Capitalizing on Climate

This report by Friends of the Earth International critiques the World Bank's role in international climate finance, arguing that the institution's history of financing fossil fuels and deforestation contradicts its claims of leading climate mitigation and adaptation efforts.

• The World Bank is a major financier of fossil fuels, reaching a record high of $4.7 billion in annual fossil fuel lending as of April 2010, primarily targeting coal in middle-income countries. A notable example is a $3.75 billion loan approved in April 2010 for the South African utility Eskom to build the 4800 MW Medupi coal plant, which is expected to emit at least 25 million metric tons of carbon dioxide annually.
• The World Bank's accounting of energy finance is criticized for overstating clean energy contributions and understating fossil fuel lending. Between 2007 and 2009, the Bank spent $5.3 billion on new renewable energy and efficiency, but 40% of its claimed renewable energy finance over the previous six years actually came from carbon finance and the Global Environment Facility rather than the Bank's own funds.
• International carbon offsetting projects facilitated by the World Bank's Carbon Finance Unit are described as failing to deliver promised emissions cuts and sustainable development. The report cites an estimate that up to two-thirds of Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) projects do not represent actual emissions cuts, and a 2007 analysis showing only 1.6% of CDM credits benefited sustainable development.
• The World Bank is accused of financing forest destruction while simultaneously attempting to manage forest-related climate mitigation. This includes promoting destructive logging in the Democratic Republic of Congo and driving Amazon deforestation for cattle ranching. The Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF) is criticized for prioritizing carbon measurement for offsets over activities that actually reduce deforestation.
• The World Bank's Climate Investment Funds (CIFs) are viewed as tools for developed countries to maintain control over climate finance, undermining UNFCCC funds where countries have equal voices. For example, the US pledged $385 million to World Bank funds in 2010 compared to $50 million to UNFCCC funds. The CIFs' Pilot Program on Climate Resilience is noted to compete directly with the UNFCCC's Adaptation Fund and Least Developed Countries Fund.
• Developing countries, including the G77 and China, resist World Bank control of climate finance and propose a Global Climate Fund under the authority of the UNFCCC's Conference of Parties (COP). This alternative would allow direct access to funding for recipient countries and be governed by a board with a slight majority of developing countries, contrasting with the World Bank's donor-controlled 'one dollar equals one vote' system.

APA

Orenstein, K. (2010). Capitalizing on Climate. Friends of the Earth International. https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Capitalizing-on-Climate-FINAL-6-1-10.pdf

Chicago

Orenstein, Karen. Capitalizing on Climate. Friends of the Earth International, 2010. https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Capitalizing-on-Climate-FINAL-6-1-10.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Orenstein |first1=Karen |title=Capitalizing on Climate |publisher=Friends of the Earth International |date=June 2010 |url=https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Capitalizing-on-Climate-FINAL-6-1-10.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{orenstein2010capitalizing, author = {Orenstein, Karen}, title = {{Capitalizing on Climate}}, institution = {Friends of the Earth International}, year = {2010}, month = jun, url = {https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Capitalizing-on-Climate-FINAL-6-1-10.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }