Not just who pays, but how to get paid

Mountains may be Nepal's greatest asset. But a warming world is turning them into an ever-growing source of risk. The latest flash floods that flattened much of the landscape along the China-Nepal border, and killed more than 1,000 people, have handed the country a stiff reconstruction bill of $4-5 bn. Many factors contributed to the scale of devastation. But there's little doubt that climate change was the key underlying driver. But that trigger was not of Nepal's making. Its contribution to historical stock of GHG emissions is 0.01%, while its share of global annual GHG emissions is 0.05%.

Nepal's tragedy puts the spotlight on the urgent need for climate finance. Devastation comes as wealthy developed countries, responsible for a disproportionate share of the accumulated stock of GHG emissions, retreat from their financial commitments to the developing world. After more than three decades of multilateral climate negotiations, the rich world can't keep shifting goalposts or, literally, passing the buck. It must honour obligations and deliver the finance developing countries need to cope with a crisis they did far less to create.

But the climate finance debate must not get mired in the question of who pays. It's time to consider a science-based fair-shares assessment to ensure that countries are accountable for their share of emissions. Even for the available money, access is slow. India, current BRICS chair, has been vocal on the who-pays question. Now, it must expand its focus to other critical aspects of improving access, starting at the summit that begins tomorrow. Nepal's tragedy should force the world - BRICS and all - to build a climate-finance system that is fairer, faster, more responsive to those facing the greatest risks.