There is growing concern that the World Bank will play too influential a role regarding the UN’s new climate funds.
According to Eurodad, only one sixth of CIF financing will be released in the form of grants, with the largest portion disbursed as concessional loans. As noted by the World Development Movement, these loans will add to the debt burdens of the least developed countries, in violation of the “basic principle of climate justice: that rich countries should pay for the damage they have caused.”
Read Eurodad’s full report “Why World Bank Climate Investment Funds could do more harm than good” here
The UNFCCC’s Green Climate Fund (GCF) is seen as a more accountable mechanism
In a letter to the UNFCCC secretariat, over 50 CSOs argue that “in spite of the climate and economic crises, the World Bank continues to finance fossil fuel projects at an alarming rate, promote false solutions to the climate crisis, and use funding instruments that increase the indebtedness of developing countries. Thus, the World Bank is not suited to advise in the design of a fund that must ensure fair and effective long-term financing based on the principles of environmental integrity, equity, sustainable development, and democracy.”
In April 2011 more than 50 civil society organizations submitted a series of recommendations to the Transitional Committee of the UN Framework Convention for Climate Change (UNFCCC). They call for the Committee to limit the role of IFIs, specifically the World Bank, in the development of the UN’s Green Climate Fund (GCF). Read recommendations here.
Photo: Oxfam International