Q&A with the Board of the Adaptation Fund

Copenhagen, Friday 11 December

The science of climate change is unambiguous with increasing burdens on the poorest people in the world, who are often hardest hit by weather catastrophes, desertification, and rising sea levels. Helping the most vulnerable countries and elements of societies, the Adaptation Fund (AF) was created to drive funds to help nations struggling with the consequences of climate change. Chair of the AF board, Jan Cedergren and the Vice-Chair Farrukh Iqbal Khan presented the work of the AF followed by an intense round of questions and answers.

The Adaptation Fund Handbook focuses on transparency and capacity-building issues in financing developing countries to meet the cost of adaptation. To gain access to funds, vulnerable developing countries can nominate domestic institutions for accreditation through the National Implementing Entities (NIEs) that is responsible for endorsing projects and programs of the recipient. Countries also have the option of going through Multilateral Implementing Entities (MIEs), which is a new approach to international cooperation, providing the opportunity of direct access to resources. However the board members had admitted that limited funds that are available to the AF mean that projects have to be prioritised to urgent cases. While the process in obtaining funds can be bureaucratic, the board assured that all projects are reviewed thoroughly according to AF guidelines. Allocation of funds are reviewed every 5 years, however the board is currently establishing an evaluation system to manage results that are agreed upon.

There were some concerns on how vulnerable communities can access funds, following rumours that allocated money go straight to corporations that operate within communities. The board stated that detailed reports are fed back to the AF, but I felt the answer given was vague. The World Bank is often mistrusted with the lack of transparency with the way finances are spent, yet the World Bank is responsible in handling the AF trust fund and system which then reports back to the AF board.

Transparency is always a concern with directing funds to right places, however the board declared the use of funds is becoming more of a bottom-up, country-led approach, therefore making it easier for community leaders to use the money where they believe is best spent. The board said, “We do give emphasis mainly on our cooperation with the national strategies. Our strategic priorities are the basis on how to confront the situation in those countries and ameliorate the adaptation levels. But what we mostly take into account is the enhancement of capacity-building, transparency and financial assistance.”