ECO is worried that the lengthy conversations about future contributors to climate finance may be helping developed countries avoid provisions today for more adequate and predictable support. Because, with time running out, ECO is fearful that Article 6 may be reduced to little more than a compromise on differentiation, a bit on ex-ante information (the draft para on this, let’s face it, is just re-hashing stuff from previous COP decisions), language on ex-post transparency, and perhaps a reference to the global stocktake.
Finance Working Group
Many developing countries lack the resources to properly address the profound challenges of climate change. For this reason, developed countries have long promised to provide support to help developing countries limit their emissions and adapt to the impacts of climate change. Yet for the most part, the assistance that has been provided to date has been inadequate to meet the challenge. The CAN Finance Group coordinates advocacy and policy work around the need to rapidly scale up support for climate action from developed countries directly, and through new, innovative sources of finance. The group’s main focus is to ensure that sufficient support is available for developing countries to reduce their emissions as required to stay below 2 degrees/1.5 degree temperature rise, and to help countries adapt to climate effects that are already inevitable. Towards this end, the group works to strengthen financial commitments within the UNFCCC and other venues, and to ensure that the Green Climate Fund is an effective and appropriately funded vehicle for delivering climate support to developing countries.
ECO has no doubt that parties came to Paris with the best of intentions, and are keen to make sure we stay below 2°C. The party spoiler is that we’ve been warned that we are on a more-than-3°C track. And ECO knows that even 2°C is too much. How can we increase the stakes to avoid settling for a 3°C world? ECO believes that many Parties, especially developing countries, can and are willing to go further than their current INDCs. But many will need extra support to do that.
Yesterday, the Climate Vulnerable Forum declaration sent a resounding call to make the 1.5°C target real. Today, we continue to focus on the reality of climate impacts.
The anticipation of what leaders would or would not announce on climate finance had our hearts pounding. Yesterday calmed some of those nerves. Hot on the heels of Canada’s pledge, other countries joined the party, making commitments to the Least Developed Country Fund. Norway, Sweden and Spain also increased their climate finance commitments.
In recent years, ECO has observed, with concern, the negotiations on the future of the Adaptation Fund (AF) in the post-2020 agreement.
Earlier this month contributors showed us what a US$100 billion commitment looks like. The OECD/CPI report revealed that the commitment consists mostly of loans and private finance. In 2013, the contributions consisted of more than $20b in loans, almost $20b in private finance, equity and guarantees, and a mere $13b in grants. These numbers don’t quite add up and ECO feels that the “$100 billion” is desperately lacking the spirit of the 2009 promise—to provide new and additional money to help meet the needs of developing countries.