Connect with us

Published

on

Developing countries require hundreds of billions of dollars in investment every year to help them adapt to the rising threat of climate change.

Without this investment, more extreme floods, fires and hurricanes will place many more lives at risk and millions of people in the global south will be pushed into extreme poverty.

Yet, as it stands, there are major gaps in global adaptation finance.

In the new Adaptation Finance Gap Update, part of the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) Adaptation Gap Report 2023, we examine recent trends in adaptation funding.

Specifically, we focus on the flow of public adaptation funds from the governments of developed countries to developing countries, since the implementation of the Paris Agreement.

In this article, we identify three major gaps in adaptation finance and explain why these gaps have emerged even as nations commit to scaling up these funds.

Financial shortfall

Adaptation costs for developing countries are estimated at between $215bn and $387bn annually this decade, according to the latest Adaptation Finance Gap Update report.

Spending from the public funds of developed nations, while not the only source of adaptation finance, remains a crucial source, especially for low-income countries.

As it stands, people in the least developed countries (LDCs) and small-island states are often more exposed to climate hazards and more likely to be killed by climate-related disasters. This is despite the fact that these nations bear very little responsibility for causing climate change.

Under the Paris Agreement, developed countries agreed to achieve a balance in the amount of climate finance to adaptation and mitigation. However, far more funds have been channelled towards cutting emissions than preparing for climate impacts.

The commitments made by developed countries so far fall drastically short of the costs and needs expressed by developing countries.

Observed flows of public adaptation finance from these nations have been well below $30bn each year.

At the COP26 climate summit in Glasgow, developed countries pledged to double their adaptation finance contribution by 2025. However, as the chart below shows, progress towards this goal has fluctuated since the baseline year of 2019 (figures are not yet available for 2022 and 2023.)

Climate adaptation finance provided by developed countries must increase significantly to reach the 2025 goal.
Climate adaptation-specific finance commitments, $bn, from developed to developing countries per year for the period 2017-2021. Source: UNEP Adaptation Gap Report 2023. Chart by Carbon Brief.

In 2019, adaptation finance was estimated in our analysis at $19.2bn. To meet the commitment of doubling this amount by 2025, developed countries should aim to contribute at least $38.4bn per year toward developing countries.

However, a promising 31% increase in funding observed in 2020 was followed by a subsequent 15% decrease in 2021, complicating the path to achieving the target. It is noteworthy that while adaptation finance declined, finance for mitigation – that is, cutting emissions – continued to grow.

To reach the goal of doubling the finance, a consistent 16% average annual increase is required going forward.

Lack of local finance

Local organisations, people and communities are at the forefront of experiencing climate change impacts. Often, they are the most engaged and innovative in developing sustainable solutions to navigate these challenges.

Therefore, it is critical that these local entities are meaningfully involved in funded adaptation projects. However, there has been a lack of clarity on how much adaptation funding is intentionally directed to benefit local communities.

Our analysis provides comprehensive estimates of adaptation finance that mainly focuses on local communities, which cover both bilateral and multilateral sources.

Previous assessments have only covered dedicated climate funds such as the Green Climate Fund (GCF), the Adaptation Fund and the Global Environmental Facility (GEF). Despite their significance, these sources still only constitute a minor share – roughly 9% – of total public adaptation finance.

Our assessment reveals that less than 17% of total international public adaptation finance was allocated to projects with a specific focus on local communities.

Even though this represents an increase from a previous estimate of about 10%, it underscores a persistent and pressing need to increase financial support to local communities.

Struggling to reach the ground

Effective use of funds is essential to ensure that they serve their intended purpose, rather than inadvertently creating new challenges.

However, our research reveals that a significant portion of funding does not even reach its target.

Between 2017 to 2021, we estimate that only 66% of the allocated funds were successfully disbursed to their recipient countries. The remaining funds have not reached developing countries, for various reasons including project delays and lack of capacity.

In contrast, 98% of general development finance, covering other issues such as education and healthcare, was successfully disbursed within the same period.

This highlights the unique barriers in disbursing funds for adaptation projects. These include inadequate understanding of local markets during project planning, limited climate policy knowledge among decision-makers and bureaucratic delays in fund approval and disbursement.

The adaptation disbursement gap varies regionally. South Asia received merely 51% of allocated funds, whereas sub-Saharan Africa, home to most LDCs, had a higher disbursement ratio of 79%.

This discrepancy is likely due to sub-Saharan Africa receiving a higher amount of grants, which tend to have better disbursement ratios. 

South Asia has seen the lowest rates of adaptation finance disbursement
Disbursement ratios for bilateral, adaptation-specific finance globally and across different regions, 2017-2021. “Regional” finance represents finance for projects in multiple countries. Source: UNEP Adaptation Gap Report 2023.

It is essential to note that these figures predominantly represent data from bilateral sources, meaning funding provided country-to-country.

Comprehensive data on disbursements from multilateral organisations, including the World Bank and other development banks, remains limited. This is significant as most (61%) international public adaptation finance for the global south comes from these sources.

Moving forward

Our analysis shows that adaptation finance goes beyond being a single aggregate number and requires alignment with local situations.

It also indicates that a collaborative approach involving both finance providers and recipients is required to identify and solve existing gaps.

Bridging these gaps could drive a shift towards climate justice, wherein vulnerable, developing countries are not excessively burdened by climate change. Conversely, neglecting them could exacerbate loss and damage in those countries.

Negotiations at the upcoming COP28 in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) present an opportunity for world leaders to establish measures to address these gaps.

The post Guest post: Three major gaps in climate-adaptation finance for developing countries appeared first on Carbon Brief.

Guest post: Three major gaps in climate-adaptation finance for developing countries

Continue Reading

Climate Change

Corpus Christi Cuts Timeline to Disaster as Abbott Issues Emergency Orders

Published

on

The governor’s office said the city’s two main reservoirs could dry up by May, much sooner than previous timelines. But authorities still offer no plan for curtailment of water use.

City officials in Corpus Christi on Tuesday released modeling that showed emergency cuts to water demand could be required as soon as May as reservoir levels continue to decline.

Corpus Christi Cuts Timeline to Disaster as Abbott Issues Emergency Orders

Continue Reading

Climate Change

Middle East war is another wake-up call for fossil fuel-reliant food systems

Published

on

Lena Luig is the head of the International Agricultural Policy Division at the Heinrich Böll Foundation, a member of the Global Alliance for the Future of Food. Anna Lappé is the Executive Director of the Global Alliance for the Future of Food.

As toxic clouds loom over Tehran and Beirut from the US and Israel’s bombardment of oil depots and civilian infrastructure in the region’s ongoing war, the world is once again witnessing the not-so-subtle connections between conflict, hunger, food insecurity and the vulnerability of global food systems dependent on fossil fuels, dominated by a few powerful countries and corporations.

The conflict in Iran is having a huge impact on the world’s fertilizer supply. The Strait of Hormuz is a critical trade route in the region for nearly half of the global supply of urea, the main synthetic fertilizer derived from natural gas through the conversion of ammonia.

With the Strait impacted by Iran’s blockades, prices of urea have shot up by 35% since the war started, just as planting season starts in many parts of the world, putting millions of farmers and consumers at risk of increasing production costs and food price spikes, resulting in food insecurity, particularly for low-income households. The World Food Programme has projected that an extra 45 million people would be pushed ​into acute hunger because of rises in food, oil and shipping costs, if the war continues until June.

Pesticides and synthetic fertilizer leave system fragile

On the face of it, this looks like a supply chain issue, but at the core of this crisis lies a truth about many of our food systems around the world: the instability and injustice in the very design of systems so reliant on these fossil fuel inputs for our food.

At the Global Alliance, a strategic alliance of philanthropic foundations working to transform food systems, we have been documenting the fossil fuel-food nexus, raising alarm about the fragility of a system propped up by fossil fuels, with 15% of annual fossil fuel use going into food systems, in part because of high-cost, fossil fuel-based inputs like pesticides and synthetic fertilizer. The Heinrich Böll Foundation has also been flagging this threat consistently, most recently in the Pesticide Atlas and Soil Atlas compendia. 

We’ve seen this before: Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022 sparked global disruptions in fertilizer supply and food price volatility. As the conflict worsened, fertilizer prices spiked – as much from input companies capitalizing on the crisis for speculation as from real cost increases from production and transport – triggering a food price crisis around the world.

    Since then, fertilizer industry profit margins have continued to soar. In 2022, the largest nine fertilizer producers increased their profit margins by more than 35% compared to the year before—when fertilizer prices were already high. As Lena Bassermann and Dr. Gideon Tups underscore in the Heinrich Böll Foundation’s Soil Atlas, the global dependencies of nitrogen fertilizer impacted economies around the world, especially state budgets in already indebted and import-dependent economies, as well as farmers across Africa.

    Learning lessons from the war in Ukraine, many countries invested heavily in renewable energy and/or increased domestic oil production as a way to decrease dependency on foreign fossil fuels. But few took the same approach to reimagining domestic food systems and their food sovereignty.

    Agroecology as an alternative

    There is another way. Governments can adopt policy frameworks to encourage reductions in synthetic fertilizer and pesticide use, especially in regions that currently massively overuse nitrogen fertilizer. At the African Union fertilizer and Soil Health Summit in 2024, African leaders at least agreed that organic fertilizers should be subsidized as well, not only mineral fertilizers, but we can go farther in actively promoting agricultural pathways that reduce fossil fuel dependency. 

    In 2024, the Global Alliance organized dozens of philanthropies to call for a tenfold increase in investments to help farmers transition from fossil fuel dependency towards agroecological approaches that prioritize livelihoods, health, climate, and biodiversity.

    In our research, we detail the huge opportunity to repurpose harmful subsidies currently supporting inputs like synthetic fertilizer and pesticides towards locally-sourced bio-inputs and biofertilizer production. We know this works: There are powerful stories of hope and change from those who have made this transition, despite only receiving a fraction of the financing that industrial agriculture receives, with evidence of benefits from stable incomes and livelihoods to better health and climate outcomes.

    New summit in Colombia seeks to revive stalled UN talks on fossil fuel transition

    Inspiring examples abound: G-BIACK in Kenya is training farmers how to produce their own high-quality compost; start-ups like the Evola Company in Cambodia are producing both nutrient-rich organic fertilizer and protein-rich animal feed with black soldier fly farming; Sabon Sake in Ghana is enriching sugarcane bagasse – usually organic waste – with microbial agents and earthworms to turn it into a rich vermicompost.

    These efforts, grounded in ecosystems and tapping nature for soil fertility and to manage pest pressures, are just some of the countless examples around the world, tapping the skill and knowledge of millions of farmers. On a national and global policy level, the Agroecology Coalition, with 480+ members, including governments, civil society organizations, academic institutions, and philanthropic foundations, is supporting a transition toward agroecology, working with natural systems to produce abundant food, boost biodiversity, and foster community well-being.

    Fertilizer industry spins “clean” products

    We must also inoculate ourselves from the fertilizer industry’s public relations spin, which includes promoting the promise that their products can be produced without heavy reliance on fossil fuels. Despite experts debunking the viability of what the industry has dubbed “green hydrogen” or “green or clean ammonia”, the sector still promotes this narrative, arguing that these are produced with resource-intensive renewable energy or Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS), a costly and unreliable technology for reducing emissions.

    As we mourn this conflict’s senseless destruction and death, including hundreds of children, we also recognize that peace cannot mean a return to business-as-usual. We need to upend the systems that allow the richest and most powerful to have dominion over so much.

    This includes fighting for a food system that is based on genuine sovereignty and justice, free from dependency on fossil fuels, one that honors natural systems and puts power into the hands of communities and food producers themselves.

    The post Middle East war is another wake-up call for fossil fuel-reliant food systems appeared first on Climate Home News.

    Middle East war is another wake-up call for fossil fuel-reliant food systems

    Continue Reading

    Climate Change

    Are There Climate Fingerprints in Tornado Activity?

    Published

    on

    Parts of the Southern and Northeastern U.S. faced tornado threats this week. Scientists are trying to parse out the climate links in changing tornado activity.

    It’s been a weird few weeks for weather across the United States.

    Are There Climate Fingerprints in Tornado Activity?

    Continue Reading

    Trending

    Copyright © 2022 BreakingClimateChange.com