Is the money allocated for climate adaptation enough?

HELLEN DAWO: In previous steps, we have looked at the definition of climate finance, sources of climate funds, and how climate funds are used. Now we will examine the amount of climate finance available. Let’s imagine we live on an island in the Pacific Ocean. Due to flooding and erosion, the government has put up concrete walls, boulders, and piles of vegetation to protect against storms and increasing sea levels. These plans have not worked and our island continues to be eroded into the ocean. Unfortunately, the government has no more funds to fight back. So what does the future hold for us in an ever-changing climate? This is the challenge that the residents of Majuro and other island populations face.

They need assistance in order to avoid the disastrous effects of global warming. How can they get this assistance? Well, in 2009 during a United Nations summit in Copenhagen, wealthier nations went against a proposal to directly compensate poorer nations for the effects of climate change. Instead, they pledged to contribute $100 billion annually to help these nations manage the effects of climate change. We are now more than 10 years later, and still there’s disagreement on the amount of money that should be contributed and the form of the contribution. The major contention is whether the funds should only be in the form of grants, or in the form of loans given to the countries in need.

This brings us back to the concept of climate finance justice. Remember the polluter pays principle that we talked about at the start of the week? It states that the one who contributes to pollution should pay for its effects. However, each country contributes to global warming, no matter how slightly. Climate finance justice is a term used for fair process which involves all relevant parties. The process is concerned with two issues. One issue is raising of adaptation funds according to the responsibility for climate impacts. The second issue is allocating these funds to the most vulnerable first.

The implementation of climate violence justice is difficult because it involves voluntary assignment of responsibility, usually to wealthier nations, and collective distribution of funds offered to poorer nations using set guidelines. Let’s go back to our island case of Majuro. Fortunately, they received funds from Pacific Resilience Project. This helped them to adapt to threats from erosion due to rising sea levels and flooding from storms. The case shows that progress is being made. Nevertheless, more needs to be done. The efforts to adapt to climate change go beyond transforming energy systems to include reforestation and transformation of transport systems, among other approaches. These efforts require funds. As it stands, the majority of climate funds do not cross borders.

It is spent by private investors in wealthier nations on projects such as renewable energy. Less-wealthy nations are still not for the effects of climate change. What makes the problem worse is that the projects that worsen climate change, such as coal plants, continue to be funded. Efforts are being made to increase funds for climate adaptation, however the progress has been slow. There are only partial commitments from governments and the public. This frame of mind needs to change rapidly so that more funding is available to adequately implement climate adaptation globally.