Climate change adaptation finance: are the most vulnerable nations prioritised?

The study finds that adaptation finance is not consistently aligned with the Paris Agreement's goal of prioritising the most vulnerable nations. For bilateral donors, the relationship between vulnerability and both the probability of selection and the amount of finance allocated is concave, meaning that while vulnerability increases funding up to a point, the most vulnerable countries actually receive smaller allocations than their less vulnerable counterparts. Multilateral donors are found to be even less responsive to recipient need, although they do prioritise members of the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) in the allocation stage and the most vulnerable states specifically when providing 'principal-classified' finance.

• Bilateral donors exhibit a concave relationship between a recipient's vulnerability to climate change and the probability of that recipient being selected for adaptation finance. The probability of selection increases until the vulnerability index reaches approximately 0.45, after which it decreases.
• The most vulnerable nations are the least likely to be selected as recipients of adaptation finance by both bilateral and multilateral donors.
• Once selected, the most vulnerable countries receive smaller shares of bilateral adaptation finance budgets than less vulnerable countries. The largest budget shares are allocated to nations with a vulnerability rating of approximately 0.525.
• Multilateral donors generally do not prioritise the most vulnerable nations in their selection process, and the least vulnerable nations are approximately 15% more likely to be selected than the most vulnerable.
• Multilateral donors specifically prioritise members of the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) during the allocation stage, though AOSIS membership does not significantly increase the probability of being selected as a recipient.
• The only category of finance where multilateral donors are shown to prioritise the most vulnerable states is 'principal-classified' adaptation finance.
• Bilateral donors are strongly influenced by strategic self-interest, specifically prioritising former colonies and trade partners, and are less likely to select recipients that are geographically distant.
• Both bilateral and multilateral donors prioritise countries with higher 'governance readiness' (quality of government), suggesting a preference for recipients where finance is expected to be most effective.
• Bilateral donors are more responsive to recipient need (such as lower GDP per capita) in their selection process than multilateral donors.

APA

Saunders, N. (2019). Climate change adaptation finance: are the most vulnerable nations prioritised? Stockholm Environment Institute. https://www.sei.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/climate-change-adaptation-finance-are-the-most-vulnerable-nations-prioritised.pdf

Chicago

Saunders, Nicholas. Climate change adaptation finance: are the most vulnerable nations prioritised? Stockholm Environment Institute, 2019. https://www.sei.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/climate-change-adaptation-finance-are-the-most-vulnerable-nations-prioritised.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Saunders |first1=Nicholas |title=Climate change adaptation finance: are the most vulnerable nations prioritised? |publisher=Stockholm Environment Institute |date=April 2019 |url=https://www.sei.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/climate-change-adaptation-finance-are-the-most-vulnerable-nations-prioritised.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{saunders2019climate, author = {Saunders, Nicholas}, title = {{Climate change adaptation finance: are the most vulnerable nations prioritised?}}, institution = {Stockholm Environment Institute}, year = {2019}, month = apr, url = {https://www.sei.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/climate-change-adaptation-finance-are-the-most-vulnerable-nations-prioritised.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }