• Contact us
  • Tiếng Việt
    Our partners

    Last updated: 27/06/2013, 3:23 PM - View: 992
    CDKN releases two new policy briefs on the Green Climate Fund

    New reports from CDKN: improving & facilitating access to the GCF

    Enhancing Direct Access to the Green Climate Fund

    At the third meeting of the Green Climate Fund (GCF) Board in March 2013, Board members considered the different ways for developing countries to access funding. They agreed that “a country-driven approach is a core principle to build the business model of the Fund” and noted this as an area of convergence among its members. The forthcoming GCF Board meeting in Songdo, Korea, 26-28 June, will continue this discussion about the GCF’s design.

    Some Board members from developing countries argue that direct access to the GCF is one of the key structures for country ownership. Under direct access, national governments or their nominated national and subnational institutions receive international climate funds and disburse them to relevant projects. However, some developed country Board members argue that while direct access is important, it is one of several possible access modalities. The Board has noted that the GCF should: “commence as a fund that operates through accredited national, regional and international intermediaries and implementing entities,” which leaves all options for access modalities open – including a larger role for multilateral agencies, for example.

    A new policy brief on Enhancing Direct Access to the Green Climate Fund by the Frankfurt School, Germanwatch and ENDA Tiers Monde for CDKN contributes to the ongoing debate around access modalities for the GCF. In particular, the paper:

    • explains the terminology around 'direct access' and 'enhanced direct access', outlining the capacities needed at each institutional level to achieve direct access;
    • reviews recent experience of using the ‘direct access’ approach in international climate funds;
    • makes recommendations to the GCF Board on building blocks for the Fund’s design.

    Key messages include:

    • The Green Climate Fund (GCF) Board must put access modalities in place as soon as possible, so it can start disbursing funds. In the meantime, it could consider the conditional, interim accreditation of institutions that have been accredited by other climate funds.
    • The Board should learn from the experiences of others, particularly the Adaptation Fund and the Global Environment Facility (GEF), regarding how to provide developing countries with direct access to climate finance.
    • The Board should note some of the particular barriers to direct access in the past – for example, difficulties in achieving fiduciary standards – and the need to build developing countries’ capacity in these areas.
    • The degree of direct access to the GCF will also depend on each country’s ability to devolve decision-making power to the lowest effective level in its governance structure, at the national or subnational level.

    The full brief Enhancing Direct Access to the Green Climate Fund is now online.

    Local Actors Are Ready to Act: 6 Views on How the Green Climate Fund Could Reach Them

    Local adaptation efforts and the needs of those most vulnerable must be placed at the centre of the international response to climate change. The Green Climate Fund (GCF), in particular, should prioritise access of local (state and non-state) actors to available climate funds. That’s the key message from a new publication by the Netherlands-based NGO Both ENDS, co-sponsored by CDKN, called Local Actors Are Ready to Act: 6 Views on How the Green Climate Fund Could Reach Them.

    The report makes the case for developing an international climate finance system that supports adaptation and mitigation opportunities at city and subnational level, through essays by six climate leaders. By taking such a devolved financing approach, the authors argue, the nascent Green Climate Fund will rise to its mission to “provide simplified and improved access to funding, including direct access, basing its activities on a country-driven approach and encourage[ing] the involvement of relevant stakeholders, including vulnerable groups and addressing gender aspects.”

    As for local actors’ fiduciary standards - which critics often see as a stumbling block to allocating climate finance locally – these can be handled effectively. Danielle Hirsch, Both ENDS director, writes in the introduction: “ Past experiences show that local actors are capable of meeting common fiduciary standards, especially if funding agencies allow for capacity support of receiving organisations, to build trust.”

    The full report is now available on the CDKN website.

    ©2012 Climate Finance Options. All Rights Reserved.
    Developed by MPI-UNDP-WB Address: 6B Hoang Dieu street, Ba Dinh district, Ha Noi
    Contact: Ms Dieu Trinh: trinh4mpi@gmail.com
    Legal Information & Privacy Policy