Financing EbA for Marine and Coastal Resources

The document examines the funding gap for marine and coastal ecosystem-based adaptation (EbA), specifically within the SADC region. It analyzes various financing streams—including national budgets, international bilateral and multilateral funds, philanthropy, and private capital—while highlighting the challenges of access to finance due to economic categorizations. The paper emphasizes blended finance solutions, such as blue bonds and debt-for-nature swaps, using the Seychelles as a primary case study, and discusses the emerging potential of blue carbon markets. It concludes that public funding remains the dominant source and recommends that SADC countries integrate EbA into their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and establish independent trust funds to ensure long-term sustainability.

• There is a significant global funding gap for marine conservation, with estimates ranging from $300 billion to $7 trillion, yet no established methodologies exist for calculating the specific costs of EbA action.
• Access to international concessional finance is hindered by economic categorizations based on per capita gross national income (GNI), which creates inequities for Small Island Developing States (SIDS) like Seychelles that are categorized as high-income despite their high climate vulnerability.
• Multilateral climate funds, including the Green Climate Fund (GCF) and Adaptation Fund (AF), provide a more predictable and sustainable alternative to bilateral funding, although they are often underfunded and characterized by complex, bureaucratic application processes.
• Blended finance, which leverages public funds to attract private capital, is viewed as a primary means to bridge the funding gap, exemplified by the Seychelles' use of a $21.6 million debt-for-nature swap and a $15 million sovereign blue bond.
• Blue carbon financing remains limited to small-scale pilot projects, such as the Mikoko Pamoja project in Kenya, due to market skepticism regarding the reliability of quantified blue carbon and nature-positive outcomes.
• Despite the emergence of private and blended finance, public sources remain the primary contributors to EbA funding, and many SADC countries have yet to include marine and coastal EbA in their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs).

APA

POUPONNEAU, A. (2023). Financing EbA for Marine and Coastal Resources. South African Institute of International Affairs. https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/OP-342-GCCA-Pouponneau-FINAL-WEB.pdf

Chicago

POUPONNEAU, ANGELIQUE. Financing EbA for Marine and Coastal Resources. South African Institute of International Affairs, 2023. https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/OP-342-GCCA-Pouponneau-FINAL-WEB.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=POUPONNEAU |first1=ANGELIQUE |title=Financing EbA for Marine and Coastal Resources |publisher=South African Institute of International Affairs |date=May 2023 |url=https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/OP-342-GCCA-Pouponneau-FINAL-WEB.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{pouponneau2023financing, author = {POUPONNEAU, ANGELIQUE}, title = {{Financing EbA for Marine and Coastal Resources}}, institution = {South African Institute of International Affairs}, year = {2023}, month = may, url = {https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/OP-342-GCCA-Pouponneau-FINAL-WEB.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }