Financing adaptation to climate-driven agricultural risks in Zimbabwe

Background: Although the role of monitoring and evaluation (M&E) in enhancing evidence-based management in development work is increasingly recognised, M&E remains under-utilised as a vital tool in informing climate change mitigation and adaptation interventions in many developing countries. Practitioners in climate change mitigation and adaptation interventions are yet to exploit M&E to enhance effectiveness of their programmes.Objectives: This article underscores the critical role that M&E can and should play in enhancing effectiveness of climate change mitigation and adaptation interventions in developing countries. It provides a scholarly look at M&E and its visibility in climate change mitigation and adaptation work, the evidence of its role in mitigation and adaptation interventions across developing nations and the missing gaps in utilisation of M&E for mitigation and adaptation. This article presents key insights that practitioners need to design effective M&E systems for climate change mitigation and adaptation.Methods: The article was compiled based on Cooper’s stages of literature review 1984. A total of 15 peer-reviewed articles, a few eBooks and hard copy textbooks as well as reports from credible international organisations that met the inclusion criteria of focus, goal and coverage on M&E and climate change mitigation and adaptation were reviewed.Results: The findings show that M&E can be used as an effective tool for learning, informing evidence-based decision-making, promoting accountability and helping organisations to improve on climate change mitigation and adaptation interventions.Conclusion: M&E if well designed and implemented can be handy and useful in informing climate change mitigation and adaptation interventions.

PurposeThe Philippines is among the countries vulnerable to the adverse impacts of climate change. However, many local government units (LGUs) and the people themselves are not aware of the climate change phenomenon and do not have the capacity to undertake appropriate climate change adaptation measures. The purpose of this paper is to discuss the climate change adaptation strategies of communities and LGUs and the barriers and recommendations to enhance their adaptive capacity.Design/methodology/approachThe study covered five communities vulnerable to climate change impacts. Information on extreme climatic events and their impacts and adaptation strategies undertaken were gathered through focus group discussions (FGDs) and key informant interviews. LGU staff members were assisted in the preparation of their climate change adaptation plan (CCAP).FindingsThe LGUs and communities have low adaptive capacity and employed temporary adaptation strategies. Strong social cohesion and spontaneous collective action are factors that could enhance the communities' adaptive capacity. The pursuit of awareness raising and capacity building activities on climate change phenomena, alternative livelihood, preparedness and adaptation possibilities, technology and infrastructure development and collective action, which are critical adaptive capacity enhancement factors were laid‐out in the CCAP.Originality/valueThe paper presents the barriers that constrain the adaptive capacity of communities and LGUs, the recommended adaptive capacity enhancement measures to overcome these barriers and the highlights of the CCAP jointly prepared by the partner LGUs and scientists.

In the process of global climate finance, the perspective of climate justice, especially distributive justice, has received widespread attention. However, how this principle is implemented in the practice of climate finance is still a topic that deserves in-depth discussion. Accordingly, this study aims to empirically examine the impact of climate vulnerability on the just allocation of climate aid (including mitigation and adaptation) funds based on balanced panel data of 89 countries from 2010 to 2020. To better understand this relationship, asymmetry, the moderating effects of government quality and low-carbon technologies, and the threshold effect of financial development are also empirically tested. The empirical results confirm that there is justice in the allocation of climate aid funds. Specifically, countries with higher climate vulnerability tend to receive more mitigation and adaptation funds, with adaptation funds being more responsive. However, this relationship is not universal but asymmetric. In addition, we test the mechanisms behind it. The quality of government and low-carbon technology development can enhance the beneficial effects of climate vulnerability, but government quality can only have an effect on the just allocation of mitigation finance. We also find a single threshold effect of financial development in the allocation of mitigation finance. Climate vulnerability contributes more to improving the just allocation of mitigation finance when the level of financial development exceeds the threshold. Finally, we provide policy implications for donors and recipients, respectively.

Impact of climate vulnerability on the allocation of climate finance: global evidence.

The human Community in earth understood theemergency need to integrate forces to avert dangerous climate change. This requires mobilising financial resources from a wide range of sources, public and private, bilateral and multilateral, including alternative sources. This makes it increasingly important to track and report financial flows that support climate change mitigation and adaptation to create trust and accountability with regard to climate related investment. Climate Financing by Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs) comprising the African Development Bank (AFDB) the Asian Development Bank (ADB) the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) the European investment Bank (EIB) the inter-American Development Bank Group (IDBG) the world Bank (WB) and the International Finance Corporation (IFC). The vision of Paris agreement’s in financial flows consistent with low greenhouse gas emissions and climate- resilient development plays a significant role in the MDBs work to improve tracking and reporting. At COP 24 in December 2018 the MDBs reinforced their commitment to combating climate change presenting joint approach that will align their activities with the goals of the internationalagreement. Based on the increasing role of MDB Banks in Climate Financing to different regions and sectors this paper focuses on the objectives such as To study climate Financing of Multilateral Banks and its role in minimising global CO2 emissions, To find the share of Adaptation Financeto total climate finance and also to determine the share of different banks in total adaptation funding. Based on the share, the moving pattern of financing by each group of banks would be analysed, to study the share of adaptation finance to total investments of funds in different sectors. The moving pattern of financing in different regions and sectors would also be observed. In order to study the variations in total amount allotted, amount for adaptation and amount on mitigation, Bank wise, Region wise and sector wise would be analysed. Data are collected from secondary sources for the years 2011 to 2018 from the reports of Multilateral Development joint report on climate finance. Regression was used to study the variation in variables such as total climate finance given by MDBs, Finance to Adaptation and Mitigation, Region wise financial distribution and sector wise allocation. The result of the study found that MDB banks are more innovative enough to distribute climate finance to various regions and to various sectors by pooling finance from various sources. Finance is given to countries to implement Adaptation and Mitigation measures separately. Comparatively finance to Adaptation is less to Mitigation. To utilize the Climate Finance more effectively MDB banks have to follow the approach of synthesizing both Adaptation finance and Mitigation Finance.

The international community recognizes the need to join forces to avert dangerous climate change. This requires mobilizing financial resources from a wide range of sources, public and private, bilateral and multilateral, including alternative sources. This makes it increasingly necessary to track and report financial flows that support climate change mitigation and adaptation, to build trust and accountability with regard to climate finance commitments and monitor trends and progress in climate related investment. Yet there is currently no precise internationally definition of climate finance and current efforts to track climate finance lack transparency, comparability and comprehensiveness. This report sets out the joint MDB approach for adaptation finance reporting, developed by a group of MDBs to work towards better tracking of climate finance. It responds to the particular context of the activities that the MDBs carry out in developing and emerging economies and is built on the premise that climate adaptation and sustainable development are closely aligned. A separate report on mitigation finance is being published in parallel to this report. This harmonized methodology has emerged from a process to find commonalities between existing MDB approaches to adaptation finance, each reflecting a different set of sectoral, geographic and investment mandates. The joint approach is also a work in progress aimed at assisting the MDBs, as well as other organizations that might want to follow a similar approach, in gradually converging towards a harmonized approach for the tracking of climate change finance.

The role of the private sector in climate finance is increasingly emphasized in international political debates. Knowledge of private engagement in mitigating climate change and in more advanced economies is growing, but the evidence base for private-sector engagement in climate change adaptation in developing countries remains weak. Starting from the premise that the private sector's role in adaptation is often inevitable and potentially significant, this article first analyses the potential of private-sector engagement in adaptation and adaptation financing in developing countries by conceptualizing the private sector's roles and motivation therein. For further inquiry, and for a discussion based on a developing-country context, interviews were conducted with key stakeholders for adaptation of Zambia's agricultural sector, including on ways in which the government can incentivize private-sector engagement in adaptation.How much private-sector adaptation and adaptation finance can be identified depends on the interpretation of the concept of adaptation. Under a broad interpretation, the domestic private sector in particular can contribute substantially to adaptation, both directly and indirectly, through its investments and activities. However, the international private sector's role in financing adaptation should be analysed under a strict interpretation of adaptation and appears limited.Policy relevanceInternational political debates increasingly stress the importance of private climate finance, yet are constrained by vagueness around the private sector's role in adaptation finance. This article conceptualizes and scrutinizes private-sector engagement in adaptation and adaptation finance in developing countries. It concludes that the domestic private sector in particular can contribute substantially to adaptation in direct and indirect ways, and that domestic policies incentivize such contributions. However, international private financing of adaptation is more limited and its analysis requires a stricter interpretation of adaptation. Private-sector engagement in adaptation and adaptation finance can supplement, but not substitute for, public investments in adaptation. These limitations are particularly important when discussing private adaptation finance as part of the developed countries' pledge to mobilize US$100 billion of climate finance per annum from 2020 onwards.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper was to develop an integrated framework for assessing the flood risk and climate adaptation capacity of an urban area and its critical infrastructures to help address flood risk management issues and identify climate adaptation strategies.Design/methodology/approachUsing the January 2011 flood in the core suburbs of Brisbane City, Queensland, Australia, various spatial analytical tools (i.e. digital elevation modeling and urban morphological characterization with 3D analysis, spatial analysis with fuzzy logic, proximity analysis, line statistics, quadrat analysis, collect events analysis, spatial autocorrelation techniques with global Moran’s I and local Moran’s I, inverse distance weight method, and hot spot analysis) were implemented to transform and standardize hazard, vulnerability, and exposure indicating variables. The issue on the sufficiency of indicating variables was addressed using the topological cluster analysis of a two-dimension self-organizing neural network (SONN) structured with 100 neurons and trained by 200 epochs. Furthermore, the suitability of flood risk modeling was addressed by aggregating the indicating variables with weighted overlay and modified fuzzy gamma overlay operations using the Bayesian joint conditional probability weights. Variable weights were assigned to address the limitations of normative (equal weights) and deductive (expert judgment) approaches. Applying geographic information system (GIS) and appropriate equations, the flood risk and climate adaptation capacity indices of the study area were calculated and corresponding maps were generated.FindingsThe analyses showed that on the average, 36 (approximately 813 ha) and 14 per cent (approximately 316 ha) of the study area were exposed to very high flood risk and low adaptation capacity, respectively. In total, 93 per cent of the study area revealed negative adaptation capacity metrics (i.e. minimum of −23 to <0), which implies that the socio-economic resources in the area are not enough to increase climate resilience of the urban community (i.e. Brisbane City) and its critical infrastructures.Research limitations/implicationsWhile the framework in this study was obtained through a robust approach, the following are the research limitations and recommended for further examination: analyzing and incorporating the impacts of economic growth; population growth; technological advancement; climate and environmental disturbances; and climate change; and applying the framework in assessing the risks to natural environments such as in agricultural areas, forest protection and production areas, biodiversity conservation areas, natural heritage sites, watersheds or river basins, parks and recreation areas, coastal regions, etc.Practical implicationsThis study provides a tool for high level analyses and identifies adaptation strategies to enable urban communities and critical infrastructure industries to better prepare and mitigate future flood events. The disaster risk reduction measures and climate adaptation strategies to increase urban community and critical infrastructure resilience were identified in this study. These include mitigation on areas of low flood risk or very high climate adaptation capacity; mitigation to preparedness on areas of moderate flood risk and high climate adaptation capacity; mitigation to response on areas of high flood risk and moderate climate adaptation capacity; and mitigation to recovery on areas of very high flood risk and low climate adaptation capacity. The implications of integrating disaster risk reduction and climate adaptation strategies were further examined.Originality/valueThe newly developed spatially explicit analytical technique, identified in this study as the Flood Risk-Adaptation Capacity Index-Adaptation Strategies (FRACIAS) Linkage/Integrated Model, allows the integration of flood risk and climate adaptation assessments which had been treated separately in the past. By applying the FRACIAS linkage/integrated model in the context of flood risk and climate adaptation capacity assessments, the authors established a framework for enhancing measures and adaptation strategies to increase urban community and critical infrastructure resilience to flood risk and climate-related events.

Climate finance and peace—tackling the climate and humanitarian crisis

MotivationDespite global rhetoric to increase climate finance to civil society organizations and faith‐based organizations (CSOs‐FBOs), little is known about how accessible climate funds are for these organizations in the Pacific Islands.PurposeWe posed three broad questions: (1) what types of climate finance did CSOs and FBOs obtain? (2) what barriers did CSOs and FBOs face to obtain climate finance? and (3) what innovative approaches or solutions did CSOs and FBOs use to obtain climate finance?Methods and approachIn 2022, key informant interviews and focus group discussions were held in Fiji, led by House of Sarah; in Samoa, led by the Samoa Women's Association of Growers; and in Solomon Islands, led by the Coalition of Youths for Environmental Sustainability. Most CSOs and FBOs had fewer than 10 employees, with many relying on volunteers.FindingsCSOs and FBOs generally pursued funding aligned to their values, priorities, and needs. None of the organizations had obtained funds from the large multilaterals, such as Green Climate Funds and Adaptation Fund. Their funds were seen as poorly suited to local organizations. The main barriers to obtaining climate finance were: (1) poor dissemination of information on the availability and suitability of funding sources for CSOs and FBOs; (2) overly complex donor processes and requirements; (3) insufficient capacity to write grant proposals and to manage funds; (4) poor recognition by donors of the role of CSOs and FBOs in development; and (5) difficult relationships with national governments and donors marked by differences in power. To overcome some barriers, some CSOs and FBOs partnered with regional or global organizations with the capacity to absorb the administrative burden of writing proposals and managing grants. In other cases, CSOs and FBOs made use of professionals with experience of donors who volunteered their time to craft or edit proposals.Policy implicationsDonors can create or inhibit equitable access to climate funding. If donors are genuinely committed to helping CSOs‐FBOs obtain climate finance, they should reduce the complexity of grant‐making and tailor it to local contexts and priorities. They should also work through regional or national intermediaries to reach grassroots organizations.

There is rising interest among research and development practitioners to arrive at impact driven solutions in the field of gender and climate change adaptation. Climate change adaptation interventions can be better targeted by being linked with type of climatic risks experienced by women farmers, their social profile and their needs based on the role they play in agriculture. This study presents a methodology to identify hotspots where climate change adaptation and gender based interventions could be prioritized. The methodology is illustrated for India. The results suggest 36 hotspots across 10 states in India, where large number of women farmers are impacted by high levels of drought probability, excess rainfall and heat wave. The target population in these hotspots comprise 14.4% of the total women farmers in the country. A socioeconomic characterization of the hotspot population highlights barriers, such as labor, credit and market access for female cultivators and lower wage rates for female laborers in these hotspots. Based on the constraints as well as the climatic risks faced by these women in the hotspots, the potential of climate-smart agriculture technologies and practices are emphasized. Additionally, a comparison of current research being done in the field with the results of the study highlights the potential to learn from current efforts for efficient scalability of gender and climate change adaptation interventions.

Under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, international financial assistance is expected to support African and other developing countries as they prepare for and adapt to the impacts of climate change. The impact of this finance depends on how much finance is mobilized and where it is targeted. However, there has been no comprehensive quantitative mapping of adaptation-related finance flows to African countries to date. Here we track development finance principally targeting adaptation from bilateral and multilateral funders to Africa between 2014 and 2018. We find that the amounts of finance are well below the scale of investment needed for adaptation in Africa, which is a region with high vulnerability to climate change and low adaptation capacity. Finance targeting mitigation (US$30.6 billion) was almost double that for adaptation (US$16.5 billion). The relative share of each varies greatly among African countries. More adaptation-related finance was provided as loans (57%) than grants (42%) and half the adaptation finance has targeted just two sectors: agriculture; and water supply and sanitation. Disbursement ratios for adaptation in this period are 46%, much lower than for total development finance in Africa (at 96%). These are all problematic patterns for Africa, highlighting that more adaptation finance and targeted efforts are needed to ensure that financial commitments translate into meaningful change on the ground for African communities. Key policy insights Between 2014 and 2018, adaptation-related finance committed by bilateral and multilateral funders to African countries remained well below US$5.5 billion per year, or roughly US$5 per person per year; these amounts are well below the estimates of adaptation costs in Africa. Funders have not strategically targeted support for adaptation activities towards the most vulnerable to climate change African countries. Lessons from countries that have been more successful in accessing finance point to the value of more sophisticated domestic adaptation policies and plans; of alignment with priorities of the NDC; of meeting funding requirements of specific funders; and of the strategic use of climate funds by national planners. A low adaptation finance disbursement ratio in this period in Africa (at 46%) relates to barriers impeding the full implementation of adaptation projects: low grant to loan ratio; requirements for co-financing; rigid rules of climate funds; and inadequate programming capacity within many countries.

Implementing climate change adaptation and mitigation interventions at the local government levels in Tanzania: where do we start?

The paper assesses the usability of groundwater in climate change adaptation in Moshi rural district, Tanzania. It examines how groundwater is used as a climate change adaptation strategy as well as the strategy for boosting other adaptation strategies. Data for the study were gathered from five major sources; these include field observation, interviews, household questionnaires and focus group discussions (FGDs). It also reviewed various literature including weather-recorded data. The study found that groundwater is unsurpassed climate change adaptation in the area and it enhances other adaptation mechanisms like planting trees and irrigation. The use of groundwater has thrived to diminish water shortage in the area as a result it helps to increase water for domestic and sanitation usage. It also boosted water use range per person per day and decreased the distances walked by persons in obtaining domestic water. Despite these advantages, groundwater is neglected and less preferred in government planning, a snag that leads to poor groundwater usage and conservation. This paper concludes that, groundwater is among the best climate change options in Moshi rural district as it helped to cover water shortage between rainfall seasons in the area since the area was semi-arid. It provided daily water supply in the area for both agriculture and domestic use hence supporting people’s livelihood. Therefore, this paper recommends more research on contributions made by groundwater in climate change adaptation in semi arid regions in Tanzania. This will generate knowledge that can be used by planners in climate change adaptation since groundwater can help to evacuate people’s livelihood from climate change vulnerability.

As climate adaptation gains international prominence as one means for addressing climate change, it remains critical that just and equitable outcomes are maintained as adaptation technologies are deployed across various target populations. In this vein, subjectivity has been problematized by climate change adaptation scholars as a concept that needs further attention to understand the political nature of climate change adaptation. Extending frameworks of environmentality to cases of climate change adaptation, we engage the term adaptation subjects to distinguish individuals whose interests and desires align with broader understandings and goals of climate change adaptation. In this research, we situate the co-production of livelihoods and climate change adaptation interventions as projects of rule to understand subject-formation. Such an analysis allows for a move beyond econocentric framings of livelihoods that privilege material outcomes to also engage with the socio-political realities of these livelihoods and climate change adaptation more broadly. We apply the Livelihoods as Intimate Government approach to a case study of the Ada Sea Defense System in the Ada East District of the Volta River Delta of Ghana as a climate change adaptation project of rule, in order to illustrate the ways this adaptation technology discursively constructs (or not) different residents as adaptation subjects. Understanding the Ada Sea Defense System as a technology of adaptation constituted through socio-political practices has the potential to promote justice and equity when designing, implementing and evaluating such technologies in the future.