At talks in Abu Dhabi today, the US and EU are pushing for the new loss and damage fund to be hosted by the World Bank.
As a board member of a fund hosted by the World Bank, I want to warn them. Being hosted by the World Bank is expensive and it erodes your independence and identity.
I’m the civil society representative on the board of the Global Partnership for Education (GPE), which channels around $5 billion of funding to education projects in low and lower-middle income countries.
The fund has been hosted by the World Bank for about 20 years. For over twelve of those years, there have been recurrent board discussions about moving the fund out of the World Bank and the board will discuss this again next month.
Expensive
The costs of being hosted by the World Bank are one of the most significant concerns. In recent years, the core administrative charge paid to the World Bank for hosting the GPE has been rising.
At one point, the bank charged 12% of the GPE’s income. A few years ago, this went up to 17% and then the bank tried to increase it to 24%. This provoked outrage from the GPE board who negotiated it down to 20.5%.
GPE are told this is an exceptional arrangement and that all other funds hosted by the World Bank are being charged 24%.
Rooftop solar panels offer fragile lifeline to besieged Gazans
If the loss and damage fund was to be hosted by the World Bank and if it was to get the $100 billion a year which developing countries are demanding, then $24 billion of this would go to the World Bank rather than addressing loss and damage.
This figure could go up at any time. Once you agree to be hosted, it seems the World Bank can change the rules and increase the levies.
One of the main reasons the World Bank’s fees are going up is because because of a wider financing crisis in the World Bank owing to the cost of its final salary pension scheme from the 1970s to 1990s.
In effect GPE funds, raised in the name of education, are paying for luxurious retirements for ex World Bank employees who left work before GPE was even created.
These direct costs are exacerbated by other costs. The GPE has to follow the excessive and hierarchical salary structure of the World Bank – with all staff being employees of the World Bank – and effectively having to pledge loyalty to the Bank.
The costs of having the main office in Washington DC are considerably higher than most other locations. The travel, security and insurance costs are also high – with most staff flying business class and staying in five-star hotels.
Not independent
In 2012, an independent review of the GPE’s hosting arrangements raised the problem of having a GPE secretariat serving two masters.
The GPE board is relatively democratic and it should be able to develop its own strategy, policies and procedures. Being hosted by the World Bank limits this.
When the GPE board agreed to expand the staffing of the GPE secretariat, this was directly blocked by the World Bank who had a recruitment freeze in place.
Movement mourns ‘driving force for climate justice’ Saleemul Huq
More broadly, being hosted by the World Bank ‘means operating within the business model of the host’ (as flagged in the 2012 review). This includes following very heavy procurement and recruitment processes.
While some see it as a benefit that funds can draw on the World Bank’s expertise, this is not always neutral and it often comes with a certain perspective and even ideological baggage.
For example, the GPE has a strong position about not supporting any for-profit education provision – but agreeing this position was difficult when the World Bank itself was supporting one of the most problematic for-profit actors.
Loss of identity
Being hosted by the World Bank takes away a fund’s identity it country level. Many see the GPE as just another World Bank project.
This seems to be a view also held by some World Bank country managers. One particularly problematic dimension of this is that when countries want World Bank funds for education, they are encouraged to use the GPE pot – displacing other funds for education.
Something similar could happen with loss and damage or wider climate finance. The World Bank could see itself as absolved of any wider responsibility if it takes on the loss and damage fund.
Indonesia delays coal closure plans after finance row with rich nations
It is not a surprise that the US and Europeans are keen to see the loss and damage fund hosted by the World Bank.
It would give them more control. It would fit within their business model and comfort zone for such structures.
But it would be a disaster from the point of view of effective action on loss and damage. We must avoid the mistakes made by the GPE.
David Archer is Action Aid’s head of programmes and the civil society representative on the board of the Global Partnership for Education.
The post Avoid our mistake: Don’t let World Bank host loss and damage fund appeared first on Climate Home News.
https://www.climatechangenews.com/2023/11/03/avoid-our-mistake-dont-let-world-bank-host-loss-and-damage-fund/
Climate Change
COP31’s electrification pledge wins support, with caveats on clean power and finance
More than a dozen countries, including Germany, South Korea, Pakistan and several small island states, have publicly backed the Turkish COP31 presidency’s flagship electrification pledge.
The voluntary pledge aims to raise electricity’s share of global final energy consumption to 35% by 2035, from 23% currently, but does not specify how that electricity should be generated.
The COP31 presidency is not expected to publish a full list of backers until next week, as it continues to rally support. But at least 14 countries have publicly endorsed the pledge, according to a Climate Home News analysis of speeches and official statements.
Alongside COP31 co-host Australia and COP32 host Ethiopia, they include Germany, Norway, Finland, South Korea, Pakistan, Zimbabwe, Eswatini, Togo and Liechtenstein, as well as the small island states of Palau, Seychelles and the Solomon Islands.
The European Union is widely expected to join the pledge this week, although member states still need to formally approve the decision, Politico reported. On Wednesday, President Ursula von der Leyen supported the pledge in her personal capacity and encouraged others to do the same.
Major economies still on the fence
Other major economies have welcomed COP31’s focus on electrification while stopping short of endorsing the pledge.
British Prime Minister Andy Burham said on Thursday that he was proud to support the summit’s focus on electrification. He said it matters for energy security, for creating good jobs in clean energy and manufacturing, and for lowering people’s bills.
Brazil’s environment minister João Paulo Capobianco ssaid on Thursday that electrification was “an important front” in climate action, but warned it should not be pursued “for the sake of it”. It should instead serve as a means of improving efficiency and cutting emissions. He said Brazil would work with the Turkish proposal and suggest adjustments to allow “specific solutions” that reduce emissions, without giving details.
Saudi Arabia was more openly sceptical. Energy minister Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman told the leaders’ summit that emissions reduction is “what unites us”, “not necessarily the track to achieving it”. “The expansion of electrification does not necessarily mean cutting emissions, so long as we do not consider the sources of its production,” he said, adding that countries’ choices must be respected.
Clean power strings attached
Many of the nations formally backing the initiative have attached some strings to their support. At a high-level roundtable on Wednesday, the low-lying Pacific island nation of Palau said it would sign on to the pledge. But it added that electrification “must not become a substitute or a distraction” from the chief goal of transitioning away from fossil fuels.
Seychelles also endorsed the pledge but added that it must be connected with cleaner electricity. “Electrifying more activities while continuing to burn fossil fuels will not deliver the full economic or climate benefits,” the country’s representative told the roundtable.


Australia’s climate and energy minister Chris Bowen, whose country is co-leading the pledge with Türkiye, has defended its design. “Electrification is almost always a good thing,” he told the Outrage and Optimism podcast recently. He argued that switching to an electric car cuts emissions by 60% even on a coal-fired grid, and by 90% when powered by solar.
Doug Arent, senior fellow at the WRI Polsky Center for the Global Energy Transition, said the most important thing “is that there is significant support for the concept of electrification”. He expects more countries to “recognise their pathway to be behind the 35 by 35” in the coming years.
Calls for finance
Other developing countries backing the pledge have underlined the critical importance of access to finance. Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif showed off his country’s people-led boom in rooftop solar and growing rollout of electric vehicles. But he added that “momentum without finance cannot be sustained,” and said the burden of new technologies cannot fall on countries already in debt.
Zimbabwe backed the pledge but warned of the high capital costs and financial bottlenecks facing developing countries. Its representative proposed a global electrification investment facility that would provide first-loss guarantees for projects under Mission 300, an initiative to connect 300 million people in Sub-Saharan Africa to electricity by 2030.
The Solomon Islands, another supporter of the pledge, asked for a dedicated finance access window for small island nations and least developed countries (LDCs).
Tuesday saw the launch of a global finance coalition backed by COP31 host Türkiye and COP32 host Ethiopia aimed at supporting clean electrification in developing countries.
Closing the roundtable, Türkiye’s energy minister Alparslan Bayraktar, who chaired the session, claimed the 35×35 pledge had found broad support worldwide. He called for a “smart” energy transition that draws on all available technologies, including carbon capture, use and storage.
The post COP31’s electrification pledge wins support, with caveats on clean power and finance appeared first on Climate Home News.
COP31’s electrification pledge wins support, with caveats on clean power and finance
Climate Change
Albanese must deliver credible action to end fossil fuel chokehold, not just rhetoric
ANTALYA,Türkiye, Thursday 12 November 2026 — In response to Prime Minister Albanese’s COP31 Leaders’ Summit address, Shiva Gounden, Head of Pacific at Greenpeace Australia Pacific, speaking from Antalya said:
“Prime Minister Albanese’s COP31 address was full of nice rhetoric, but once again failed to confront or even mention the root cause of the climate crisis — fossil fuels.
“In Antalya, UN climate chief Guterres told leaders to “tell the truth”. The truth is Australia can not credibly talk about its clean energy transition while continuing to expand the industry it needs to leave behind. Australia must reckon with reality; its damning track record of 38 coal and gas approvals since it took office in 2022.
“We meet in Antalya amidst a global energy shock and dire projections of 1.5°C overshoot. Overshoot means something in the Pacific — it means irreversible harm, lives and cultures lost forever, entire nations at stake. We must face the fierce urgency of now.
“Never before has the need to end the fossil fuel chokehold been so abundantly clear, as our Pacific communities again suffer the consequences of a global economy hooked on coal, oil and gas. The Pacific needs credible roadmaps and clear timelines to unhook from fossil fuels — Australia can’t keep saying implementation and not reflect it with credible action.”
ENDS
COP31 images and video available here in Greenpeace Media Library
Media contact: Kate O’Callaghan in Antalya (GMT+3) on +61 406 231 892 (Whatsapp/Signal)
Albanese must deliver credible action to end fossil fuel chokehold, not just rhetoric
Climate Change
COP31 Bulletin Day 4: Burnham speaks with UK climate policy under fire
A second set of world leaders give their speeches on Thursday before heading out of town and leaving their negotiators to it. After around 40 leaders spoke on Wednesday, today there will be just 25 or so including the UK’s Andy Burnham, Venezuela’s Delcy Rodriguez and Bangladesh’s Tarique Rahman.
But Brazil’s President Lula is still there and is expected to keep grabbing headlines, along with California’s Governor – and maybe next US president – Gavin Newsom – and Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg who has lost none of her star power, if the crowd around her in the press centre was anything to go by.
We’ll bring you highlights through the day on issues ranging from finance to methane, and update you on a pledging event for the Pacific Resilience Facility, which the climate-vulnerable region is relying on to keep small island nations as safe as possible in the face of intensifying storms, drought and sea level rise.

The post COP31 Bulletin Day 4: Burnham speaks with UK climate policy under fire appeared first on Climate Home News.
COP31 Bulletin Day 4: Burnham speaks with UK climate policy under fire
-
Climate Change1 year ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases1 year ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Renewable Energy1 year agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Greenhouse Gases1 year ago
嘉宾来稿:探究火山喷发如何影响气候预测
-
Climate Change2 years agoAnalysis: China’s CO2 falls 1% in Q2 2024 in first quarterly drop since Covid-19
-

