Search Climate Insights Directory

This report, commissioned by the Climate and Development Knowledge Network and drafted by Dalberg Global Development Advisors, provides design options for the Green Climate Fund's (GCF) MSME Program. It identifies barriers preventing micro, small, and medium enterprises (MSMEs) in developing countries from accessing climate finance and proposes solutions across policy, knowledge, and financial product design. The report emphasizes the need for intermediaries to deliver finance efficiently and suggests a pilot phase to test these approaches before full-scale implementation.

A statement by a coalition of development, environment, and social justice organizations expressing disappointment and concern over the Green Climate Fund (GCF) Board's decision to accredit Deutsche Bank and other large financial institutions.

This policy brief analyzes the Green Climate Fund's (GCF) role as a primary financier for climate change adaptation in 2015. It outlines key tasks for the GCF to ensure effective, country-owned adaptation, including the scaling of direct access for national institutions, the piloting of 'enhanced direct access' through small grants, and the development of robust investment and accountability frameworks that avoid maladaptation.

This statement by Friends of the Earth International criticizes the lack of coherent rules and oversight regarding climate finance, specifically highlighting instances where developed nations use climate funds to finance coal-fired power plants in developing countries.

The CFAS Guide, published in November 2014 by the Climate and Development Knowledge Network, provides a technical synopsis of climate finance negotiations under the UNFCCC to support stakeholders participating in the 20th Conference of the Parties (COP20) in Lima, Peru. It details the status of long-term finance goals, the operationalization of the Green Climate Fund, the financial constraints of the Adaptation Fund, and the role of the Standing Committee on Finance in improving the measurement, reporting, and verification (MRV) of climate finance flows.

The CFAS Guide, published in November 2014 by the Climate and Development Knowledge Network, provides a comprehensive overview of climate finance negotiations leading up to the COP20 in Lima, Peru. It details the status of long-term finance goals, the operationalization of the Green Climate Fund, the challenges facing the Adaptation Fund, and the technical work of the Standing Committee on Finance regarding the monitoring, reporting, and verification of climate funds.

The CFAS Guide, published in November 2014 by the Climate and Development Knowledge Network, provides a comprehensive briefing for negotiators and stakeholders attending the 20th Conference of the Parties (COP20) in Lima, Peru. The document outlines the state of climate finance negotiations, focusing on the goal of mobilizing $100 billion annually by 2020, the operationalization of the Green Climate Fund (GCF), and the roles of the Standing Committee on Finance (SCF) and other financial mechanisms under the UNFCCC and the Kyoto Protocol.

This briefing by the World Resources Institute provides five sets of recommendations ('do's and don'ts') for the Board of the Green Climate Fund (GCF) as they finalize the Fund's operational design in Songdo, Korea. The document emphasizes that the GCF's operationalization is a critical step toward unlocking climate finance progress for the global climate agreement planned for COP 21 in 2015.

This briefing by the Climate Policy Initiative (CPI) examines design options for the Private Sector Facility (PSF) of the Green Climate Fund (GCF) to better mobilize private capital for climate mitigation and adaptation. It argues that addressing both policy and financing risks through innovative instruments is essential to closing the green financing gap.

WRI urges the Green Climate Fund to adopt a holistic and flexible approach to 'readiness' support. While acknowledging the GCF's initial $30 million focus on helping countries access the fund, WRI argues that long-term transformation requires addressing broader systemic barriers, such as policy development and financial capacity, and utilizing a diverse range of national and international institutions for implementation.

This guide, published by the Climate and Development Knowledge Network (CDKN) in November 2013, provides a synopsis of key climate finance discussions and deliverables for negotiators attending the 19th Conference of Parties (COP19) in Warsaw. It outlines the progress of the Work Programme on Long-Term Finance, the activities of the Standing Committee on Finance, the operationalization of the Green Climate Fund, and the financial challenges facing the Adaptation Fund.

This briefing by the World Resources Institute outlines five priority areas for the Green Climate Fund (GCF) Board to address during its fifth meeting in Paris to ensure the fund can effectively mobilize and distribute finance for low-carbon, climate-resilient development in developing countries.

This policy brief examines the mechanisms for direct access to the Green Climate Fund (GCF), distinguishing between 'direct access' and 'enhanced direct access'. It analyzes the experiences of the Adaptation Fund and the Global Environment Facility (GEF) to identify barriers for developing countries—particularly regarding fiduciary standards—and provides recommendations for the GCF Board to streamline accreditation and support country ownership.

This situation report by the Institute for Security Studies examines the mobilisation of private sector finance for climate change mitigation and adaptation, with a particular focus on developing countries and the role of the Green Climate Fund.

This policy brief outlines the context and objectives of the Fifth Review of the UNFCCC’s Financial Mechanism (FM), which was initiated at CoP18 in December 2012 and scheduled for conclusion by CoP20 in 2014. The document argues that the Review provides a critical opportunity to restructure the institutional architecture of climate finance, address past shortcomings of the Global Environment Facility (GEF), and integrate new entities like the Green Climate Fund (GCF) and the Standing Committee on Finance (SCF).

This policy brief by the Climate and Development Knowledge Network (CDKN) examines the challenges of mobilising and managing climate finance for developing countries. It emphasizes the need for a coordinated international architecture, the strengthening of national public finance management systems, and the creation of stable frameworks to attract private sector investment, which is expected to provide the bulk of necessary funding.

This policy brief examines how the Green Climate Fund (GCF) can achieve its objective of initiating a 'paradigm shift' towards low-emissions and climate-resilient development. It argues that such a shift requires moving from isolated projects to programmatic approaches, ensuring strong country ownership, and providing clear incentives for ambition in proposal design.

This case study examines the experiences of Jamaica and Senegal in accrediting National Implementing Entities (NIEs) to gain direct access to the Adaptation Fund, highlighting challenges in fiduciary management, institutional capacity, and the implications for future access to the Green Climate Fund.

This report by the Center for International Environmental Law argues for the integration of a human rights-based approach into the global climate finance architecture. It evaluates existing mechanisms—the Global Environment Facility (GEF), REDD+ initiatives, and the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM)—and provides detailed recommendations for the design of the UNFCCC's Green Climate Fund (GCF) to prevent social and environmental harm.

This research paper examines the challenges of using vulnerability as a criterion for allocating adaptation finance, noting that science alone cannot provide a single objective ranking. It analyzes the Global Climate Change Alliance (GCCA), the Pilot Program for Climate Resilience (PPCR), and the Adaptation Fund, finding that while all three use vulnerability for prioritization, their criteria vary and are influenced by political factors, presenting a continuing challenge for the Green Climate Fund (GCF).