Climate Finance Policy Brief

De Gruyter Handbook of Sustainable Development and Finance

Finance is one of the central aspects necessary for combatting climate change and is covered by a wide range of mechanisms, institutional arrangements and governing bodies with the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), validating claims that the Convention is indeed both a regime complex and a complex regime. The chapter begins by outlining those arrangements historically and how they, and the responsibilities pertaining to them, have evolved over time. It continues with a summary of some of the main points of contention, not the least of which have been disputes over the provision of resources from developed to developing countries, which have served to reinforce the North/ South divide, notably in the context of climate finance. The remainder of the chapter summarises the key themes and findings of the contributing authors to this section of the Handbook, who discuss the strengths and weaknesses of some of the central mechanisms for financing climate action within the UNFCCC, and beyond. They provide recommendations as to how the integrity of finance can be safeguarded, both within the Convention and beyond, where the impacts of povertyand COVID-19make resilience in the face of the escalating climate emergency especially difficult.

This article looks at the current climate finance architecture and its impact on developing countries climate change responses. The primary aim is to capture the contradictions that exist in the climate finance architecture particularly between those recommended by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and those advanced by developed countries otherwise known as non-UNFCCC climate financing mechanisms. The overall observation is that once non-UNFCCC climate financing mechanisms emerged and the more they were justified using the UNFCCC, the global response to the climate change problem was fatally wounded through a procedural derailment of UNFCCC objectives. This article calls for a review of non-UNFCCC with the aim of divesting them of the profit factor which in this case is the problematic.

Heinrich Boll Stiftung and …, 2011

OECD/IEA Climate Change Expert Group Papers

This series is designed to make available to a wider readership selected papers on climate change issues that have been prepared for the OECD/IEA Climate Change Expert Group (CCXG). The CCXG (formerly called the Annex I Expert Group) is a group of government delegates from OECD and other industrialised countries. The aim of the group is to promote dialogue and enhance understanding on technical issues in the international climate change negotiations. CCXG papers are developed in consultation with experts from a wide range of developed and developing countries, including those participating in the regular Global Forum on the Environment organised by the CCXG. The full papers are generally available only in English. The opinions expressed in these papers are the sole responsibility of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the OECD, the IEA or their member countries, or the endorsement of any approach described herein.

2020

What has changed since 2015-16, when developed countries last reported on their climate finance, and will the $100bn commitment be met? Reported public climate finance has increased from $44.5bn per year in 2015-16 to an estimated $59.5bn per year in 2017-18. 4 However, a closer look reveals that donor reports continue to overstate climate finance by a huge margin. Most loans continue to be counted at their full face value, rather than as the amount of money given to a developing country once repayments, interest and other factors are accounted for (the grant equivalent). There are also significant inaccuracies in how the climate component of broader development projects is counted. Taking account of these issues, Oxfam estimates that public climatespecific net assistance is much lower than reported figures, increasing slightly from $15-19.5bn per year in 2015-16, to $19-22.5bn per year in 2017-18. 5 Oxfam estimates the provision of climate finance as grants has barely changed, from around $11bn in 2015-16 to $12.5bn in 2017-18, while provision of concessional loans and other non-grant instruments

Finance has emerged in the last few years in and outside the Conference of the Parties (COP) process as a key ingredient of climate policy design. It also appears to be a key sector for structural reform in order to align it with the new low-carbon horizon. This policy brief draws lessons from a discussion platform launched jointly by CEPII and France Stratégie, which welcomed more than thirty contributions on climate finance issues from various experts and citizens in the four months leading to COP21. Both these contributions and the final text adopted by the Parties indicate that the financial question will remain essential in the near future in order to consolidate and nurture the Paris Agreement. In this brief, three directions for future debates are analyzed. First, the equity question remains open, through the financing schemes to guarantee a minimum of $100 billion in annual transfers to developing countries in the name of the principle of " common but differentiated responsibilities ". The question of an increasing ambition to implement the " Intended Nationally Determined Contributions " through specific financial instruments is also discussed. Finally, the necessary long-term objective of a net decarbonization of the world economy invites us to look for more structural reforms in the financial sector.

Journal of Law Policy and Globalization, 2014

This article looks at the current climate finance architecture and its impact on developing countries climate change responses. The primary aim is to capture the contradictions that exist in the climate finance architecture particularly between those recommended by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and those advanced by developed countries otherwise known as non-UNFCCC climate financing mechanisms. The overall observation is that once non-UNFCCC climate financing mechanisms emerged and the more they were justified using the UNFCCC, the global response to the climate change problem was fatally wounded through a procedural derailment of UNFCCC objectives. This article calls for a review of non-UNFCCC with the aim of divesting them of the profit factor which in this case is the problematic.

Clement Adzisu, 2023

Understanding the Concept of Climate Financing Across the Globe Climate change is one of the most urgent global challenges we face today. It poses a threat to ecosystems, economies, and societies worldwide. To combat climate change, we must take coordinated actions on multiple fronts, including mitigation and adaptation measures.

2013

International climate finance is the transfer of funds from the North to the South to help enable developing countries adapt to the unavoidable impacts of climate change (i.e. adaptation), reduce greenhouse gas emissions (i.e. mitigation) , and embark on clean energy development paths. If we are to avoid the dangerous impact of climate change we must limit global mean temperature increase to 2 0 C above pre industrial levels. This means stabilizing atmospheric GHG concentration below 450ppm carbon dioxide equivalent. Emission reductions required for a 450ppm pathway adapted from Mckinsey global GHG abatement cost curve. Failure to cut emissions on this kind of scale would result in serious risks of temperature increases of 3,4,5 deg. C and higher. Scientists tell us that to have a 50-50 chance of holding temperature below 2 0 C global emissions would need to be below 35Gt CO2e by 2030. The 2009 Copenhagen Accord pledged funds of $10 billion a year from 2010 to 2012, increasing to $1...