Green Climate Fund (GCF): Role, Capacity Building, and Directions as a Catalyst for Climate Finance

Author(s):  
Mohammad Al-Saidi
2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (01) ◽  
pp. 2050002
Author(s):  
MARÍA VICTORIA ROMÁN ◽  
IÑAKI ARTO ◽  
ALBERTO ANSUATEGI ◽  
IBON GALARRAGA

The Paris Agreement states that from 2020 developed countries will mobilize at least USD 100 billion per year to support climate action in developing countries. The attainment of this objective involves decisions by donor countries about the channel and destination of climate finance disbursements. This paper explores how the spending conditions associated to different disbursement options can affect the opportunities for donors to expand their exports. In particular, using a Multiregional Input-Output Model, it finds that donors have an economic incentive for choosing bilateral channels that enable to tie aid to the detriment of multilateral ones, such as the Green Climate Fund. On the other hand, local content requirements imposed by recipient countries do not substantially affect donors’ exports, since they do not reduce intermediate exports, which represent a relevant share of the total exports generated by the mitigation and adaptation actions analysed.


Subject Outlook for the Green Climate Fund. Significance Green Climate Fund (GCF) Executive Director Hela Cheikhrouhou on March 31 urged Asia Pacific leaders to submit climate finance proposals for the Fund to consider. The institution has received 10.2 billion dollars of funding commitments thus far but has fallen behind schedule in disbursing those funds. Impacts The GCF is unlikely to meet its target for the volume of climate finance disbursed while also keeping project quality high. The GCF's embrace of financial engineering could herald a long-term shift in how climate finance is delivered, especially on mitigation. Should the funding stream remain modest, pressure will rise for the GCF to capitalise other channels.


Subject Green Climate Fund. Significance The Green Climate Fund (GCF) held its first replenishment conference in late October, seeing 9.78 billion dollars pledged for the next four years of operations. That amount exceeds the initial capital pledged in 2014, relieving fears that the impending US withdrawal from the Paris Agreement in 2020 might drag down confidence in the Fund. This public source of climate finance is politically important in catalysing action in developing countries. However, overall global climate finance is still falling far short of the amounts required to meet the Paris Agreement goals. Impacts ‘Gold standard’ requirements for GCF project approval will push institutions to raise standards in areas such as 'gender mainstreaming'. Civil society groups are beginning to assess more systematically the effectiveness of different climate finance approaches. Deeper private sector engagement will be a major GCF future focus area, with co-financing leveraging additional investment.


2021 ◽  
Vol 167 (3-4) ◽  
Author(s):  
P. P. Stoll ◽  
W. P. Pauw ◽  
F. Tohme ◽  
C. Grüning

AbstractThe mobilization of effective private sector engagement is considered to be critical to address the adaptation challenge, but literature demonstrates that it has proven difficult. In the context of international climate finance, the focus has been on mobilizing private finance for adaptation and in addressing barriers that prevent investments from materializing. In contrast, this article identifies options to engage the private sector in adaptation beyond finance and focuses on market imperfections instead of barriers. This moves the focus away from simply mobilizing more private adaptation finance towards identifying market forces that innovate, engage, and direct investments towards adaptation. The Green Climate Fund (GCF) and its portfolio of 74 adaptation projects serve as a case study. Two of these projects are categorized as private sector projects and an additional nine mobilize private co-finance or non-financial private contributions. Beyond these two indicators, we demonstrate that an additional 60 projects engage the private sector in other ways, thus indicating the important broader role of the private sector in adaptation. Furthermore, our ordinal regression demonstrates that by addressing the market imperfections of positive externalities, imperfect financial markets, and incomplete and/or asymmetric information, all have a significant positive effect on private sector engagement in the GCF’s adaptation portfolio. Both findings indicate that there is a large potential for the GCF—and other climate finance providers—to increase private sector engagement in adaptation. It must be noted, however, that the mobilization of private sector engagement in adaptation is a means to an end, not an end in itself. The main aim should be to adapt society as a whole in an efficient manner, including the most vulnerable groups and people.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document