Bill Gates' pivot away from bold climate action misses key challenges

Bill Gates’ call for the United Nations (UN) to pivot from climate action focused on temperature goals to vaccines has misread the challenge we face. Investments in climate mitigation and development are not competing priorities. On the contrary, with the World Health Organization projecting that climate change will cause approximately 250,000 additional deaths per year between 2030 and 2050, climate action is also health action.

 

All those attending the UN Climate Change Conference (COP30) in Belém this week should keep this insight in mind. But Mr Gates is right that we must deliver real solutions, and, as the Brazilian government has made clear, the goal for this “Solutions COP” is to bridge the gap between declarations and delivery, which will require allocating scarce resources effectively. 

 

Progress at COP30 is far from assured. The United Kingdom has just withdrawn its funding for the proposed Tropical Forest Forever Facility, which is supposed to be formally adopted this month. Making matters worse, the European Union has just weakened its 2040 decarbonisation target by allowing countries to buy foreign carbon credits rather than cutting domestic emissions. Meanwhile, 3.3 billion people live in countries that are spending more on interest payments than on health, implying that they are foregoing investments in climate resilience.

 

Ten years after COP21 in Paris, the world is not short of targets or stated commitments. Rather, what is missing is the ability to deliver fast, fair, and durable progress. From debt sustainability and climate change to the pursuit of inclusive growth, the common thread running through all our biggest challenges is public institutions’ inability to turn commitments into tangible outcomes.

 

As a result, we are left treading water. Cutting debt while undermining investment-led growth will not bring about debt sustainability, but it will exacerbate the climate crisis. After all, the debt crisis is also an investment crisis—without investment, the productive capacity of countries does not increase, making them more dependent on foreign aid precisely when that aid is withering.

 

To find our way back to shore, we urgently need a new financial architecture that can provide the policy and fiscal space to support implementation and build state capacity. While the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank are attempting to reimagine themselves for the 21st century, they must move faster to accommodate carbon-related constraints and persistent development deficits. Here, too, ambition has outpaced execution: Pledges abound, but governance and public-purpose finance are still bottlenecks.

 

Moreover, countries must commit to investing in their ability to administer and implement the much-needed industrial and financial strategies that can put the Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) at the center of economic development— such as by embedding climate goals in green industrial strategies and green financial policies.  As I argue in a new report, “State Capacity and Capabilities for a Just Green World,” with Esther Dweck, Brazil’s minister of management and innovation in public services, governments must invest in their own capacity. This means ensuring all tools— including procurement policy, digital public infrastructure, and the design of state-owned enterprises— are fit for purpose. Building dynamic state capabilities means investing in policy labs, learning by doing, and becoming less reliant on outside consultants. Brazil’s Pix payment system and Rural Environmental Registry show what becomes possible when governments invest in the data collection, systems, and skills needed to turn plans into results.

 

Most developing countries need additional support to build these capabilities and fulfill their NDCs, and a new financial architecture should be supportive of that objective. Investments in state capacity should be understood as among the most effective forms of climate policy. When designed as mission-oriented implementation hubs, country platforms can align public instruments behind clear goals, with state-owned enterprises, public development banks, and strategic procurement agencies working in concert. 

Mr Gates is right that temperature goals alone are not the best measure of human welfare. But he is wrong to turn away from bold climate action that emphasises ambitious mitigation rather than passive adaptation. In the spirit of Brazil’s call for this to be a Solutions COP, climate finance must be spent on the right things: Building the state capacity needed to implement green industrial strategies that align decarbonisation with development, health, jobs, and resilience.

 

The author is professor in the economics of innovation and public value at University College London 

 

©Project Syndicate, 2025