Summary

AI-generated

This summary is written by a language model reading the source document. It is not the publisher's words and is not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment

The report criticizes the Copenhagen Accord for promoting private finance and market mechanisms over binding public commitments. It highlights how investment banks like Barclays and Santander, and companies like Shell and Lafarge, use carbon trading and REDD projects to generate profit or 'greenwash' their images. The authors advocate for a transition to climate justice, proposing a 'Robin Hood Tax' on financial transactions and the replacement of REDD with UN-wide negotiations to stop deforestation.

Key insights

AI-generated

These insights are written by a language model reading the source document. They are not the publisher's words and are not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment
  • The Copenhagen Accord is criticized for removing binding emissions reduction commitments for Annex 1 countries and shifting the burden to developing nations, while setting a climate finance goal of US$100 billion per year that the authors describe as 'woefully inadequate'.
  • Annex 1 countries are accused of using public funds primarily to leverage private finance, which risks allowing profit-motivated companies and markets to dictate climate strategies rather than environmental needs.
  • Major financial institutions are aggressively entering carbon markets; Barclays Capital is identified as the most active trader in the global carbon emissions market, and Banco Santander has launched finance lines to purchase carbon credits in Brazil, Mexico, and Chile.
  • The report alleges that oil companies use REDD (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation) for 'greenwashing'. For example, Shell is investing in the Rimba Raya project in Indonesia, which is described as a 'for profit' project that may not directly benefit local communities.
  • The authors argue that the current REDD framework rewards those who deforest rather than those who protect forests and should be replaced by UN-wide negotiations focused on stopping unsustainable deforestation.
  • To fund climate justice, the report recommends alternative revenue sources including a 'Robin Hood Tax' (financial transaction tax) on international financial transactions, a levy on international flights, and the ending of fossil fuel subsidies to generate a minimum of US$200 billion annually.

Cite the original document

APA
Elosegui, J., & Valdomir, S. (2010). the abc of climate finance. Friends of the Earth International. https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/5210-foei-climate-finance-report-eng-07-mr.pdf
Chicago
Elosegui, José, and Sebastián Valdomir. the abc of climate finance. Friends of the Earth International, 2010. https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/5210-foei-climate-finance-report-eng-07-mr.pdf.
Wikipedia
{{cite report |last1=Elosegui |first1=José |last2=Valdomir |first2=Sebastián |title=the abc of climate finance |publisher=Friends of the Earth International |date=December 2010 |url=https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/5210-foei-climate-finance-report-eng-07-mr.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}
BibTeX
@techreport{elosegui2010abc, author = {Elosegui, José and Valdomir, Sebastián}, title = {{the abc of climate finance}}, institution = {Friends of the Earth International}, year = {2010}, month = dec, url = {https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/5210-foei-climate-finance-report-eng-07-mr.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }

Full text

Collected · Record updated