Climate Finance Inflows into the Caribbean

Launch of the PANOS Caribbean Online Database & Its Establishment as a Regional Hub for Climate Change Information

Montego Bay, JamaicaJune 19-20, 2014

1

1. Pledges to climate funds in 2013 are 71% lower than they were in 2012 

2. Nearly sixty cents out of every dollar pledged has now been approved for viable projects.

3. Approved spending for mitigation in the entire developing world in 2013 was only slightly higher than Poland's annual spending on fossil fuel subsidies

4. Funding to reduce emissions from deforestation and degradation grew to a total of US$ 647 million in 2013, less than was spent on a single highway through the Amazon

5. Funding in response to German flood damage in 2013 was four times higher than the total sum of funding to help developing countries adapt to climate change since 2003

6. Public funding has not yet attracted as much private investment as expected: for every US$1 spent between 2010 and 12, only US$0.25 of private finance had been drawn in as of the beginning of 2012

7. Korea has pledged the most to the Green Climate Fund to date - US$ 40 million - ahead of all developed countries

8. Despite many meetings, we still don't know where Long-Term Finance - which is supposed to deliver US$ 100 billion by 2020 - will come from

9. Despite increasing austerity, Europe remains a leader on climate finance, providing 61% of total funds for multilateral finance to date

10. Total spending on Fast-Start Finance represents just 1.76% of global funding to respond to the 2008 financial crisisSource: Climate Finance Update

Source: Climate Funds Update

Source: Climate Funds Update

Challenges in tracking funds

Lack of data and varying metric for private vs. public flows Collective vs. individual reporting ($100 B commitment v. UNFCCC) Disbursements v. Commitments Double counting

Inflows into the Caribbean

Lessons from Fast Start Finance

Thematic Areas – Mitigation continues to be a priority

Bilateral vs Multilateral – UNFCCC Funds remain underutilized

Instruments – Less reliance on grant financing

Prioritization – SIDS, LDCs and Africa remain under- served

Green Climate Fund (GCF)

Created in 2010 at COP-16 in Cancun Governing Instrument was approved at

COP- 17 in Durban Governed and supervised by a 24 member

Board in Songdo, South Korea The World Bank is the Fund’s Interim

Trustee Its Operational Guidelines have just been

approved

GCF - The Structure Scale and Impact

To make a significant and ambitious contribution to the global efforts to combat climate change

To promote a paradigm shift and help developing countries transform their economies and put them on a low emission and climate-resilient path.

Expected to become the main global fund for climate finance Governance

An equal number of members from developed countries and developing countries including dedicated seats for SIDS and LDCs

Access Recipient countries will be able to utilize direct access or access through international and

regional intermediaries and implementing entities under the Fund Allocation

Minimum floor for adaptation financing to SIDS, LDCs, Africa and other vulnerable developing countries

The allocation of resources will be balanced between adaptation and mitigation activities

What prevents greater uptake? Donor focus on larger emerging economies

Burdensome access criteria Lack of capacity and in-country expertise Under-financing of regional priorities

(adaptation) High transaction costs Lack of understanding of SIDS issues at the

International level Absence of a voice in decision-making in key

international financial institutions

Sharon Lindoslindo@caribbeanclimate.bz

12