Finance for the adaptation of ecosystems to climate change: a review of the Adaptation Fund portfolio

The review finds that only 15% of Adaptation Fund commitments are ecosystem-related, with the vast majority focusing on human-centric ecosystem services rather than ecological resilience. Most interventions employ traditional restoration strategies at a small scale, failing to align with conservation literature that emphasizes landscape-scale adaptation and the protection of high-value biodiversity hotspots.

• Ecosystem-related activities represent a small fraction of the Adaptation Fund's total commitments, totaling approximately US$ 52.3 million, which is about 15% of the US$ 346.2 million committed across its first 53 projects.
• The primary objective of most ecosystem-related funding is to benefit humans rather than species; only about 4% of total allocated funding (US$ 15.04 million) is directed toward activities where ecosystem resilience is the primary goal.
• Most ecosystem interventions rely on traditional restoration and protection strategies rather than the 'adaptation' strategies recommended by conservation literature, such as improving connectivity or protecting climate refugia.
• Forests are the most common target for interventions, but these often consist of tree plantations for soil erosion or water supply rather than the restoration of complex ecological systems.
• Ecosystem interventions are frequently conducted on a miniscule physical scale, such as 50 hectares of forest in Nicaragua or a one-kilometre stretch of seagrass beds in Jamaica, which limits their benefit to biodiversity.
• There is no evidence that the Adaptation Fund's projects select ecosystems based on ecological criteria, such as biodiversity hotspots or the presence of endangered species; instead, they typically target already degraded environments.
• Project monitoring and evaluation frameworks largely ignore ecosystem quality, relying instead on quantitative metrics like the number of hectares planted rather than indicators of species survivability or overall ecosystem function.
• The authors argue that the UNFCCC should establish dedicated funding windows for ecosystem projects to prevent the marginalization of non-human species in country-driven adaptation agendas.

APA

Atteridge, A., & Tenggren, S. (2019). Finance for the adaptation of ecosystems to climate change: a review of the Adaptation Fund portfolio. Stockholm Environment Institute. https://www.sei.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/finance-for-the-adaptation-of-ecosystems-to-climate-change-adaptation-fund.pdf

Chicago

Atteridge, Aaron, and Sandra Tenggren. Finance for the adaptation of ecosystems to climate change: a review of the Adaptation Fund portfolio. Stockholm Environment Institute, 2019. https://www.sei.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/finance-for-the-adaptation-of-ecosystems-to-climate-change-adaptation-fund.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Atteridge |first1=Aaron |last2=Tenggren |first2=Sandra |title=Finance for the adaptation of ecosystems to climate change: a review of the Adaptation Fund portfolio |publisher=Stockholm Environment Institute |date=April 2019 |url=https://www.sei.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/finance-for-the-adaptation-of-ecosystems-to-climate-change-adaptation-fund.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{atteridge2019finance, author = {Atteridge, Aaron and Tenggren, Sandra}, title = {{Finance for the adaptation of ecosystems to climate change: a review of the Adaptation Fund portfolio}}, institution = {Stockholm Environment Institute}, year = {2019}, month = apr, url = {https://www.sei.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/finance-for-the-adaptation-of-ecosystems-to-climate-change-adaptation-fund.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }