Moral Debts: the Green Climate Fund

  • Written by  Marco Magrini
  • Published in Climate
Moral Debts: the Green Climate Fund Luka Tomac/Friends of the Earth International
08 Apr
2017
Geographical’s regular look at the world of climate change. This month, Marco Magrini looks at the trouble with funding

‘Money, it’s a gas!’ sang Pink Floyd many years ago. Today, there is nothing melodious about how financial resources are being raised and spent in helping developing countries withstand climate change, a trouble fostered by our own collective habit with greenhouse-gas emissions.

The Green Climate Fund (GCF) was established in 2009 as a last-minute agreement at the disastrous UN Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen. The fund, based in South Korea, is intended to transfer money from rich and polluting countries to poor and guiltless ones, in order to help the latter adapt to global warming and mitigate its effects with carbon-free energy sources.

Several years later, much of that money is still in a gaseous state – it’s all just hot air. ‘Our initial resource mobilisation period lasts from 2015 to 2018, and the Fund accepts new pledges on an ongoing basis,’ the GCF’s website states. Until now, $10.3billion has been committed by governments, but much of that sum is yet to materialise. For example President Obama pledged $3billion, but actually wired just $1billion (half of which was sent three days before leaving office). Trump appears unlikely to ever disburse the other $2billion, so the GCF is already short one fifth of its promised endowment.

True, the fund has not performed spectacularly well. Many of its 37 projects have still to be financed. Bureaucracy and paperwork hamper its operations. Boardroom politics, with dozens of countries involved, take up much of its time and energy. The new executive director, Howard Bamsey, has a hard mission to accomplish: build a future for a righteous and necessary climate finance programme. The principle of ‘common but differentiated responsibilities’ (that long-time polluters should bear a bigger burden) is enshrined in international law since 1992. Why should any country backtrack?

Even if Trump were to pay that huge moral debt, much of the GCF’s uncertainties would remain. $10billion is peanuts compared to the $238billion spent worldwide last year on clean energy. In Copenhagen, the rich side of the world agreed to provide the fund with a steady stream of the staggering sum of $100billion a year from 2020. Less than three years away, no one has the slightest idea where to get that money from.

This was published in the April 2017 edition of Geographical magazine.

Share this story...

Submit to FacebookSubmit to Google PlusSubmit to Twitter

Related items

Leave a comment

ONLY registered members can leave comments and each comment is held pending authorisation before publishing. Please login or register to voice your opinion.

Geographical Week

Get the best of Geographical delivered straight to your inbox every Friday.

Subscribe Today

EDUCATION PARTNERS

Aberystwyth UniversityUniversity of GreenwichThe University of Winchester

TRAVEL PARTNERS

Ponant

Silversea

Travel the Unknown

DOSSIERS

Like longer reads? Try our in-depth dossiers that provide a comprehensive view of each topic

  • National Clean Air Day
    For National Clean Air Day, Geographical brings together stories about air pollution and the kind of solutions needed to tackle it ...
    REDD+ or Dead?
    The UN-backed REDD+ (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) scheme, under which developing nations would be paid not to cut dow...
    The true cost of meat
    As one of the world’s biggest methane emitters, the meat industry has a lot more to concern itself with than merely dietary issues ...
    Long live the King
    It is barely half a century since the Born Free story caused the world to re-evaluate humanity’s relationship with lions. A few brief decades later,...
    London: a walk in the park
    In the 2016 London Mayoral election, the city’s natural environment was high on the agenda. Geographical asks: does the capital have a green future,...

MORE DOSSIERS

NEVER MISS A STORY - follow Geographical

Want to stay up to date with breaking Geographical stories? Join the thousands following us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram and stay informed about the world.

More articles in NATURE...

Climate

Compared to other types of carbon sink, seagrass in Kenya…

Geophoto

Who in their right mind wants to shoot with film…

Climate

Geographical’s regular look at the world of climate change. This…

Geophoto

Calling photographers passionate about capturing and sharing great images of…

Climate

Five experts weigh-in on the future of the Paris Agreement…

Oceans

Analysis into a killer whale found dead off the shores…

Geophoto

For the past ten years, the Chartered Institution of Water…

Geophoto

Less than 4,000 tigers remain in the wild, so it…

Oceans

Zafer Kizilkaya has been awarded the 2017 Whitley Gold Award…

Wildlife

John Kahekwa is the founder and general manager of the…

Polar

Recent observations of Arctic flora and fauna indicate major changes…

Oceans

A massive die-off of Australian mangrove forests is being attributed…

Energy

Geographical’s regular look at the world of climate change. This…

Climate

Was last year’s El Niño a practice run for future…

Wildlife

The continuing adventures of Aaron Gekoski as he joins the…

Geophoto

What do Ethiopia’s ‘church forests’, the incipient HS2 high-speed rail…

Wildlife

Aaron Gekoski continues working alongside the Wildlife Rescue Unit

Geophoto

Today, the camera is regarded as an essential smartphone feature.…

Oceans

An innovative new theory hopes to save millions of lives…

Wildlife

Aaron Gekoski continues his personal adventure into the wilds of…