This research examines the correlation between foreign direct investment (FDI), gross capital formation (GCF), financial development, and renewable energy consumption (REC). The research utilizes the CS-ARDL and NARDL estimates to identify a strong and statistically significant connection, both in the long-term and short-term, between Foreign Direct Investment (FDI), Gross Capital Formation (GCF), financial development, and Regional Economic Cooperation (REC). More precisely, a 10% alteration in Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) leads to a 1.545% augmentation in Research and Development Expenditure (REC) over an extended period of time, and a 0.735% boost in the immediate term. Likewise, favorable (unfavorable) advancements in foreign direct investment (FDI) hasten (diminish) the pace of economic growth in the long term. The analysis also demonstrates a strong and statistically significant relationship between GCF and REC, highlighting the advantageous impact of domestic capital creation on the integration of clean energy. Moreover, it reveals a favorable correlation between financial development and REC, indicating that the financial incentives enabled by financial development have a crucial impact on encouraging the use of renewable energy. These results are consistent with previous research and have important consequences for the connection between foreign direct investment (FDI), gross capital formation (GCF), financial development, and sustainable energy. Nonetheless, the study highlights the importance of taking into account the nature and caliber of foreign direct investment (FDI) inflows, the influence of fair and sustainable growth in the renewable energy sector on the environment and society, and the possible environmental and social consequences of renewable energy projects fueled by domestic capital expansion. Furthermore, it emphasizes the need of well-rounded policy frameworks and governance mechanisms to guarantee that foreign direct investment (FDI), green climate fund (GCF), and financial development effectively contribute to equitable and sustainable growth in the consumption of renewable energy. The study's findings offer valuable insights on how to effectively use foreign direct investment (FDI), global climate finance (GCF), and financial development to increase the use of renewable energy. However, it also emphasizes the importance of carefully evaluating the wider consequences and related factors in order to develop sustainable strategies for promoting renewable energy consumption.

Abstract The article analyzes the Floresta+ Amazônia pilot project, a Brazilian initiative associated with the UNFCCC and financed by the Green Climate Fund, as an example of a mechanism guided by the logic of neoliberal climate governance. The argument is that, in the context of neoliberal rationality, an economical and techno-managerial solution to forest conservation policy is presented as central to the struggle against climate change. The paper describes the characteristics of this rationality manifested in the project. To this end, it draws on critical literature on the REDD+ mechanism and neoliberal rationality, and describes Floresta+ Amazônia based on primary documentation, focusing on the analysis of its structure and processes, as well as on the discourses related to its form of implementation. Although the pilot project does not directly involve financial transactions, it inserts the actors involved - and the Amazon rainforest itself - into a technical-managerial logic that contributes to depoliticizing the process of defining possible projects for the territory.

The purpose of this study is to investigate climate financing practice in developing countries by following the systematic literature review process. Emerging scholarly and policy literature conclude that developing and small island Pacific countries are the most vulnerable in the world and similarly they have facing a big gap between the requirement of adaptation and mitigating financing and actual funds received by them. Developing countries are facing various problems such as Local level / beneficiaries’ participation & Green Climate Fund mobilization, unified reporting framework challenges, lack of effectiveness in Green Climate Fund (GCF) mobilization and transparency in mobilization, Governance, and policy focus, integrating disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation in theory and practice etc. By following the rigorous systematic literature review process, it found that these countries are trying to overcome from such problems which may country specific and some have similar to other countries. It is found that government, multilateral and bilateral funding is insufficient so that capacity building of the local communities and attracting of private investment in climate financing activities is crucial to the sustainability roadmap of the countries.

ABSTRACT Governments and international organizations are increasingly using public funds to mobilize and leverage private finance for climate projects in the Global South. An important international organization in the effort to mobilize the private sector for financing climate mitigation and adaptation in the Global South is the Green Climate Fund (GCF). The GCF was established under the UNFCCC in 2010 and is the world’s largest dedicated multilateral climate fund. The GCF differs from other intergovernmental institutions through its fund-wide inclusion of the private sector, ranging from project design and financing to project implementation. In this paper, we investigate private sector involvement in the GCF through a qualitative exploratory research approach. We ask two main questions: Do private sector projects deliver on their ambitious goals? What are the tensions, if any, between private sector engagement and other principles of the GCF (most importantly the principles of country ownership, mitigation/adaptation balance, transparency, and civil society participation)? This paper argues that private sector involvement does not provide an easy way out of the financial constraints of public climate financing. We show that the GCF fails to deliver on its ambitious goals in private sector engagement for a number of reasons. First, private sector interest in GCF projects is thus far underwhelming. Second, there are strong tradeoffs between private sector projects and the Global Partnership for Effective Development Co-operation (GPEDC) principles of country ownership, transparency, and civil society participation. Third, private sector involvement is creating a mitigation bias within the GCF portfolio. Fourth, while the private sector portfolio is good at channeling funds to particularly vulnerable countries, it does so mostly through large multi-country projects with weak country ownership. Fifth, there is a danger that private climate financing based on loans and equity might add to the debt burden of developing countries, destabilize financial markets, and further increase dependency on the Global North.

This study examines the practice of gender mainstreaming in the context of climate finance mobilisation. It reveals how financial institutions are adopting shifts to organisational strategy, policy, and practice that advance the integration of key aspects of social sciences. This article specifically examines the role played by the Green Climate Fund’s Gender Policy in promoting a shift in the organisational strategies developed by development finance institutions and commercial banks in southern Africa. It reveals how practitioners are grappling with the evolving role of financial intermediaries in promoting a shift towards low-emissions, climate-resilient, and just development. The analysis uncovers foundational components, highlights key lessons, and identifies strategic approaches to institutionalising gender mainstreaming practices. Critically, the research reveals that whilst gender mainstreaming involves multiple practicalities, the financial institutions that have most extensively institutionalised gender mainstreaming practices have done so by recognising its normative basis and have perpetuated changes to organisational values and culture alongside more pedestrian policy amendments. One of the critical aspects of this culture shift is the recognition that transformative social impacts in climate finance are predicated on the design and implementation of projects that account for existing gender-based vulnerabilities whilst also identifying and maximising opportunities for all genders. The study builds on and contributes new knowledge to existing frameworks for understanding gender mainstreaming in relation to multilateral climate finance.

Abstract Introduction The Green Climate Fund (GCF) is the largest public climate fund, it claims to use an innovative approach in climate adaptation actions, however, it has faced significant criticism since its inception. 2016-2025 is the Decade of Action on Nutrition and climate change's impact on food security is one of the biggest threats to human health. Current models predict that Africa will be the most affected continent. Food security is a polyhedric concept that requires definitions and indicators to acquire meaning and provide in-field applications. Methods Among the GCF's projects the ones that address the result area “health, food, and water security” in the African countries have been selected. The means of verification (MoV) has been searched in every funding proposal, simplified approval process, and other relevant documents, if not found, were requested to the Fund and local managers. Projects have been divided into ‘International’ or ‘Local’ based on GCF's definitions. The study also sought to identify the food security definition adopted by the Fund and reviewed available food security indicators. Results and discussion 21 projects, amounting to an investment of $887.2 million, met the criteria. National projects accounted for 17% of the investment, while international projects comprised the remaining $733 million. 7 of the 21 projects (circa 40% of the funds invested) did not provide measurable food security outcomes. The majority of the projects provided some measurable outcome but it is rarely possible to know how this will be measured, as only 3 projects, all from the World Food Program (WFP), declared their MoVs. The GCF seems to not adopt a clear definition of food security. The WFP's indicators, while validated for caloric adequacy, are not consistently validated for micronutrient deficiencies and other health outcomes. Conclusions Insufficient information on monitoring and evaluation may raise further concerns about the GCF's governance. Key messages • Food security is a poliedric concept that requires defintions and indicators to acquire meaning and provide in-field applications, evaluation processes are essential to detect real adaptation. • The Green Climate Fund is the largest public climate fund, it claims to use an innovative approach in climate adaptation actions but it seems to lack robust monitoring and evaluation processes.

The financing sector drives the Future of Environmental Funds to achieve climate financing. In this study, we have employed panel regression analysis and the generalized two-step moment method (GMM) for the 25 EU countries from 2000 to 2021 to explore the relationship between green financing and the portfolio structure of green climate funds. According to the findings of this research, green financing significantly impacts quality economic growth. The GCFs enhance the capacity to channel public and private funding while contributing to de-risking more conventional forms of funding, increasing climate financing, and boosting the GCFs. In addition, the study concluded that Global Climate Support might fund nonbankable components of more significant “almost bankable projects” by analyzing the portfolio’s policies and methods.

Public or stakeholder participation in environmental governance has been strongly advocated within the United Nations (UN) since the early 1990s. A relatively new mechanism for global climate finance that emphasises stakeholder engagement is the Green Climate Fund (GCF), a UN strategy for channelling funds from the Global North to the Global South. Drawing on previous critical approaches to multi-stakeholder involvement in global governance, this article explores stakeholder involvement within the GCF. The study combines ideas from institutional logics and resource dependency to provide a better understanding of how stakeholder arrangements are shaped in climate organisations. Results show that the GCF stakeholder arrangement favours private sector stakeholders – stakeholders that take a technical and apolitical approach to climate finance – and disfavours smaller, less resourceful stakeholders as well as those who perform a politicised watchdog function.

Over the last decade, Nature-based Solutions (NbS) for water management have gained traction as triple-win options for climate action due to their ability to address social, economic, and environmental challenges. Recent developments in the literature of NbS have resulted in a body of work addressing questions about knowledge and justice. In line with these developments, this paper proposes the Knowledge and Epistemic Injustice in NbS for Water Framework (KEIN Framework) to identify the production of epistemic injustices in the design of NbS for water management. The KEIN framework draws on questions about knowledge and power raised by Avelino and five mechanisms that lead to epistemic injustice based on work by Fricker and Byskov. We apply the framework to examine a proposal presented to the Green Climate Fund (GCF) that included both NbS for water management and Indigenous People in South America. Rather than being an analysis of the project or the GCF per se, the goal of this analysis is to demonstrate the utility of the framework to analyze proposals during the design stage. We argue that proposals submitted to the GCF are reflective of a broadly held international environmental logic. We also identify indications that knowledge was organized and treated in a way that favored external actors at the expense of local actors. Our analysis also revealed prejudices against people’s epistemic capacities, with potential implications for how the generation of local knowledge is adopted on the ground. The framework illustrates how the design of NbS may minimally disrupt power relations due to the influential role of some actors in generating knowledge. This study contributes to the operationalization of epistemic justice in designing NbS. Through the application of the proposed framework, the study contributes to future work advancing the construction of epistemically just NbS.

The importance of Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) has been elevated within the new climate framework outlined by the Paris Agreement, placing a significant emphasis on encouraging nations to adopt and promote REDD+ strategies. The success of REDD+ is highly dependent on financial resources that aid in addressing and mitigating the primary causes of deforestation and forest degradation. Furthermore, REDD+ projects utilize technology to counter challenges such as land-use changes for agriculture, infrastructure development, illegal logging, fuelwood collection, and forest fires. This study investigates the status of REDD+ projects, which are aimed at combating global deforestation and climate change, supported by the Climate Technology Center Network (CTCN) and the Green Climate Fund (GCF), both of which are critical mechanisms under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). We examined these projects through the lenses of technology convergence and finance blending. The analysis revealed that the CTCN and GCF predominantly support projects leveraging technology for forest disaster management. In addition, the agricultural sector demonstrated the highest degree of technology convergence. The findings indicate that a strategic approach for securing private funding involves integrating mitigation and adaptation efforts in projects. Furthermore, partnerships can facilitate the blending of financial strategies to mitigate risks. The study highlights the potential of technology convergence in enhancing the feasibility of scaling up REDD+ projects by promoting stakeholder engagement and catalyzing the private capital influx.

The article demonstrates that the Ger Plug-In, a housing prototype that combines the traditional Mongolian nomadic dwelling, or ger, with new construction, is a viable sustainable and affordable housing product that addresses urgent issues that have arisen from the growth of Ulaanbaatar’s ger districts. These settlements have no water supply, sewers or centralised heating, and households use coal and coke briquettes to heat their homes. The prototype provides the ger with electrical heating,, sanitation systems and improved thermal insulation. The pilot project was constructed in 2017 and on-site field measurements together with numerical simulation have been used to calculate its Energy Use Intensity (EUI). By using both quantitative and qualitative methods, the results show that the Ger Plug-In meets the EUI criteria to be eligible for green mortgages provided by the Green Climate Fund. Household surveys were conducted to ascertain the financial capacity of residents. By proving its qualification for low interest rate mortgages and by evidencing its market demand, the objective is to demonstrate that the product can have scalable impact for the 840,000 residents living in the ger districts.

Climate change is not a cliché anymore but a burning reality with far reaching consequences for the very survival of humankind and the nature. India on the one hand is the third largest carbon emitter and on the other hand is susceptible to the high risks of climate change, ranging from heat waves to cyclones and urban and rural displacements. Though India is a major recipient of international climate finance, it is proven to be more than insufficient to meet the climate change adaptations as per Paris Agreement. The present study analyses the challenges and prospects of India with respect to the Green Climate Fund and the imperative for developing its own paradigm of climate finance. KEY WORDS: Climate Change, Climate Finance, Green Climate Fund

ABSTRACT International climate finance institutions increasingly articulate their goals as catalyzing transformation, but can these institutions bring about deep structural change when they reflect the same liberal logics that arguably created the challenges they are designed to address? In this analysis, we use a virtual ethnography of Green Climate Fund (GCF) board meetings. We ask: how does the GCF navigate the tensions between different conceptualizations of transformation? Our sample included deliberations on 181 projects, and over 42 h of board meetings. Discussions were thematically coded to reveal concerns raised by board members and observers, followed by a structured content analysis. We found that while the transformational potential of proposals featured prominently in deliberations, there was no unified vision or clear definition of transformation. However, approaches that emphasized economic efficiency, technology and infrastructure, and market mechanisms and the private sector aligned with the liberal logic of the fund, while proposals that framed transformation in other ways faced more scrutiny. Board members and observers also raised concerns that proposals had the potential to increase vulnerability or cause harm. Despite this, almost all projects in our sample were approved, suggesting that more work is needed to expand beyond liberal understandings of transformation.

Adaptation is crucial for addressing current and future climate change challenges in Small Island Developing States (SIDS), and climate finance instruments, such as the Green Climate Fund (GCF) can play a key role in increasing their adaptive capacity and supporting the integration of adaptation into policy and programmes. Few studies have analysed the linkages between climate finance, adaptation mainstreaming, and institutional adaptive capacity; however, assessments of the impacts of climate finance on adaptation and adaptive capacity, particularly at the institutional level, are still limited. This research assesses how climate finance may promote institutional change through the mainstreaming of adaptation policies at the national level, and may contribute to more institutional adaptive capacity. Through reviewing the documentation of approved Green Climate Fund Readiness Preparatory Support Grants, and through semi-structured interviews focusing on three Caribbean SIDS (Antigua and Barbuda, Belize, and Haiti), this paper shows that the grants had a positive impact on several processes, though sometimes limited by the strength and role of the institutions in place. These results demonstrate that access to climate finance can create a window of opportunity for countries to accelerate institutional change and adaptation integration. However, further studies are needed to examine the complementary influence of the different climate finance flows (multilateral or bilateral), and their interplay with national institutional mechanisms.

Socio-ecological systems have increasingly faced climate-change impacts, which have adversely affected the lives and property of inhabitants. The present study aims to prioritize adaptation actions along an altitudinal gradient (<1200 m asl (Zone A), 1201–1800 m asl (Zone B), and >1801 m asl (Zone C)) in Pauri District, Uttarakhand. A cross-sectional survey research design was employed to prioritize adaptation action from 545 randomly selected households in 91 villages. A multi-disciplinary bottom-up indicator-based approach was applied to identify and normalize sectoral indicators, and PCA was used to prioritize sectoral indicators. Adaptation actions were designed with prioritized sectoral indicators along the altitude and stakeholder consultations. The prioritized indicators varied along the altitudinal gradient, and more than 50% of the indicators for the same sector were different along an altitudinal gradient. Sectoral adaptation planning along the altitude is pertinent in the mountain because they contribute to adaptation planning differently. Additionally, the mainstreaming of adaptation strategies with national and regional development measures is also required. Finally, cross-sectoral resource management that combines users, planners, scientists, and policymakers should be formulated along the altitude within the district. These findings contribute to minimizing the gap between policy/program fabrication and local requirements. The evidence-based valuable knowledge for decision-makers could enable Himalayan communities to adapt to the impacts of climate change effectively. Adaptation planning is also critical for designing adaptation projects for the Green Climate Fund, Adaptation Fund, and funds from multilateral and bilateral agencies. It will facilitate Nationally Determined Contributions, which aims to adapt better to climate change by enhancing investments in development programs in vulnerable sectors.

Building capacity of healthcare professionals and community members to address climate and health threats in The Bahamas: Analysis of a green climate fund pilot workshop

South Asia is the most vulnerable region in the context of global warming, climate change, and climate risk. Climate finance is the most useful tool for combating climate challenges worldwide. The study explores the present picture of climate finance in South Asian (SA) countries. The study uses multilateral development bank (MDB), Green Climate Fund (GCF), and Germanwatch supplied data from 2011 to 2021. Under the theoretical lens of institutional capacity development, the study attempts to correlate climate finance and climate risk. The study indicates an increasing trend of MBDs’ and the GCF’s climate finance in many countries worldwide. The study finds that MDBs’ total global climate finance is USD 446,977 million, while the SA region has received USD 59,301 million since 2011. It also reports that MDBs provide 77% and 23% of the money to the mitigation and adaptation areas. Moreover, the study reports that, after COVID-19, MDBs substantially increased the amount of global climate financing, but this increase was not seen in the SA region. Our climate risk data indicate that most of the SA countries are highly long-term climate risky and lose, on average, 0.378% of GDP. The correlation matrix finds a negative and significant correlation between climate finance and long-term and yearly climate risk. The study identifies that the region’s climate financing flow of money is not rationally distributed based on the short-run and long-run climate risks. The study presumes that more climate finance would be the most effective mechanism to mitigate climate risk. Therefore, SA region leadership drastically requires a holistic framework to address the prevailing climate problems and to ensure regional coordination and cooperation toward climate finance and policies. The research findings have significant implications for climate policy and climate finance.

Abstract Nature‐based solutions (NbS) can prevent further climate change and increase local communities' capacity to adapt to the current impacts of climate change. However, the benefits obtained from implementing NbS are not distributed equally across people. Thus, it is key to further understand how people are impacted when implementing NbS. We developed a multi‐objective prioritization approach to identify changes in (i) the biophysical provision of ecosystem services, (ii) optimal allocation of NbS and (iii) monetary benefits when targeting climate mitigation versus climate adaptation goals. We used the increase in metric tons of carbon storage as representative of climate mitigation and the decrease in on‐site and downstream tons of sediment per year as representative of climate adaptation. Planning strategies that target climate mitigation or climate adaptation goals separately represent a loss of between 30% and 60% of the maximum possible carbon sequestration or sediment retention benefits. Conversely, targeting climate mitigation and climate adaptation goals at the same time captured more than 90% of the maximum possible benefits for all objectives. Priority NbS in the mitigation planning strategy included soil and water conservation and forest rehabilitation, while priority NbS in the adaptation planning strategy included grassland rehabilitation and hill terrace improvement. Targeting mitigation and adaptation goals at the same time captures 35M USD (89% of the maximum attainable) in value of carbon restored and retained, and 2M USD (100% of the maximum attainable) of avoided maintenance costs to the KGA hydropower plant. Conversely, failing to incorporate adaptation goals when developing climate plans only captures 1M of avoided maintenance costs to the KGA hydropower plant. Our approach can be replicated in other locations to promote cost‐effective investments in NbS able to secure both global and local benefits to people. This can improve the outcomes of international climate change financial schemes like the Green Climate Fund and the UN‐REDD+ program. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.

ABSTRACT This study examines the state of integrated climate-security programming in the Green Climate Fund (GCF) and evaluates whether its operational activities and portfolio are conflict-sensitive and peace-responsive. Using a novel natural language processing method, the analysis draws on a comprehensive dataset of 1,704 documents published by the GCF from January 2012 to February 2023. The findings indicate that while the GCF adheres to conflict sensitivity principles, it falls short in implementing effective conflict governance practices. This oversight leads to the systematic underestimation of conflict risks, potentially exposing GCF projects to unforeseen operational challenges. On a positive note, the analysis also reveals signs of progress in integrated climate security programming in the GCF, primarily thanks to initiatives by the Board and Accredited Entities. Overall, this study offers novel insights into the work of the GCF that have potential practical implications for practitioners working in climate finance.

Abstract The governance of public climate finance for mitigation and adaptation in developing countries is fragmented on both the international and national levels, with a high diversity of actors with overlapping mandates, preferences, and areas of expertise. In the absence of one unifying actor or institution, coordination among actors has emerged as a response to this fragmentation. In this article, we study the coordination efforts of the two most important multilateral climate funds, the Climate Investment Funds (CIF) and the Green Climate Fund (GCF), on the global level as well as within two recipient countries, Kenya and Zambia. The CIF and the GCF are anchored within the World Bank and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, respectively, and represent two diverging perspectives on climate finance. We find that on both levels, coordination was depoliticized by treating it as a technical exercise, rendering invisible the political divergences among actors. The implications of this depoliticization are that both funds coordinate mainly with actors with similar preferences, and consequently, coordination did not achieve its objectives. The article contributes to the literatures on coordination, climate finance, and environmental governance by showing how a response to the fragmentation of climate governance did not overcome political fault lines but rather reinforced them.