{"query_echo":{"q":"","filters":{"climate_tags":["developing countries"]},"warnings":[{"code":"facet_value_not_in_vocabulary","message":"Value 'developing countries' for facet 'climate_tags' is not in the controlled vocabulary."}]},"total":{"value":6,"relation":"eq"},"page":1,"page_size":20,"self":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/api/v1/search?climate_tags=developing+countries","stability":"beta","ai_marking":{"digital_source_type":{"uri":"http://cv.iptc.org/newscodes/digitalsourcetype/trainedAlgorithmicMedia","name":"Created using Generative AI"},"notice":"Summary and key insights are generated using artificial intelligence."},"results":[{"id":"clipolin-000227","url":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/document/clipolin-000227","title":"Climate Finance for Small-Scale Agriculture","publisher":{"name":"Climate Policy Initiative","organization":"climate-policy-initiative"},"document_type":"report","language":"en","date_published":"2020-11-12","source_url":"https://www.climatepolicyinitiative.org/publication/climate-finance-small-scale-agriculture/","generator":"Climate Insights Directory","generated_fields":["summary","key_insights","climate_tags","geography_discussed","analysis_type"],"summary":{"text":"This report by the Climate Policy Initiative, supported by the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), proposes a framework for measuring climate finance flows to small-scale agriculture in developing countries and provides a snapshot of international financial commitments for 2017 and 2018.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"clipolin-000227#summary","date_modified":"2026-08-17"},"key_insights":[{"text":"Small-scale farmers, defined as those operating on less than 5 hectares of land, make up approximately 95% of global farms and 20% of global farmland. In Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa, these farmers are estimated to produce up to 80% of food, and the agricultural sector in these regions provides over 40% of all jobs and contributes around 15% of the GDP.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"clipolin-000227#insight-1","date_modified":"2026-08-17"},{"text":"There is a significant gap between the financial needs of small-scale agriculture and the actual climate finance provided. Global annual financial needs for small-scale farmers' agricultural and household-related requirements are estimated at USD 240 billion, with agri-enterprises in Sub-Saharan Africa alone requiring USD 132 billion per year. However, total climate finance for agriculture, forestry, and land use was only USD 20 billion per year in 2017/2018, representing 3% of total tracked global climate finance.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"clipolin-000227#insight-2","date_modified":"2026-08-17"},{"text":"Climate finance specifically targeting small-scale agriculture reached approximately USD 10 billion per year in 2017/2018, which is 1.7% of total tracked climate finance. This total includes USD 8.1 billion directly targeting small-scale farmers, agri-entrepreneurs, and value chain actors, plus USD 1.72 billion benefiting them through water management, sustainable rural transport, and renewable energy generation.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"clipolin-000227#insight-3","date_modified":"2026-08-17"},{"text":"Climate finance for small-scale agriculture is overwhelmingly public and grant-based. 95% of the funding comes from the public sector, with governmental donors contributing 39%, multilateral development finance institutions 32%, and bilateral development financial institutions 16%. Grants are the most common instrument (50%), followed by concessional debt (33%) and non-concessional debt (16%).","ai_generated":true,"unit":"clipolin-000227#insight-4","date_modified":"2026-08-17"},{"text":"The allocation of small-scale agriculture climate finance is focused on adaptation and infrastructure. 49% of funds went to climate adaptation projects, while 21% targeted mitigation only and 29% targeted both. The largest share of activity-based funding (36%) was for low GHG emission and climate resilient infrastructure, followed by farm-level production improvements (14%) and general rural community livelihood improvements (14%).","ai_generated":true,"unit":"clipolin-000227#insight-5","date_modified":"2026-08-17"},{"text":"Geographically, the largest recipients of climate finance for small-scale agriculture were Sub-Saharan Africa (36%), East Asia and Pacific (20%), and South Asia (16%). Additionally, USD 1.2 billion (12% of the total) was committed to transregional programs.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"clipolin-000227#insight-6","date_modified":"2026-08-17"}],"climate_tags":["climate finance","small-scale agriculture","adaptation","mitigation","developing countries"],"geography_discussed":["Asia","sub-Saharan Africa","East Asia and Pacific","South Asia"],"frame_perspective":[],"analysis_type":["Financial Analysis","Policy Framework"]},{"id":"clipolin-000083","url":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/document/clipolin-000083","title":"Understanding and Increasing Finance for Climate Adaptation in Developing Countries","publisher":{"name":"Climate Policy Initiative","organization":"climate-policy-initiative"},"document_type":"report","language":"en","date_published":"2018-12-13","source_url":"https://www.climatepolicyinitiative.org/publication/understanding-and-increasing-finance-for-climate-adaptation-in-developing-countries/","generator":"Climate Insights Directory","generated_fields":["summary","key_insights","climate_tags","analysis_type"],"summary":{"text":"This report by the Climate Policy Initiative examines the current state of climate adaptation finance, identifying significant funding gaps and barriers to investment, particularly in developing countries. It proposes a framework for increasing investment by boosting demand for adaptation services, supporting suppliers, and de-risking investments, while urging developing country governments to improve risk assessment and tracking.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"clipolin-000083#summary","date_modified":"2026-08-17"},"key_insights":[{"text":"There is a substantial gap between current adaptation investment and the projected costs required to avoid catastrophic impacts. In 2016, only USD 22 billion of tracked global climate change investment was directed toward adaptation. By 2030, adaptation costs in developing countries are estimated to be between USD 140 billion and USD 300 billion annually, while global costs could reach USD 280 billion to USD 500 billion per year by 2050.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"clipolin-000083#insight-1","date_modified":"2026-08-17"},{"text":"Tracking and measuring adaptation finance is hindered by the lack of a standard reporting format for developed and developing countries. Challenges include a lack of agreement on what constitutes adaptation finance and the difficulty of distinguishing adaptation projects from standard development projects, as adaptation often involves mainstreaming resilience into general investment decisions.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"clipolin-000083#insight-2","date_modified":"2026-08-17"},{"text":"Investment in adaptation is slowed by three primary types of barriers: context barriers related to policy and institutional environments; business model barriers such as uncertainty over returns and high upfront technology costs; and internal capacity barriers that prevent service providers from operating at scale.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"clipolin-000083#insight-3","date_modified":"2026-08-17"},{"text":"To increase adaptation investment, the report suggests three strategic areas: increasing demand through policy reforms and risk disclosure; sustaining suppliers via data standards and public weather data; and de-risking investments through early-stage funding, soft loans, and direct investments in government assets.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"clipolin-000083#insight-4","date_modified":"2026-08-17"},{"text":"Developing country governments can drive adaptation finance by integrating adaptation into national planning, adopting climate risk disclosure best practices (such as TCFD), and analyzing the impact of climate risks on sovereign debt. Specific near-term actions include implementing mandatory disclosure requirements, supporting local catastrophe risk models, and utilizing resilient infrastructure bonds or regional insurance pools.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"clipolin-000083#insight-5","date_modified":"2026-08-17"}],"climate_tags":["climate adaptation","climate finance","developing countries","risk management","public-private investment"],"geography_discussed":[],"frame_perspective":[],"analysis_type":["Policy Analysis","Financial Analysis"]},{"id":"clipolin-000085","url":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/document/clipolin-000085","title":"Approaches to Assess the Additionality of Climate Investments: Findings from the Evaluation of the Climate Public Private Partnership Programme (CP3)","publisher":{"name":"Climate Policy Initiative","organization":"climate-policy-initiative"},"document_type":"research paper","language":"en","date_published":"2018-03-28","source_url":"https://www.climatepolicyinitiative.org/publication/approaches-to-assess-the-additionality-of-climate-investments-findings-from-the-evaluation-of-the-climate-public-private-partnership-programme-cp3/","generator":"Climate Insights Directory","generated_fields":["summary","key_insights","climate_tags","analysis_type"],"summary":{"text":"This research paper by the Climate Policy Initiative (CPI) outlines methodological approaches for assessing the additionality of climate investments, specifically drawing from the evaluation of the Climate Public Private Partnership (CP3) program. The paper proposes both a qualitative multi-criteria assessment (MCA) framework and a quantitative composite index to determine if investments represent a deviation from business-as-usual scenarios.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"clipolin-000085#summary","date_modified":"2026-08-17"},"key_insights":[{"text":"The Climate Public Private Partnership (CP3) is a GBP £130m program funded by the UK’s International Climate Finance that invests in climate-focused private equity funds in developing countries to demonstrate that such investments are both feasible and profitable.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"clipolin-000085#insight-1","date_modified":"2026-08-17"},{"text":"The paper proposes a methodological framework to assess additionality based on whether an investment deviates from a business-as-usual scenario, which is measured by analyzing the barriers overcome and the roles played in overcoming them.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"clipolin-000085#insight-2","date_modified":"2026-08-17"},{"text":"Additionality can be demonstrated through several mechanisms: crowding in private finance, improving a venture's access to finance, showcasing new business models or technologies to a market, and raising social and environmental standards.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"clipolin-000085#insight-3","date_modified":"2026-08-17"},{"text":"The assessment of additionality for CP3 utilizes two complementary methods: a qualitative multi-criteria assessment (MCA) framework using case studies for specific investments, and a quantitative composite index of the investment environment for portfolio-level assessments.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"clipolin-000085#insight-4","date_modified":"2026-08-17"},{"text":"Private equity funds are likely to target sectors and markets where investments are more likely to be additional due to their risk appetite and higher return expectations.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"clipolin-000085#insight-5","date_modified":"2026-08-17"}],"climate_tags":["climate finance","additionality","private equity","developing countries"],"geography_discussed":[],"frame_perspective":[],"analysis_type":["methodological framework","program evaluation"]},{"id":"clipolin-000235","url":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/document/clipolin-000235","title":"Lessons on the role of public finance in deploying geothermal energy in developing countries","publisher":{"name":"Climate Policy Initiative","organization":"climate-policy-initiative"},"document_type":"report","language":"en","date_published":"2015-08-20","source_url":"https://www.climatepolicyinitiative.org/publication/lessons-role-public-finance-deploying-geothermal-energy-developing-countries/","generator":"Climate Insights Directory","generated_fields":["summary","key_insights","climate_tags","geography_discussed","analysis_type"],"summary":{"text":"This report by the Climate Policy Initiative (CPI) analyzes the role of public finance in accelerating geothermal energy deployment in developing countries. Based on case studies from Turkey, Kenya, and Indonesia, the report demonstrates that public risk-mitigation measures can reduce the levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) and allow governments to achieve electricity generation goals while spending only 15-35% of the resources required for sole public ownership.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"clipolin-000235#summary","date_modified":"2026-08-17"},"key_insights":[{"text":"Public policy and finance measures that mitigate risks—including resource exploration, political instability, and currency fluctuation—along with access to lower-cost debt, reduced the levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) by 35-48% in the studied case studies. Without these measures, the private sector's requirement for higher returns could necessitate a tariff increase exceeding 60% if the private investor bore all risks.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"clipolin-000235#insight-1","date_modified":"2026-08-17"},{"text":"To reach deployment targets of 23GW by 2030 in developing countries, public finance for geothermal must increase 7-10 fold, rising from the current USD 7.4 billion to between USD 56-73 billion. This represents 42-55% of the estimated USD 133 billion in total additional financing required, primarily for exploration, drilling, steamfield development, and power plant construction.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"clipolin-000235#insight-2","date_modified":"2026-08-17"},{"text":"The report recommends that policymakers set ambitious deployment targets and utilize feed-in tariffs (FiTs) that balance private sector incentives with public costs. Additionally, it suggests implementing closed database systems for centralized data-sharing on geothermal resources to reduce exploration risks and prevent legal disputes over ownership.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"clipolin-000235#insight-3","date_modified":"2026-08-17"},{"text":"Development finance institutions (DFIs) are encouraged to increase concessional finance and grants, as concessional loans can lower power tariffs by up to 25% in countries with high debt costs. The report also suggests increasing the share of public finance allocated to the earliest, riskiest stages of project development from 11% to 17% and developing standardized political and partial-risk guarantees.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"clipolin-000235#insight-4","date_modified":"2026-08-17"},{"text":"Geothermal development in Indonesia has the potential to reduce emissions by 54MtCO2e per year. However, the report notes that carbon leakage risks should be considered in specific locations, such as Eastern Turkey, where geothermal fluids contain high levels of non-condensable gases.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"clipolin-000235#insight-5","date_modified":"2026-08-17"}],"climate_tags":["geothermal energy","public finance","developing countries","energy transition","risk mitigation"],"geography_discussed":["Turkey","Kenya","Indonesia","Papua New Guinea","East African Rift Valley"],"frame_perspective":[],"analysis_type":["Case study","Financial analysis","Policy recommendation"]},{"id":"cdkn-000429","url":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/document/cdkn-000429","title":"Risk-informed decision-making: An agenda for improving risk assessments under HFA2","publisher":{"name":"Climate and Development Knowledge Network","organization":"climate-and-development-knowledge-network"},"document_type":"guide","language":"en","date_published":"2014-04","source_url":"http://cdkn.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/CDKN-Guide_RiskAssessment_FINAL_WEB.pdf","generator":"Climate Insights Directory","generated_fields":["summary","key_insights","climate_tags","geography_discussed","analysis_type"],"summary":{"text":"This guide by the Climate and Development Knowledge Network (CDKN) examines the technical, operational, and institutional barriers that prevent disaster risk assessments from effectively informing public policy and investment decisions. Drawing on research from Latin America and the Caribbean, as well as case studies from Ghana, India, and Pakistan, the document provides a framework for improving the 'uptake' of risk information to support the successor to the Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA2).","ai_generated":true,"unit":"cdkn-000429#summary","date_modified":"2026-08-17"},"key_insights":[{"text":"Disaster risk is defined as the interaction of hazardous physical events with vulnerable social conditions, typically expressed by the equation: Risk = Hazard x Vulnerability x Exposure. Some modern studies expand this to include 'capacity', referring to social, political, environmental, and economic factors that help reduce risk.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"cdkn-000429#insight-1","date_modified":"2026-08-17"},{"text":"Technical obstacles to the use of risk assessments include a lack of conceptual clarity, where different practitioner communities (such as those in disaster risk management versus climate change adaptation) use key terms like 'hazard' and 'risk' differently. This is exemplified in Costa Rica, where separate communities make it difficult to quantify risk for planning processes.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"cdkn-000429#insight-2","date_modified":"2026-08-17"},{"text":"Operational barriers often stem from a communication gap between scientists and decision-makers. Technical results are frequently presented in formats or languages that are too complex for officials to integrate into management processes, leading some decision-makers to dismiss scientific evidence.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"cdkn-000429#insight-3","date_modified":"2026-08-17"},{"text":"Institutional obstacles include low political salience, where disaster risk and climate adaptation are viewed as separate from sectoral development agendas. Additionally, short political cycles (typically four to six years) conflict with the decadal timescales of climate change and geological hazards, making immediate action difficult.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"cdkn-000429#insight-4","date_modified":"2026-08-17"},{"text":"The guide identifies several 'enabling factors' for successful risk assessment uptake, including moving from a 'project' approach to a 'process' approach, engaging end-users in the design phase, and building local technical capacity to ensure assessments do not have a 'short shelf life'.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"cdkn-000429#insight-5","date_modified":"2026-08-17"},{"text":"To increase impact, risk assessments should be targeted at specific sectoral agendas rather than imposing an 'integral' approach from the outside. This allows risk management to be framed within existing national development priorities.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"cdkn-000429#insight-6","date_modified":"2026-08-17"},{"text":"Risk assessments often fail because they only focus on negative outcomes. The guide suggests balancing the analysis by including the potential benefits of taking risks for economic growth, using cost-benefit analysis to help decision-makers relate findings to development needs.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"cdkn-000429#insight-7","date_modified":"2026-08-17"},{"text":"Case studies in Pakistan highlight significant gaps in coordination and data, noting the absence of a national database for disaster risk information and a lack of communication between national, provincial, and district disaster management authorities.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"cdkn-000429#insight-8","date_modified":"2026-08-17"},{"text":"In Ahmedabad, India, extreme heat was identified as a 'quiet hazard' that remained invisible to policy-makers until a major event in 2010 provided heat- and mortality-correlated data, which subsequently prompted the creation of a Heat-Health Action Plan.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"cdkn-000429#insight-9","date_modified":"2026-08-17"}],"climate_tags":["climate change adaptation","disaster risk management","risk assessment","public policy","developing countries"],"geography_discussed":["Colombia","El Salvador","Dominican Republic","Costa Rica","Ecuador","Peru","Ghana","India","Pakistan","Ahmedabad"],"frame_perspective":[],"analysis_type":["Case Study","Policy Guide"]},{"id":"ciel-000805","url":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/document/ciel-000805","title":"techcoop_montreal_jun1991-6880dc1471060e20.pdf","publisher":{"name":"Center for International Environmental Law","organization":"center-for-international-environmental-law"},"document_type":"briefing","language":"en","date_published":null,"source_url":"https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/TechCoop_Montreal_Jun1991.pdf","generator":"Climate Insights Directory","generated_fields":["summary","key_insights","climate_tags","geography_discussed","analysis_type"],"summary":{"text":"This briefing describes the establishment, organizational structure, and financing of the Montreal Protocol Multilateral Fund, designed to provide financial and technical assistance to developing countries to phase out ozone-depleting substances.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ciel-000805#summary","date_modified":"2026-08-17"},"key_insights":[{"text":"The Montreal Protocol Multilateral Fund was established to provide financial and technical assistance, including technology transfer, to eligible developing countries to help them comply with the phaseout of ozone-depleting substances. Eligibility is limited to developing countries operating under Article 5, paragraph 1 of the Protocol, which requires an annual consumption of controlled substances below 0.3 kilograms per capita.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ciel-000805#insight-1","date_modified":"2026-08-17"},{"text":"The fund is managed by an Executive Committee and a Secretariat, with three primary implementing agencies: the World Bank manages the program for agreed incremental costs; UNEP acts as the 'treasurer' and handles clearinghouse functions; and UNDP provides technical assistance such as feasibility and pre-investment studies.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ciel-000805#insight-2","date_modified":"2026-08-17"},{"text":"Initial financing for the fund's first three years is set at $160 million, with a potential increase to $240 million if more countries join the Protocol. Contributions are based on the UN scale of assessments, though countries may receive credit for up to 20% of their assessment via bilateral assistance, and some may contribute in-kind.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ciel-000805#insight-3","date_modified":"2026-08-17"},{"text":"To access funding, Article 5 countries must develop country programs approved by the Executive Committee. These programs must include a review of controlled substance use, an institutional and policy framework description, a strategy for implementing the Protocol, and a budget and timetable.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ciel-000805#insight-4","date_modified":"2026-08-17"},{"text":"Project funding is prioritized based on cost-effectiveness, efficiency in reducing emissions, geographic balance, and the ease of technology transfer to other Article 5 countries. Technical assistance and pre-investment activities are provided as grants or in-kind support, while investment projects are generally grants but may be highly concessional loans with a 1-2 year payback period.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ciel-000805#insight-5","date_modified":"2026-08-17"},{"text":"The author identifies several potential barriers to the fund's success, including the reluctance of companies to license technology to developing countries due to intellectual property concerns, the fact that incremental cost categories exclude expenses for brand new facilities, and the requirement that industries apply through national governments rather than directly.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ciel-000805#insight-6","date_modified":"2026-08-17"}],"climate_tags":["ozone layer","technology transfer","multilateral fund","montreal protocol","developing countries"],"geography_discussed":["India","Egypt","Thailand","Soviet Union"],"frame_perspective":[],"analysis_type":["Policy Analysis","Institutional Description"]}]}