COP 23 was one COP in two zones: The Bula zone was the site of the official negotiations - with little relevance to what happens in the real world. The Bonn zone hosted dozens of civil society kiosks and hundreds of events searching for real solutions.
What does a normative framing and a push for the gender-responsiveness of climate finance mean for the global climate finance architecture and the Green Climate Fund? A set of four new information briefs as part of an annual update of the Climate Finance Fundamentals (CFF) briefing series explores this relationship.
Heading into COP 23 in Bonn under a Fiji COP presidency, this Climate Finance Fundamental provides a snapshot of the operationalization and functions of the Fund. While the Fund’s role in a post-2020 climate regime as the major finance channel under the Convention was confirmed, the scale of its resourcing remains to be clarified post-Paris
This note outlines some key principles and actions for making climate-financing instruments more responsive to the needs of men and women as equal participants in decision-making and as beneficiaries of climate actions and supportive of gender equality more broadly.
This draft report sets out the key human rights risks associated with climate finance, the human rights responsibilities of State and private actors in the mobilization and administration of funding and the governance of funds and the current international architecture for climate finance.
The Convention, the Kyoto Protocol and follow-up agreements and decisions by the Conference of the Parties (COP) have laid out some of the key principles relevant to the financial interaction between developed and developing countries. The brief analyzes these principles and criteria.
The 23rd meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP 23) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change will convene from 6 to 17 November in Bonn, Germany. This article provides a short overview of key issues at stake and a summary of our expectations for COP 23.
The Green Climate Fund is important for implementing the Paris Agreement and for setting important standards for global climate finance. The financial viability of the fund, however, is by no means guaranteed.
With states, cities, and citizens willing to double down and move ahead with climate commitments, the global community can still count on many Americans’ willingness to act responsibly in support of global climate actions, even if their White House is not. Unfortunately, such activism will not make up for the failure of the Trump administration to make good on its international climate finance obligation.
With severe climate impacts for the most vulnerable countries on the rise, adaptation is no longer sufficient. Significant loss and damage must be accounted for. This discussion paper looks at how financing for loss and damage should be governed and what institutions, approaches and methodologies are necessary.