Search Climate Insights Directory

Climate finance in Brazil more than doubled between 2019 and 2023, reaching US$ 67.8 billion. The growth was primarily driven by solar energy and AFOLU (Agriculture, Forestry, and Other Land Use), with domestic sources accounting for 90% of total finance. While mitigation dominates the objective mix, finance for loss and damage saw an exponential increase in 2024, largely due to disaster relief following flooding in Rio Grande do Sul.

The document finds that DFIs are generally averse to letting national development plans shape their investment decisions, leading to underfunding in strategic sectors such as manufacturing in Ethiopia, healthcare and ICT in Ghana, and transport and ICT in Kenya. While DFIs contribute to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the Paris Agreement through clean energy investments, they often treat national agendas as risk factors rather than investment determinants. The authors propose a four-step framework—Identify, Compare, Engage, and Invest—to help DFIs better align their financial flows with country-level strategic sectors.

The report examines the alignment between DFI funding and national strategic priorities in Ethiopia, Ghana, and Kenya. It finds that while national plans are generally aligned with SDGs, DFIs often operate based on internal strategies rather than national plans. The analysis identifies specific sectoral gaps where DFIs could provide financial additionality, particularly in ICT and healthcare, and proposes a four-step framework for DFIs to better align investments with country-level strategic sectors.

Between 2010 and 2014, US$748 million in climate finance was committed to 15 Pacific SIDS, primarily as grants and delivered through bilateral channels. Adaptation received 59% of this funding, while 36% went to mitigation. The majority of support (86%) was project-based, with a strong focus on creating an 'enabling environment' for climate policy and planning.

The paper analyzes adaptation finance flows in four developing countries, finding that while governments are the primary recipients, there is a lack of transparency regarding target geographies and project details. It highlights a gap between the formal inclusion of local government in coordination and the actual participation of local stakeholders, while noting that equity and gender considerations are primarily donor-driven.

The Landscape of Climate Finance 2012 estimates that annual global climate finance flows averaged USD 364 billion in 2010/2011, with the private sector providing the majority of funding (USD 217-243 billion). While public finance acted as a catalyst and provided bilateral aid, the total flows remain significantly below the USD 1 trillion annual investment the International Energy Agency projects is necessary to limit global temperature rise to below two degrees Celsius. Mitigation activities, particularly renewable energy and energy efficiency, received the bulk of the funding, with China, Brazil, and India emerging as key recipients. Public intermediaries, including national development banks, played a pivotal role in distributing USD 77 billion and enabling riskier projects through concessional loans and grants.