Search

Begin New Search Topic Climate Change Publishing Institution Center for Global Development (CGD)

11. Forest-Based Carbon Markets: Pitfalls and Opportunities

Author:
Julián Cárdenas and Juan Jose Guzman Ayala
Publication Date:
11-2023
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for Global Development (CGD)
Abstract:
Forest-based carbon markets could become an important source of income for countries in Africa, Latin America and Asia-Pacific. Estimates indicate that under a high carbon prices scenario, the value of the forest-based carbon credit market could increase from US$1.3 billion in 2021 to US$25 billion per year by 2030. Apart from the climate and monetary benefits, forest based carbon markets also have pitfalls that must be avoided. Without the right institutions in place, at the national and local level, forest projects can generate negative externalities, such as population displacement, increases in food prices, and biodiversity degradation. The value chain in carbon credits involves a number of high value-added upstream and downstream activities that tend to take place outside the countries where the projects are located. Industrial policies are required for host countries to receive a higher share of the revenue stream, including in areas such as structuring, monitoring, verification, and surveillance. Countries need to promote actions in labor training, research and development, and access to long-term capital. The paper proposes the creation National Carbon Federations as institutions to resolve several market failures, while preventing conflict, ensuring adequate savings of the additional income, and strengthen democratic governance. These organizations can also provide key public goods, so that local communities benefit from the development of carbon credits from tropical forests.
Topic:
Climate Change, Environment, Climate Finance, Forests, and Carbon Markets
Political Geography:
Latin America

12. Climate Finance Effectiveness: Six Challenging Trends

Author:
Beata Cichocka and Ian Mitchell
Publication Date:
12-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Global Development (CGD)
Abstract:
This paper identifies and explores a number of challenges in using international public climate finance effectively towards contributing to low-carbon and resilient growth in lower- and middle-income countries. We explore key quantitative and qualitative trends in the climate finance architecture, including predictability of disbursements, affordability and concessionality of funding, provider proliferation and project fragmentation, implementation via modalities supporting recipient ownership, and the degree to which climate-related interventions are evaluated. Our research considers these trends against globally agreed principles of development effectiveness, with the aim of improving understandings of both the common and the climate-specific challenges within development finance. Ultimately, we find that climate-related development finance faces a number of challenges relative to other official development flows, including significantly lower disbursement ratios, a higher share of finance provided through debt instruments—and a rising share of loans to lower-income countries assessed as being at high risk of debt distress, a faster pace in proliferation of providers and shrinking project sizes, and fewer efforts to systematically evaluate impacts of interventions. Each of these areas will need to be tackled by public climate finance providers to ensure that the available funding is used towards climate objectives effectively. These and other issues related to the quality of climate finance should also be considered during the design of the new quantitative climate finance target under the UNFCCC to ensure that the structure of the goal promotes accountability and increases recipients’ ability to trust in the climate finance architecture.
Topic:
Climate Change, Environment, International Cooperation, and Resilience
Political Geography:
Global Focus

13. Building a Portfolio of Pull Financing Mechanisms for Climate and Development

Author:
Ranil Dissanayake and Bernat Camps Adrogue
Publication Date:
11-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Global Development (CGD)
Abstract:
Pull financing is a powerful but underused mechanism for incentivising progress on hard-to-tackle social problems for which innovation or the take-up of innovation may be part of the solution. It should become part of the ongoing landscape for climate and development work. This paper sets out the specific design features for a portfolio of pull financing mechanisms to support the accelerated development of socially valuable innovations with both climate and development implications. It considers the institutional structure required to manage such a novel mechanism, a process for finding and developing a potential application, and the objectives pull financing should pursue. It then looks in detail at seven applications of pull financing in the climate and development space, each selected to illustrate the potential and challenges of the approach. We conclude by setting out how to construct a high-ambition portfolio of pull financing projects that is both tractable and attractive to potential funders.
Topic:
Climate Change, Development, Environment, and Finance
Political Geography:
Global Focus

14. The IMF, Africa, and Climate Change—Making Sense of an Implausible Trilogy

Author:
Daniel Citrin and Daouda Sembene
Publication Date:
06-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Global Development (CGD)
Abstract:
Evidence suggests that Africa is the most vulnerable continent to climate change. While African countries contribute relatively little to global emissions, they remain significantly vulnerable to the devastating economic effects of this phenomenon. This paper reviews IMF activities and explores how best the IMF could support efforts by African countries to cope with macroeconomic policy and structural challenges associated with climate change. To this end, while recognizing the relative significance of the overall IMF contribution to addressing this global challenge, we make several recommendations about potential ways to strengthen the role of IMF surveillance, capacity development and financing. First, IMF staff should ensure that policy advice in the context of global, regional and country surveillance fit specific circumstances and institutional capacity of African countries as well as their economic vulnerabilities to climate change. To enable timely response to climate-related crises, staff teams should also be prepared to provide advice on a flexible basis, without being tied to formal periodic work schedules. Additionally, the IMF could facilitate adaptation and mitigation by engaging in intensive outreach activities about the economic impact of climate change. Second, there is merit in developing comprehensive IMF capacity development strategies in close collaboration with the authorities in climate-vulnerable countries. For effective implementation, the IMF will need to identify and actively seek adequate financing for capacity development activities on climate issues. Finally, while the Resilience and Sustainability Trust (RST) is a welcome addition to the IMF toolkit and represents a potentially significant source of financing for some sub-Saharan African countries, specific amendments could be considered notably with a view to limiting the potential cost for low-income borrowers to access its resources. Moreover, successful operationalization of the RST hinges on careful and flexible design of conditionality and how programs under the new facility will be linked to concurrent upper-credit tranche programs.
Topic:
Climate Change, International Cooperation, Finance, and IMF
Political Geography:
Africa

15. Let Them Eat Carbon

Author:
Vijaya Ramachandran and Arthur Baker
Publication Date:
06-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Global Development (CGD)
Abstract:
The push for the World Bank and others to link their investments to addressing climate concerns stems from a fear that, unless developing countries take action to decarbonize now, their economic growth will lead to vast emissions that will derail all global efforts to limit climate change. This approach, which treats low- and middle-income countries as a monolith, is unhelpful to the conversation about climate change. To understand better where emissions are concentrated and how to address them, we projected carbon dioxide emissions to 2035—the point at which observers believe they will level off in most countries due to technological advances and accumulating wealth—under some simple assumptions. Emissions from the world’s poorest 64 countries, those which get IDA loans, will remain very low for decades to come, even if their economies grow rapidly and without action to reduce emissions. Pressuring low- and lower-middle-income countries to replace plans for gas power with solar or wind energy will have limited climate benefits compared to replacing coal generation in richer countries. It is just more efficient—and just—to focus on climate mitigation where emissions are high, and on poverty reduction where poverty is high. And given that there is no sign of an increase in aid spending, especially in the poorest countries, rich countries must not cannibalize development aid or reinvent the development finance architecture
Topic:
Climate Change, Environment, World Bank, Finance, Banking, and Green Transition
Political Geography:
Global Focus

16. Greening the US Sovereign Bond Guarantee Program: A Proposal to Boost Climate-Directed Sovereign Finance in Developing Countries

Author:
Scott Morris, Rowan Rockafellow, and Alan Cameron
Publication Date:
02-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Global Development (CGD)
Abstract:
Sovereign bond guarantees (SBGs) are an effective but underutilized instrument available to the US government in support of developing country partners. By protecting bond purchasers in the event of a foreign issuer country’s default, SBGs substantially reduce borrowing costs for developing country governments. In this CGD policy paper, we estimate the costs and benefits of historical US sovereign bond guarantees in order to model the use of SBGs for climate finance purposes. We demonstrate that the US government-provided SBG has the effect of conferring the US government’s cost of borrowing on the partner government. On that basis, it represents substantial savings for these countries. Based on this analysis, we propose a $20 billion “Green” SBG program aimed at financing climate change mitigation efforts in 28 emerging market economies. We estimate that the US government could support $20 billion in bond issuances through a subsidy outlay of $2 billion, resulting in a 22 percent reduction in borrowing cost of the target countries, which represents $4 billion in budgetary saving for their governments. We propose that the subsidy appropriations in support of the guarantees be retained and recycled within the Green SBG program, which would substantially improve the financial leverage of the program over time. We also suggest that the program could be used for climate adaptation purposes by targeting a different group of developing countries
Topic:
Climate Change, Development, Finance, Sustainability, and Green Transition
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

17. Strengthening Regional Policy Frameworks to Better Respond to Environmental Migration: Recommendations for the UK Government

Author:
Amelia Dal Pra, Mariam Traore Chazalnoel, and Helen Dempster
Publication Date:
12-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Global Development (CGD)
Abstract:
The Bay of Bengal, the Sahel, and Small Island Developing States (SIDS) are especially vulnerable to the impacts of slow-onset climate events resulting from climate change. Global temperature warming is leading to a dramatic rise in sea levels, which will lead to coastal erosion and land loss across SIDS and the Bay of Bengal. Such warming will also contribute to increasing desertification and water scarcity issues in the Sahel. This environmental damage is irreversible and may seriously threaten economies as well as the daily lives of communities. Without strong policy interventions to bolster in-situ resiliency and increase climate change adaptation and mitigation, including migration, the regions most vulnerable to climate impacts might experience major human security and security crises. This paper provides an analysis of some of relevant regional frameworks that could be useful in addressing environmental migration across these three regions. It concludes that high-income countries such as the UK should do two things: provide financial and technical support to bolster climate adaptation in regions uniquely vulnerable to slow-onset climate events; and support the establishment and / or implementation of regional migration frameworks and free movement agreements (FMAs) that can potentially offer safe, orderly, and regular migration pathways to those affected by the impacts of slow-onset climate events.
Topic:
Climate Change, Environment, Regional Cooperation, and Regionalism
Political Geography:
Global Focus

18. Who’s Responsible for Climate Change? New Evidence Based on Country-Level Estimates of Climate Debt

Author:
Benedict Clements, Sanjeev Gupta, and Jianhong Liu
Publication Date:
11-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Global Development (CGD)
Abstract:
In this paper, we introduce the concept of climate debt and provide country-level estimates through 2035 under a business-as-usual scenario. These estimates can help inform the debate on climate change by providing a clear view of which countries have (until the present) contributed the most to climate change, as well as the likely path for climate debt by country over the next 15 years. We then discuss the implications for carbon emissions if the G-20 countries and EU were to adopt either of the two policy options proposed in recent months: the first by President Biden for the US and the other by the EU for its member countries. The implications for fiscal policy are that beyond the need to keep public debt at sustainable levels, countries will also need to allocate funds for expected increases in pension and health spending associated with aging populations. As a result, there may be little room for new expenditures (such as green infrastructure or subsidies for clean energy) to reduce the growth of climate debt. Countries could turn to the revenue side, in particular greater taxation of energy with carbon taxes. This would have the advantage of reducing emissions while also helping countries to fund spending on green infrastructure.
Topic:
Climate Change, Energy Policy, Environment, Humanitarian Response, and Green Transition
Political Geography:
Global Focus

19. Navigating the Straits: Pull Financing for Climate and Development Outcomes

Author:
Ranil Dissanayake
Publication Date:
11-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Global Development (CGD)
Abstract:
An increasing share of official development assistance is being used for climate-related activities. This trend is continuing despite the lack of comprehensive cost-effectiveness evidence to guide spending decisions and continuing concerns that few applications are effective or efficient mechanisms for either climate or development outcomes. This represents both a waste of scarce resources and a missed opportunity. This paper proposes that a well-designed pull financing mechanism, which identifies specific problems for which it will pay a pre-specified price for solutions that can scale up, has the potential to navigate these problems. When they work, a pull instrument can solve problems at scale at low cost by incentivizing private innovators to produce a socially beneficial product that people want to buy and use. However, the design challenges associated with them are not trivial: firstly, the identification and selection of technologies or problems for which the pull financing facility would be a sufficiently large portion of the market to shift incentives for innovators or producers (for technologies that exist but have not been taken up widely yet); and secondly, the ability to design contracts that incentivize socially beneficial innovation that are bought and used. This paper sets out the case for pull financing for climate and development activities, the challenges that need to be addressed to do it well, criteria for judging potential applications of pull financing and an initial indication of some sectors to which pull financing may be applied.
Topic:
Climate Change, Development, Environment, and Finance
Political Geography:
Global Focus

20. Valuing Climate Liabilities: Calculating the Cost of Countries’ Historical Damage from Carbon Emissions to Inform Future Climate Finance Commitments

Author:
Lee Robinson and Ian Mitchell
Publication Date:
10-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Global Development (CGD)
Abstract:
A central commitment of action on climate is the promise of “developed countries” to jointly mobilize $100 billion of climate finance per year by 2020 (and through to 2025), formalised at the UN climate change conference in 2010 (COP16). Five years later, the Paris Agreement reaffirmed this commitment and promised a new goal after 2025 “from a floor of USD 100 billion per year.” We propose an approach for calculating financial climate liabilities for each country based on their historical CO2 emissions, using the idea of an externality: a social cost that has not been borne by the agent whose actions produced it. The paper follows earlier work on calculating carbon debts (e.g., Kunnas, 2014) which we update with recent and authoritative research on carbon pricing methods. We also adjust for awareness, calculating the accruing of liabilities only from the time that countries knew that their emissions were harmful. We present several scenarios adjusting this and other assumptions. The main scenario produces a clearly quantified liability for each country and a total carbon liability to the world of $34 trillion, or $4,500 per capita. If this liability was used to set climate finance goals, it would suggest OECD countries would need to contribute $190 billion a year to 2100. The analysis also highlights that other industrialised countries, notably China and Russia, have also built-up substantial liabilities and should therefore also contribute to future climate finance goals.
Topic:
Climate Change, Energy Policy, Environment, Carbon Emissions, and Green Transition
Political Geography:
Global Focus