OP27 in Sharm El-Sheikh proved to be a breakthrough for Global South countries most impacted by climate change. For three decades, they had been demanding compensation for loss and damage caused by climate disasters, to no avail. Rich countries finally agreed to establish a Loss and Damage (L&D) Fund to support Global South countries beyond climate adaptation and mitigation efforts. Following the initial excitement, questions have now focused on how this fund will be financed and managed, with recipient countries demanding the “new fund” not take away from existing adaptation and mitigation or development and humanitarian funding.
Against this backdrop, COP28 will be yet another defining moment. Important decisions about the fund and its setup will be made during COP28 based on the recommendations of a Transitional Committee.
The urgency to support countries most vulnerable to the impacts of climate disasters provides a unique window of opportunity to collectively design a climate finance architecture that promotes and protects citizens' voices, ensures participation, mainstreams transparency and social accountability, and prevents reprisals. We call this “green accountability” and it is a key to unlocking a more sustainable and just future for all of us.
Why Green Accountability?
The Loss and Damage Collaboration and the Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung have estimated that a minimum of $400 billion will be needed annually to finance loss and damage. For example, according to Pakistan’s climate minister, climate stress results in costs of about 9% of national GDP annually. Achieving the loss and damage target, and most importantly, ensuring it reaches the most vulnerable communities, will take a collective effort. However, the current discussion and action frameworks around climate finance are siloed, opaque, and unequal. Governments and multilateral institutions are focused on capital optimization, while civil society actors have called for more transparent, equitable, and accountable climate finance mechanisms to ensure funding reaches the targeted communities.
Green accountability provides a way forward and puts into practice what has been known for decades—that affected communities are best placed to identify and find solutions to their challenges. Green accountability can build sustainability and equity in several ways through inclusion, localization, effectiveness, and conflict prevention.
First, green accountability is the only way to bring historically marginalized communities into decision-making processes that affect them. The influx of vast funds quickly, especially in contexts already prone to weak governance, carries the risks of exclusion, corruption, and misallocation of funds. Evidence shows that emergencies, including natural disasters, increase the risk of diversion and misuse of public resources, slowing down disaster relief efforts and adding to the cost. Engaging local communities representing diverse local groups in the co-creation and oversight of projects will minimize such risks.
Second, green accountability ensures feedback loops between citizens and governments that can inform local priorities and provide oversight from the bottom up in ways that can build accountability over time. The context and community needs can change quickly when hit by climate disasters. For instance, during the 2022 flooding in Pakistan, community needs varied—from food to health and sanitation to information. Real-time feedback from communities and civil society can help with accurate needs assessments to deliver reliable information and target relief efforts. Green accountability mechanisms are especially relevant for such emergencies because they create a rapid feedback and adaptation platform.
Third, green accountability ensures the limited funds available for loss and damage are spent effectively with better outcomes. This can be achieved by supporting multi-stakeholder platforms across governance levels that communicate priorities and devolving climate finance down to the local level, where only 10% of climate finance is currently allocated. A pilot project for locally-led climate action is currently being implemented nationwide in Kenya in partnership with the World Bank. It could provide valuable lessons to scale up such initiatives in other countries.
Finally, regardless of the country setting, all climate projects are susceptible to risks of conflict. This risk mainly arises from differing perspectives about local priorities and strategies or unequal access to benefits. Such risk is higher for climate projects, as resources must be allocated as quickly as possible without the time needed to develop robust public finance management systems. Green accountability approaches can play a crucial role in helping to mitigate such conflict by providing channels for constructive engagement, voice, and agency led by civil society.
Never Too Late
The agreement to establish the L&D Fund shows that it is never too late for the global community to find consensus on contentious issues. Stakeholders still need to discuss and find agreements around some sticky points in follow-up conversations at COP28. Among other topics, the governance and management of the funds and whether there are systemic mechanisms to channel the voices of community and civil society meaningfully will determine the success or failure of the “historic win” from COP27.
Editors’ Note: This article was included in our COP 28 special edition, which was published on November 21, 2023, and which you can find here. All articles were written with that publication time frame in mind.
a global affairs media network
Green Accountability is the Missing Piece for Equitable Climate Finance
Photo by Mika Baumeister on Unsplash
December 5, 2023
One of the biggest points of progress from COP27 was the establishment of a Loss & Damage Fund to compensate the Global South for loss and damage related to climate disasters. Implementation is the next step, and green accountability is key to success here, writes Blair Glencorse.
C
OP27 in Sharm El-Sheikh proved to be a breakthrough for Global South countries most impacted by climate change. For three decades, they had been demanding compensation for loss and damage caused by climate disasters, to no avail. Rich countries finally agreed to establish a Loss and Damage (L&D) Fund to support Global South countries beyond climate adaptation and mitigation efforts. Following the initial excitement, questions have now focused on how this fund will be financed and managed, with recipient countries demanding the “new fund” not take away from existing adaptation and mitigation or development and humanitarian funding.
Against this backdrop, COP28 will be yet another defining moment. Important decisions about the fund and its setup will be made during COP28 based on the recommendations of a Transitional Committee.
The urgency to support countries most vulnerable to the impacts of climate disasters provides a unique window of opportunity to collectively design a climate finance architecture that promotes and protects citizens' voices, ensures participation, mainstreams transparency and social accountability, and prevents reprisals. We call this “green accountability” and it is a key to unlocking a more sustainable and just future for all of us.
Why Green Accountability?
The Loss and Damage Collaboration and the Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung have estimated that a minimum of $400 billion will be needed annually to finance loss and damage. For example, according to Pakistan’s climate minister, climate stress results in costs of about 9% of national GDP annually. Achieving the loss and damage target, and most importantly, ensuring it reaches the most vulnerable communities, will take a collective effort. However, the current discussion and action frameworks around climate finance are siloed, opaque, and unequal. Governments and multilateral institutions are focused on capital optimization, while civil society actors have called for more transparent, equitable, and accountable climate finance mechanisms to ensure funding reaches the targeted communities.
Green accountability provides a way forward and puts into practice what has been known for decades—that affected communities are best placed to identify and find solutions to their challenges. Green accountability can build sustainability and equity in several ways through inclusion, localization, effectiveness, and conflict prevention.
First, green accountability is the only way to bring historically marginalized communities into decision-making processes that affect them. The influx of vast funds quickly, especially in contexts already prone to weak governance, carries the risks of exclusion, corruption, and misallocation of funds. Evidence shows that emergencies, including natural disasters, increase the risk of diversion and misuse of public resources, slowing down disaster relief efforts and adding to the cost. Engaging local communities representing diverse local groups in the co-creation and oversight of projects will minimize such risks.
Second, green accountability ensures feedback loops between citizens and governments that can inform local priorities and provide oversight from the bottom up in ways that can build accountability over time. The context and community needs can change quickly when hit by climate disasters. For instance, during the 2022 flooding in Pakistan, community needs varied—from food to health and sanitation to information. Real-time feedback from communities and civil society can help with accurate needs assessments to deliver reliable information and target relief efforts. Green accountability mechanisms are especially relevant for such emergencies because they create a rapid feedback and adaptation platform.
Third, green accountability ensures the limited funds available for loss and damage are spent effectively with better outcomes. This can be achieved by supporting multi-stakeholder platforms across governance levels that communicate priorities and devolving climate finance down to the local level, where only 10% of climate finance is currently allocated. A pilot project for locally-led climate action is currently being implemented nationwide in Kenya in partnership with the World Bank. It could provide valuable lessons to scale up such initiatives in other countries.
Finally, regardless of the country setting, all climate projects are susceptible to risks of conflict. This risk mainly arises from differing perspectives about local priorities and strategies or unequal access to benefits. Such risk is higher for climate projects, as resources must be allocated as quickly as possible without the time needed to develop robust public finance management systems. Green accountability approaches can play a crucial role in helping to mitigate such conflict by providing channels for constructive engagement, voice, and agency led by civil society.
Never Too Late
The agreement to establish the L&D Fund shows that it is never too late for the global community to find consensus on contentious issues. Stakeholders still need to discuss and find agreements around some sticky points in follow-up conversations at COP28. Among other topics, the governance and management of the funds and whether there are systemic mechanisms to channel the voices of community and civil society meaningfully will determine the success or failure of the “historic win” from COP27.
Editors’ Note: This article was included in our COP 28 special edition, which was published on November 21, 2023, and which you can find here. All articles were written with that publication time frame in mind.
