The world stands at a critical crossroads where climate action is no longer just about policies, but also about algorithms. As AI becomes central to predicting disasters, managing emissions, and building climate resilience, questions of fairness and access grow louder. Will artificial intelligence empower vulnerable nations, or leave them even further behind?
This debate gained urgency in January 2025 when UN Secretary-General António Guterres warned that the world risked splitting into AI “haves” and “have-nots”. The concern: wealthy nations and tech corporations might monopolize AI advancements while the Global South is sidelined especially in the climate fight.
At the COP29 climate summit in Baku, nations signed the Baku Climate Unity Pact, a bold commitment to provide $300 billion annually for climate resilience in the Global South by 2035. It was hailed as a breakthrough a rare moment of unity in a fractured world.
But the pact’s real impact depends on how this money will be used and how AI will shape its implementation. Will artificial intelligence be used to improve flood warnings in Bangladesh and help farmers in Malawi? Or will it simply fine-tune carbon markets for financial hubs in the West?
Experts warn of a dangerous imbalance. AI models trained on data from Europe or North America may not work in regions vulnerable to monsoons or droughts. According to Mumbai-based climate economist Kirit S Parikh, the answer lies in local ownership: “Developing countries should build their own models. Collaboration is key, but confidence in local expertise must come first.”
The Green Digital Action initiative, launched at COP28, was meant to make tech firms more accountable. Its Greening Digital Companies dashboard now tracks the emissions of global tech giants. But the deeper challenge remains: Who builds the climate models? And whose data powers them?
A January 2025 report from the Council on Foreign Relations found that AI-driven weather alerts can cut storm damage by 30%. Yet these tools often fail in places like Kerala or Malawi not because of poor design, but because they’re not designed with these regions in mind.
Climate researcher Ayesha Bhatti points out that many countries have scientists, but not the supercomputers or datasets needed to build strong AI systems. A climate engineer from Nairobi summed it up: “Capacity development isn’t charity it’s survival.”
In February 2025, the Paris Summit on AI and climate called for “immediate impact” tools instead of focusing on future threats like rogue AI. But critics argued that the summit ignored urgent ethical questions especially about data ownership and profit.
The absence of the U.S. and UK further weakened the summit’s message, allowing tech giants to fill the void. While nations spoke of “sovereignty,” global AI systems were still being controlled by Silicon Valley.
Now, the pressure shifts to the upcoming Bonn Climate Conference in June 2025. Key topics will include technology sharing and fair access to AI tools. For nations like Malawi, hit hard by drought, further delays could be deadly.
Without open-source tools and patent sharing, vulnerable countries remain stuck using systems built for entirely different environments. A December 2024 policy brief warned that failure to transfer technology could derail COP29’s goals of a fair, net-zero future.
But there’s hope. India’s success in developing AI tools for local crop resilience shows what’s possible when countries create their own climate tech designed by their own scientists for their own realities.
A Fairer Code for a Shared Future
The $300 billion Baku Pact must be more than a promise. It must be paired with support for AI that is equitable, local, and ethical. That means co-developing tools with experts in Nairobi and Jakarta, using data from farmers and flood-prone towns not just servers in Silicon Valley.
As Parikh said, “We can build our own tools.” The world must give the Global South the space, respect, and resources to do so.
Because if AI becomes just another tool of control, it risks turning climate justice into climate apartheid where the vulnerable face disasters worsened by solutions built for someone else’s storm.