toward climate change, the financialised nature of these bonds do more to erode the economic and climatic stability of LMIC and LIC’s which Africa is predominantly made of. This is primarily because they exacerbate financial vulnerabilities in poor and middle-income countries. The repayment of principal and accumulating interest places significant strain on national budgets, often drawing from public funds that are redirected from critical social services. Furthermore, the long payback periods and modest returns of green projects frequently fail to offset the repayment costs, creating a fiscal gap that undermines economic growth. These projects often prioritise global environmental benefits, such as reducing carbon emissions, without directly improving local economies or creating long-term jobs. Additionally, LMIC and LICs commonly issue these bonds in foreign currencies to attract international investors, leaving them exposed to exchange rate risks that inflate their repayment burdens. This dynamic not only drains resources but also perpetuates debt cycles, reinforcing dependence on external financing and further destabilising these economies.
The pressure on African nations to speedily decarbonise industrialisation efforts is not adequately supported with the required finance and resources. This dilemma should be a top priority for the South African G20 Presidency, not just as a service to South Africa, but for the continent as a whole. Climate finance agreements with African countries cannot be dominated by concessional finance agreements with disproportionate payback terms emanating from countries or multilaterals that have been part of the problem. Capital markets and debt financing for the just transition do more to maintain the financialised nature of African markets than to trickle down finances into tangible renewable energy projects or meaningful programmes for communities affected by the environmental impact of climate change. While the policy positions taken from the G20 meeting are not binding, unrelenting advocacy efforts for increased climate finance commitments by the EU, UK, US and other developed nations in the G20 is critical.
President Cyril Ramaphosa has prioritised economic transformation and debt relief on the G20 agenda, which by all means are key priorities for the continent. While the African Development Bank (AfDB) projects economic growth on the continent to reach 4.3% in this year, it is not sufficient to offset the ever growing African population. The very low marginal increases in GDP per capita are still leaving African families unable to afford food, water, shelter, education and social services that are becoming increasingly commodified. Economic transformation for the continent must create an enabling environment for ordinary poor and working-class families, youth, women and persons with disabilities to move upwards, with adequate levels of agency, on the social and economic scale. Currently, there are several global economic dynamics from the side of developed nations that serve as impediments to our continent’s prosperity.
Just recently, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) filed criminal charges against Apple for the use of conflict minerals such as cobalt. These charges have been filed in France and Belgium, where Apple has subsidiaries situated. Apple has vehemently denied the allegations of laundering critical minerals through global supply chains. As the case sits with legal officials in France and Belgium, South Africa, through the G20 has a prime opportunity to put pressure on France (a member of the G20) to proceed with the case eagerly. For a country that produces 70% of cobalt, it is a great shame that 73,5% of people in the DRC live on less than $2.15 a day. For a country struggling with poor infrastructure for educational facilities for young people, the estimated $1 billion USD lost annually through illegal mining and illicit financial flows is lost financial capital for investing in the young people of the DRC. South Africa has always stood out on the global stage as a defender of the interests of vulnerable communities and people. 2025 cannot come and go without consistent effort to engage France and the US on this case, and advocating for the repayment of the value of cobalt lost through illicit flows to the Congolese government. This is “economic transformation” in action.
Economic transformation in action also looks like engaging the G20 on economic and climate policies such as the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM). Formally introduced in 2023, CBAM is a tool introduced by the European Union (EU) to “put a fair price on carbon emitted” during the manufacturing or production of a carbon intensive product that is imported into the EU. The purpose of CBAM is to help the EU manage their carbon footprint and to encourage greener production processes in non-EU trading partners. According to the African Climate Foundation, during the nascent stages of CBAM’s policy formulation, the EU considered exempting less developed countries (LDCs), of which 33 out of the 46 LDCs can be found in Africa, from it. For reasons unknown, this consideration was not actioned. A study done by the African Climate Foundation on the impact of CBAM on Africa found that the application of CBAM on all of the EU’s imports from African LDCs would result in a negative impact on GDP by “more than 1.5% and up to 8.4%”. EU imports from African LDCs such as aluminium, electricity, cement and steel are projected to be amongst the hardest hit by CBAM as per the study. South Africa has a responsibility to rigorously engage the EU on CBAM through the G20 and plead the case for other African countries that trade with the EU. At a time where young African entrepreneurs are just getting their foot into the door of industry and manufacturing, the added compliance costs imposed by CBAM and other policies, continue to concentrate markets and exclude a large majority of Africans.
The G20 is indeed a prestigious forum composed of countries representing 85% of global gross domestic product and 75% of international trade. However, what good would this colossal stage serve if we do not intentionally steer the conversation in the direction towards issues that matter? Issues that have an effect on the ordinary person on our continent, trying to make ends meet while our more advanced counterparts prosper off of our resources. These arguments are not to absolve African leaders who are often sometimes complicit in these injustices, however, accountability and progress must start somewhere. Let it start with South Africa championing the rights, freedoms and prosperity of African people, as we have always done on the global stage.
Comments