David vs Goliath- the case of climate finance

Rosie Rogers, WDM campaigner

While doing some research on my favourite climate financing body, the UN Adaptation Fund, I came across this quote by Farrukh Iqbal Khan, recent Chair of the Fund appealing to developed countries to contribute generously to the Adaptation Fund...

To date, we have received nearly 20 projects for financing. This shows that the demand for adaptation financing is enormous. However, the Adaptation Fund is constraint to remain cautious in its approach due to limited funds at its disposal.

It is a sad state of affairs that a fund for climate finance has to essentially beg for funding from the very countries that have caused climate change. And to add insult to injury, the Adaptation Fund was actually set up collaboratively at the UNFCCC climate talks in agreement with poor and rich countries alike.

Where is all the climate finance money going, you ask? The World Bank. That’s right, the UK government has chosen this notoriously undemocratic institution, which itself has massively contributed to climate change through it’s enforcement of neo-liberal policies across the global south. This is without mentioning the World Bank's continued and increasing fossil fuel lending, which WDM has long campaigned against.

Many of WDM members and friends have been writing in to the Secretary of State for International Development, Andrew Mitchell, to raise issues around our Send a Pound action. Over 1,500 pound coins have been sent to the Department for International Development (DfID) asking the Minister to forward the money to the UN Adaptation Fund. It is hoped that Mr. Mitchell will then follow suit in supporting this Fund as opposed to the World Bank. No such luck so far though.

In the standard responses from the Minister to our supporters, he states that:

The British Government is supportive of the Adaptation Fund. We are active members of the Adaptation Fund’s board and we welcome the progress that the Adaption Fund has made.”

That is all well and good, but so far the UK Government has still not given a single penny to the actual UN Adaptation Fund. They did give a start up loan to the Administrative Trust Fund, but this does not disperse any money to countries that have to adapt to and deal with the impacts of climate change.  What’s more, the UK has given this money as a loan and demands that the UN pays the money back!

In his craftily worded letter, the Minister then introduces the Pilot Programme for Climate Resilience (PPCR) which, in his opinion:

delivers something that no other existing fund or mechanism can - a strategic, programmatic approach to finance for adaption”.

Interestingly, this sounds a lot like the Adaptation Fund, yet there are two major points that the Minister has not made very clear.

1. The fact that the PPCR is governed by the World Bank. 

2. The strategic use of the word strategic.

The Minister refers to the PPCR as unique due to its ‘strategic’ approach; however, ‘strategic’ translates as top- down, donor led governance via the World Bank in which countries are hand picked for funding by the World Bank. This means that rich countries are able to decide whether to block or accept loan applications by poor countries based on their own political agendas. Also, countries that receive money from the PPCR are required to have an active World Bank programme already existing in their country. So essentially, by ‘strategic’, the Minister means ‘ruled by the rich’. 

Just a quick comparison; about 70 per cent of the Adaptation Fund’s governance is by countries from the global south, and has a bottom- up approach.  This means that countries can apply for grants (as opposed to the World Bank which disperses its money as grants and loans, may I add) safe in the knowledge that their applications are decided by a democratic process based on need and merit, as opposed to political manipulation.

The UK Government is currently deciding where to put the rest of its money dedicated to international climate finance over the next few years. So there is still time to show the government that we don’t want them to use our money to lock the poorest countries, who aren’t even responsible for the climate crisis anyway, further into poverty through World Bank loans.

If Andrew Mitchell means what he says about being “supportive” of the Adaptation Fund, it’s high time he put his money where his mouth is.

What you can do:

Join WDM and let the Minster know we won’t be silenced by taking part in our Send a Pound campaign. If you already have, ask your friends and family, school or church group, local transition town or whoever you think might want to be heard on this issue. You can email us [wdm@wdm.org.uk] and we will send you some of our action cards for the Minister.