Climate 411

Solving the Adaptation Finance Gap: Plans are in Place, but Funding Falls Short

The UN climate talks, COP29, is well underway, and countries have entered final negotiations on the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG), a new climate finance goal to boost funding for climate action in developing countries. Reaching agreement on the goal may be difficult in the face of the U.S election results, but it remains an urgent priority. 

One glaring finance gap that we need to address in the new goal is finance for climate adaptation. Adaptation is how governments and communities prepare for and adjust to the impacts of climate change. It’s about making changes to reduce or prevent the harm caused by climate impacts like rising sea levels, more frequent storms, and hotter temperatures. 

According to a new report from the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), adaptation needs are not being met worldwide. Developing countries will need $215 billion per year over the next decade for their adaptation priorities, from building climate resilient infrastructure to restoring ecosystems. Yet international finance flows for adaptation were just $28 billion in 2022 – an increase over prior years, but nowhere near enough.  

Transformational adaptation requires closing the finance gap and maximizing the impact of every dollar. 

Where is the world falling behind on adaptation? 

Many developing countries are particularly vulnerable to climate change impacts, and the good news is that they are prioritizing efforts to build resilience. UNEP’s Adaptation Gap Report found that 87% of countries have at least one national adaptation planning instrument in place, compared to around just 50% a decade ago. These instruments include National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) and other strategies or policies that guide adaptation. 

Now time for the bad news: although planning has improved, there is a growing gap in implementation as countries lack the necessary finance to meet their objectives. Adaptation has consistently been underfunded compared to mitigation, and while developed countries are working to double adaptation finance, the current $28 billion in annual flows represents just 13% of the $215 billion needed annually. 

[Source: UNEP Adaptation Gap Report 2024] 

The lack of finance for adaptation has serious implications for many developing countries, especially small island states which urgently need international support to strengthen resilience. For example, the Caribbean nation of Dominica is installing early warning systems to improve preparedness and reduce the impact of future hurricanes, but by 2023 they had only installed three systems and need 50 more to adequately cover the island. Without sufficient adaptation finance, the country will remain highly exposed to sudden climate shocks. 

This finance gap is further complicated by limited private sector engagement in adaptation. UNEP finds that many transformational adaptation projects are seen as risky by private investors, due to their longer time frame for benefits and less clear return on investment. Private finance does flow to projects in infrastructure and commercial agriculture, but often not without efforts by the public sector to de-risk investments. 

It is not surprising that two-thirds of adaptation financing needs are anticipated to be financed by the public sector. But the quality of public finance for adaptation has room for improvement as well. 62% of public finance for adaptation is delivered through loans, of which 25% are non-concessional, or at market rate with no favorable terms. And the use of non-concessional loans for adaptation in most vulnerable countries has actually increased in recent years. These tools have the potential to drive up the debt burden in developing nations which are already struggling to pay the bills. Expanding grant and concessional finance will be important to mitigate these challenges. 

How do we unlock quality adaptation finance? 

The Adaptation Gap Report suggests that filling the finance gap will require several enabling factors that can unlock new finance flows. Notably, in EDF’s new report ‘Quality Matters: Strengthening Climate Finance to Drive Climate Action,’ we identify similar strategies as we call for structural reforms within the international climate finance system. Three key recommendations overlap in both reports. 

First, countries need to mainstream their climate objectives and adaptation goals within national planning and budgeting processes. This integration should be paired with robust stakeholder engagement that systematically includes subnational authorities, marginalized groups and potential implementing entities in the planning process. Doing so will better align adaptation activities with other national priorities and create more fundable projects. Moreover, planning processes should emphasize project evaluation and evidence gathering to better understand what interventions are most impactful and maximize the potential of climate resources. 

Second, countries should adopt investment planning approaches to climate action. Specifically, they should work to develop a pipeline of bankable projects that can meet the objectives within their NAPs and other planning instruments. This can help attract investors to projects and ensure successful implementation of adaptation plans. 

Third, multilateral financial institutions including multilateral development banks (MDBs) and climate funds need to undergo structural reform to improve the quality of finance. The MDBs are currently pursuing reforms to become better fit-for-purpose for addressing the climate crisis, and at COP29 they jointly announced that their collective climate finance will reach $120 billion by 2030 – though only $42 billion will be dedicated for adaptation. Improving the balance between mitigation and adaptation finance will be important to ensure that developing countries’ priorities don’t go unfunded. Additional actions these institutions can take include strengthening the concessionality of terms for adaptation projects to alleviate debt burdens and spark new blended finance opportunities, and leveraging innovative instruments like adaptation swaps which can foster positive adaptation outcomes in exchange for forgiving debt. 

The NCQG is an important milestone which has the potential to advance action on these reforms and strengthen adaptation finance flows. Alongside supporting a strong quantitative goal, countries should call for improvements in the quality of finance, to ensure that finance for adaptation projects is available, accessible, concessional, and impactful. 

Posted in News / Authors: , / Comments are closed

Getting Climate Finance Right at COP29: Key Issues to Address in Baku

 

Negotiations at the United Nations climate talks in Azerbaijan, COP29, are now picking up. Global leaders are tasked with deciding on a new goal for how much money will be provided to developing countries to take climate action. The New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) on climate finance represents a critical opportunity to reshape how we support developing countries in their fight against climate change.  

As negotiations continue and the negotiation text is revised, we need to see several core principles included in the NCQG to serve its purpose. EDF has reviewed some key issues for the NCQG to bring quality into climate finance, and these are some issues we must address in Baku:  

  1. Unlock Economic Opportunities, Don’t Lock in Debt

First and foremost, the new finance goal must break away from traditional financing models that burden developing countries with additional debt, which further hampers their ability to take climate action. Market-rate loans and private finance at unfair market returns should not be counted as climate finance. As revealed in recent studies, many developing countries are already struggling with debt distress, making it crucial that climate finance comes primarily through quality climate finance. 

The NCQG must transform climate finance into an engine for economic opportunity rather than a source of debt burden. This means structuring climate finance to unlock new markets, create jobs, and build resilient economies while avoiding the debt trap that has historically hindered development. The focus should be on enabling countries to seize the economic opportunities of the green transition through grants, concessional finance, and strategic investment in capacity building.

  1. Agree on What We’re Talking About: Define Climate Finance

Transparency is another cornerstone of the NCQG framework. We need clear, standardized definitions of what constitutes climate finance. Currently, the climate finance landscape is ambiguous, with some countries counting official development assistance (ODA) or non-climate-specific funding toward their climate commitments. The NCQG must establish precise criteria for what qualifies as climate finance, ensuring accountability and preventing the inflation of reported contributions. 

  1. Cut the Red Tape

Access to finance remains a significant hurdle for many developing nations. The NCQG must mandate efficient, streamlined access channels that minimize bureaucratic barriers. Current systems often involve complex application processes and stringent requirements that can delay or prevent countries from accessing crucial funding. The new framework should prioritize swift, direct access while maintaining appropriate oversight. 

  1. Remove the Roadblocks

A critical aspect often overlooked is the need to address “dis-enablers” – structural barriers that prevent effective climate finance deployment. High capital costs, excessive transaction fees, and unilateral measures like carbon border adjustments can significantly reduce the real value of climate finance reaching developing countries. For instance, some developing nations face interest rates two to three times higher than developed countries for renewable energy projects, making clean energy transitions unnecessarily expensive. 

  1. Make Finance Predictable

The NCQG must ensure predictability in climate finance flows, so developing countries can plan long-term climate strategies with confidence that they will be supported. Currently, financing often arrives unpredictably or later than promised. By establishing clear timelines and reliable funding mechanisms, the NCQG can enable better planning and more effective implementation of climate projects. 

  1. Public-Private Finance: Getting the Balance Right

Public finance must remain the cornerstone of the NCQG framework, while strategically leveraging private sector involvement. Currently, multilateral development banks mobilize only about $0.60 in private capital for every $1 of financing – far below what’s needed. While private investment is crucial for scaling up climate solutions, particularly in renewable energy and green technology, it cannot replace public finance. This is especially true for adaptation projects that protect vulnerable communities. Public funding through grants and concessional instruments can de-risk investments and catalyze private capital, while ensuring developing nations maintain sovereignty over their climate priorities. 

Make COP29 outcomes matter if we want 2025 to succeed 

Looking ahead, the success of the NCQG will depend on how well it addresses these fundamental issues. Simply setting a higher numerical target without addressing quality, access, and structural barriers would perpetuate existing challenges in climate finance. We need a comprehensive approach that combines ambitious funding goals with practical mechanisms for effective delivery. 

As negotiations continue, world leaders should remain focused on solutions to make our climate finance system more equitable, efficient, and impactful. By ensuring unconditional access, emphasizing grants and concessional funding, maintaining transparency, and addressing structural barriers, we can build a framework that genuinely serves the needs of developing nations in their fight against climate change. 

For more, read EDF’s latest report on climate finance quality: Quality Matters: Strengthening Climate Finance to Drive Climate Action”. 

Posted in News / Authors: / Comments are closed

Climate Finance and Accountability at COP29

COP29 sign in Baku

COP29 sign in Baku. Photo by UNclimatechange via Flickr

 

Today, November 14, is Finance Day at COP29. We caught up with Leslie Labruto, EDF’s Managing Director for Sustainable Finance, about what she’s watching for at COP29, the United Nations’ climate change talks in Baku, Azerbaijan. Follow Leslie on LinkedIn.

Q: You’re in Baku for COP29. What key issues are on your radar?

A: The spotlight here this year is on scaling up climate finance for developing countries, and a need for redoubled global cooperation to achieve our shared climate goals. My team and I, along with the rest of the +Business team at EDF, are laser focused on working with the private sector to ensure climate and nature wins. A major focus at COP will be the establishment of a climate finance goal, called the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG), which will replace the $100 billion annual commitment that high-income countries pledged to deliver under the Paris Agreement. The NCQG could reach at least $1 trillion a year—a figure that better aligns with the financial gap that needs to be closed to address the climate crisis.

Developing countries need these funds to tackle climate change, transition to clean energy, and adapt to the impacts of climate change, and it’s crucial that the finance be provided in a way that’s just, equitable, and effective. Let’s not forget that those ‘wins’ in developing countries are good for everyone everywhere, since climate impacts are felt globally. Successful climate finance means more forests still standing, a larger climate workforce, more resilient food systems, more methane abated, and greater global renewable energy capacity. Because climate-related investments are needed to meet global goals and address inequitable impacts from past emissions, low-income borrowers should have access to concessional finance. The NCQG will not only scale up ambition but also support countries as they prepare to submit their updated climate commitments in 2025.

Q: You’ve emphasized both the quantity and quality of climate finance. What do you mean by “quality”?

A: While the amount of climate finance is essential, its effectiveness — its quality — is equally important. When we talk about quality, we mean ensuring that climate finance is structured to be concessional, accessible, and impactful. In the private sector, finance is tracked with metrics like profits and losses that communicate shareholder value. In climate finance, however, there is less accountability in terms of impact metrics.

Climate finance should leverage public and private investment to make rapid progress toward net zero emissions and benefit local communities. To make sure financing achieves this, we need a system that is accountable for being easy to access, impactful in tackling climate-related challenges, and affordable for borrowers.

Read More »

Posted in Carbon Markets, Climate Finance, International, Paris Agreement, United Nations / Authors: / Comments are closed

At COP29, Article 6 must deliver on urgent finance for forests and Indigenous communities

This blog was authored by Pedro Martins Barata, Associate Vice President, Carbon Markets and Private Sector Decarbonization and Santiago García Lloré, Senior Manager, IPLC & Conservation Partnerships, Forests

UN Climate Change, Kamran-Guliyev/ Flickr

At the start of COP29, negotiators in Baku secured a major breakthrough by agreeing on new standards for a UN-led global carbon market under Article 6 of the Paris Agreement, potentially unlocking billions in funding for climate projects.

But the terms of the standards are still flexible, meaning there’s a real chance to shape them to make sure the money goes where it’s needed most – like Indigenous Peoples and local communities who are fighting to conserve the planet’s last intact forests, known as high forest, low deforestation (HFLD) regions.

The stakes are higher now than ever, especially after the recent US election, which casts doubt on future public climate funding from one of the world’s biggest economies. In this uncertain landscape, carbon markets must step up to fund critical climate solutions, especially nature-based projects like forest conservation.

Read More »

Posted in Carbon Markets, Forest protection, Indigenous People, Paris Agreement, REDD+, United Nations / Tagged , , , , | Authors: , / Comments are closed

From Cali to Belèm: Finding Common Ground for Nature and Climate

This blog was authored by Milloni Doshi, Project Manager, Global Engagement and Partnerships and Annie Mark, Senior Director, Global Partnerships.

Photo by Milloni Doshi at COP16

The Conference of the Parties (COP) of the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) is a global meeting focused on conserving nature. Unlike the United Nations’ larger annual climate conferences, CBD meetings are usually smaller and have a specific focus: conserving and restoring biodiversity. In 2022, countries adopted the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF), a landmark plan aimed at halting and reversing biodiversity loss by 2030. Many call it the “Paris Agreement” for nature.  

This year’s COP16 took place in Cali, Colombia and was the largest yet. Although discussions moved slowly and ended without a final agreement, COP16 sparked important conversations about how nature and climate are deeply connected. This was a positive development on the “Rio Trio” —a partnership between the leadership of the UN three conventions on biodiversity, climate, and desertification. These pathway ideas may help shape future climate talks, including next week’s COP29 in Baku, Azerbaijan, and COP30 next year in Belem, Brazil.  

Pathway 1: Recognizing Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities (IPLCs) and Their Vital Role Read More »

Posted in International, Policy, United Nations / Authors: , / Comments are closed

Beyond numbers: strengthening climate finance through evidence-based impact

As countries discuss a new goal on climate finance at the UN climate conference, COP29, we have an opportunity to boost the impact of every dollar we invest in climate action.  

In climate finance, impact represents the measurable, positive outcomes achieved through climate action—determined by tracking specific metrics like emissions reductions, adaptation results, co-benefits, and the timeliness of fund disbursement. In a recent report on quality climate finance, we argue that we need better evidence to ensure every dollar of finance has better climate impact.  

To measure impact well, we need measurable ways to track contributions to national climate plans (called Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), capture both immediate and long-term transformational change, enable learning for future interventions, and help identify scalable successful approaches.  

The evidence gap  Read More »

Posted in International, Policy, United Nations / Tagged | Authors: / Comments are closed