Abstract

Readiness is the current mantra in the climate finance discourse and is a key determinant for accessing climate finance. This study develops and applies an analytical 3-dimensional framework to appraise climate finance readiness in selected Asia-Pacific countries. Three dimensions of readiness are identified: (1) Policies and Institutions, (2) Knowledge Management and Learning, and (3) Fiscal Policy Environment. Using the Climate Public Expenditure and Institutional Review as the basis for such framework, the study uncovers a massive readiness gap between countries in the Asian sub-region and those in the Pacific sub-region. The study also found that readiness has a predictable, yet small, impact on the magnitude of climate finance accessed. This suggests that improving readiness alone is not sufficient to unlock climate finance, as access to climate finance is to a larger extent determined by other factors; this is critical to shaping readiness endeavors for the Pacific Small Island Developing States (PSIDS), as well as for donors. This study argues for a re-think in the PSIDS current readiness approach, reducing emphasis on multilateral and private flows and diversifying through practical and uncomplicated bilateral and remittance sources. These two sources of finances have a good track record of consistently mobilizing external finance to PSIDS despite their climate finance readiness status. Broadening readiness efforts towards these two alternative funding sources extends the feasibility of the current readiness approach. The present direction of climate finance readiness offers a continuing access dilemma to many of the PSIDS, especially the poorest and most vulnerable.

Highlights

  • Access to climate finance remains an on-going negotiation issue within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)

  • Unlike other existing reporting platform, the Climate Public Expenditure and Institutional Review (CPEIR) is closely related to the issue of readiness, as it is specially designed to assess the existing national systems and processes of a country to access and manage climate finance

  • CPEIRs in Asia were undertaken by the UNDP, while those of the Pacific Small Island Developing States (PSIDS) were conducted by the Pacific Island Forum Secretariat (PIFS), a leading intergovernmental organization in the Pacific

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Access to climate finance remains an on-going negotiation issue within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). A global stocktake of climate finance sources indicated that there are more than 50 international public funds, 60 carbon markets, and 6000 private equity funds [4,5], as well as 99 multilateral and bilateral climate funds, currently in operation [6]. Such proliferation of climate finance sources is a blessing and a curse for poor and small vulnerable countries [7]. The increase in climate financing sources has triggered a race for readiness amongst developing countries as they compete to maximize access to, and leverage from, these varied opportunities

Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.