Determinants of the Flow of Bilateral Adaptation-Related Climate Change Financing To Sub-Saharan African Countries

Abstract

The apparent mismatch between countries receiving Adaptation-related Climate Change Financing (ACCF) and those most vulnerable to climate change is a concern which is the motivation for this research. This paper examines the determining factors of receiving ACCF for sub-Saharan African countries and finds that the recipient policy and an existing aid relationship are significant determinants of funding. ACCF therefore appears to be contingent on democratic characteristics of the recipient and prevailing a donor-recipient relationship, with vulnerability not being a factor. Our research draws a parallel between ACCF and traditional, bilateral aid allocation, and stresses the importance of accurate climate finance allocation practices. In the lead up to the climate negotiations in Paris at the end of 2015, this quote seems particularly fitting. Climate change negotiations have long been stalled by the idea that compelling countries to cut their greenhouse gas emissions would be the death knell to their economies, all the while overlooking the idea that future economic prosperity will be contingent on the actions we take now to mitigate future effects of climate change and to adapt to its current effects. The latter is particularly relevant to lower income countries who have contributed the least to greenhouse gas emissions, but are disproportionately impacted by climate change through a limited capacity to adapt to its effects.Adaptation-related climate change financing is therefore pivotal for lower income countries. The apparent mismatch between countries receiving adaptation-related climate change financing and those most vulnerable to climate change is a concern. This concern is the motivation for this research.

Development and Climate Aid to Africa: Comparing Aid Allocation Models for Different Aid Flows

“…We now turn to the discussion of climate aid, and how this relatively new form of aid is allocated. Recent studies have shown that the three allocation models (recipient need, recipient merit, donor interests) are also of relevance in the realm of climate aid (Figaj, 2010), and individually for both adaptation aid (Betzold and Weiler, 2018; Michaelowa and Michaelowa, 2012; Robertsen et al, 2015; Robinson and Dornan, 2017; Weiler et al, 2018) and mitigation aid (Bagchi et al, 2016; Halimanjaya, 2015). In particular Weiler et al (2018) mention that adaption aid flows follow “very closely” the pattern of general aid flows to developing countries.…”

Allocation of aid for adaptation to climate change: Do vulnerable countries receive more support?

“…Several studies examine funding decisions of the multilateral Adaptation Fund; they conclude that the Adaptation Fund does not accord priority to vulnerable countries (Persson and Remling 2014;Remling and Persson 2015;Stadelmann et al 2014). Robertsen et al (2015) focus on bilateral aid from seven donors to sub-Saharan Africa. Their results similarly suggest that donors do not take into account vulnerability in their allocation decisions:…”

Climate Financing Through the Adaptation Fund: What Determines Fund Allocation?

“…It focuses on capacity development of institutions and community representatives rather than communities in designing projects and programs (Biagini et al, 2012). Despite its focus on adaptation, the First Start Finance, for instance, allocates the fund mainly to mitigation rather than adaptation (Fransen et al, 2015) and prioritizes institutional strength of recipient country rather than vulnerability while funding adaptation (Barrett, 2014;Robertsen, Francken, & Molenaers, 2015).…”