Regional implications of the AGF recommendations: Small Island Developing States

The document examines how the AGF's goal of mobilising US$100 billion annually can support SIDS, noting that while public grants are essential for adaptation, private capital can be leveraged for mitigation. It highlights risks such as the impact of international transport levies on trade and tourism, and the potential for non-LDC SIDS to be underserved by existing aid patterns.

• SIDS face significant climate exposure, with Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, and Suriname identified as among the most exposed countries globally. Adaptive capacity varies widely, ranging from very low in Guinea-Bissau and Haiti to high in Singapore.
• Annual adaptation costs for SIDS are estimated by the World Bank to be approximately US$3 billion by 2030, representing about 2.5% of their GDP. Roughly 75% of these funds are expected to be spent on coastal protection, with the rest primarily for agriculture and fisheries.
• Annual mitigation investment requirements for SIDS are estimated between US$2 billion and US$4.6 billion. While SIDS contribute only 0.6% of global emissions as of 2005, some have significant renewable potential, such as Fiji, which generates over 50% of its electricity from renewables, and the Maldives, which aims for a carbon-neutral energy sector by 2020.
• Adaptation funding for SIDS must primarily come from public grants because most projects, such as flood defences and land-use planning, do not generate private sector returns. Mitigation can attract private capital through carbon markets, though SIDS currently hold a very small share of the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) market.
• The AGF proposes three main public funding instruments: auctioning emission allowances or carbon taxes in developed countries (potentially US$30 billion annually), redirecting fossil fuel subsidies (US$10–15 billion annually), and carbon pricing of international transport (approximately US$10 billion annually).
• Proposed levies on international transport pose a risk to SIDS due to their high dependence on international trade and tourism. However, the document suggests that because SIDS account for less than 2% of global air passengers and less than 8% of container traffic, sufficient revenues could be raised to compensate them.
• There is a risk that climate finance disbursed through multilateral development banks or direct budgetary contributions will follow existing Official Development Assistance (ODA) patterns, which would disadvantage non-LDC SIDS. Non-LDC SIDS require about 3.4% of total global adaptation needs but receive only 1.7% of multilateral lending and 2.2% of ODA.

APA

Fankhauser, S., & Ward, J. (2010). Regional implications of the AGF recommendations: Small Island Developing States. Climate and Development Knowledge Network. http://cdkn.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/AGF-Implications-SIDS-CDKN-Special-Briefing-small1.pdf

Chicago

Fankhauser, Sam, and John Ward. Regional implications of the AGF recommendations: Small Island Developing States. Climate and Development Knowledge Network, 2010. http://cdkn.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/AGF-Implications-SIDS-CDKN-Special-Briefing-small1.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Fankhauser |first1=Sam |last2=Ward |first2=John |title=Regional implications of the AGF recommendations: Small Island Developing States |publisher=Climate and Development Knowledge Network |date=November 2010 |url=http://cdkn.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/AGF-Implications-SIDS-CDKN-Special-Briefing-small1.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{fankhauser2010regional, author = {Fankhauser, Sam and Ward, John}, title = {{Regional implications of the AGF recommendations: Small Island Developing States}}, institution = {Climate and Development Knowledge Network}, year = {2010}, month = nov, url = {http://cdkn.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/AGF-Implications-SIDS-CDKN-Special-Briefing-small1.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }