How to Strengthen the Institutional Architecture for Capacity Building to Support the Post-2020 Climate Regime

This research paper by the World Resources Institute examines the institutional architecture for capacity building under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). It argues that current efforts are too ad hoc and project-based, leaving developing countries with significant gaps in long-term organizational and institutional capacity. The authors propose that the post-2020 climate regime (specifically the Paris Agreement) should establish a formal 'capacity-building mechanism' and a long-term objective to ensure coherence, coordination, and sustained delivery of climate action capabilities.

• Developing countries continue to face significant capacity constraints that hinder climate action, driven by a lack of public awareness, fragmented information and research, and a deficiency in international support for long-term institutional capacity rather than short-term projects.
• The current UNFCCC institutional architecture is fragmented, with over 12 thematic bodies and operating entities performing capacity building without a centralized process to ensure coordination, coherence, or regular monitoring and review.
• The authors recommend that the new international climate agreement establish a specific long-term objective for capacity building to enable developing countries to implement adaptation and mitigation, develop and deploy technology, and absorb finance.
• The paper proposes the creation of a 'capacity-building mechanism' to serve as an umbrella framework. This mechanism would foster coordination among entities, monitor and review progress through robust data, identify resource gaps, and promote cooperation via networks of experts.
• To implement this mechanism, the authors suggest a work program starting at COP 21 in 2015 and concluding before 2020. This program would include surveying operating entities for gaps, analyzing country needs, and determining if new institutions are required or if existing bodies' mandates should be expanded.
• The paper identifies two primary options for the institutional role of coordination and review: either establishing a new dedicated body (such as a committee or expert panel) or designating existing bodies like the Consultative Group of Experts (CGE), the Standing Committee on Finance (SCF), or the Climate Technology Centre and Network (CTCN).

APA

World Resources Institute (n.d.). How to Strengthen the Institutional Architecture for Capacity Building to Support the Post-2020 Climate Regime. https://www.wri.org/research/how-strengthen-institutional-architecture-capacity-building-support-post-2020-climate

Chicago

World Resources Institute. How to Strengthen the Institutional Architecture for Capacity Building to Support the Post-2020 Climate Regime. n.d. https://www.wri.org/research/how-strengthen-institutional-architecture-capacity-building-support-post-2020-climate.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=World Resources Institute |title=How to Strengthen the Institutional Architecture for Capacity Building to Support the Post-2020 Climate Regime |url=https://www.wri.org/research/how-strengthen-institutional-architecture-capacity-building-support-post-2020-climate |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{worldresourcesinstitutendhow, author = {{World Resources Institute}}, title = {{How to Strengthen the Institutional Architecture for Capacity Building to Support the Post-2020 Climate Regime}}, institution = {World Resources Institute}, url = {https://www.wri.org/research/how-strengthen-institutional-architecture-capacity-building-support-post-2020-climate}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }