WRI’s preliminary analysis on countries’ immediate and long term climate finance pledges announced thus far.
Note: This analysis was updated on March 4, 2010.
Download the Most Recent Version (PDF, 4 pages, 129 Kb)
Previous Versions of this Analysis
- February 18, 2010 (PDF, 4 pages, 555 Kb)
To “fast start” the Copenhagen Accord, developed countries committed, collectively, “to provide new and additional resources, including forestry and investments through international institutions, approaching USD 30 billion for the period 2010-2012 with balanced allocation between adaptation and mitigation.” Developed countries also agreed to a goal of jointly mobilizing, over the longer term an additional “100 billion dollars a year by 2020 to address the needs of developing countries. This funding will come from a wide variety of sources, public and private, bilateral and multilateral, including alternative sources of finance.”
These commitments were key to reaching an agreement in Copenhagen and to maintaining momentum thereafter. Once implemented, these resources will help the poorest and most vulnerable countries mitigate (reduce) their greenhouse gas emissions, and adapt and cope with the effects of climate change.
Though the commitments are clear, their delivery is uncertain. WRI has carried out a preliminary analysis based on available information on countries’ immediate and long term pledges announced thus far. The accompanying table sets out both the amounts and the mechanisms by which funding would be delivered. WRI has also looked at whether these pledges will provide “new and additional”1 funds compared to what developed countries already provide through official development assistance.
This table will be continuously updated as more information becomes available.
Download the Table (PDF, 4 pages, 129 Kb)
-
The “new and additional” column includes information on the additionality of countries’ financial pledges. However, the information provided by contributing countries thus far is of varying nature and insufficient to determine additionality. While it is important to use a common baseline to assess additionality, there is currently no agreement among countries on what this baseline should be and the pledges listed in this table reflect this diversity. (1) Some countries chose to characterize their pledge as an increase in relation to previous levels of climate finance (2) Others explain how the finance provided relates to development assistance and ODA levels or pledges. See Counting the Cash: Elements of a Framework for the Measurement, Reporting and Verification of Climate Finance for proposed methods. ↩