 |
| M Zakir Hossain |
The planet earth has been struggling against three ‘V’s or vulnerabilities to climate change, corruption, and conflicts (four ‘C’s).With the alarming progression of the climate risks the Paris
Agreement was approved by 197 countries in November 2015 in the Conference of Parties (COP21) following years-long negotiation under the United Nation Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).
The first session of the Conference of the Parties, serving as the Meeting of the Parties to the Paris Agreement (CMA1), have already taken place in Marrakech in conjunction with COP 22 and CMP 12 to determine the roadmap of the Paris Agreement.
Under the Paris Agreement, ‘strongly urges developed country Parties to scale up their level of financial support, with a concrete roadmap to achieve the goal of jointly providing USD 100 billion annually by 2020 for mitigation and adaptation’ (para 115). Pursuant to the Paris Agreement, ahead of COP22 developed countries have declared a “Roadmap to US$100 billion” per year that projects that amount of public climate finance might be increased to US$67 billion in 2020 (ODI, 2016). However it is not clear in the Roadmap that the means of scaling up the adaptation finance in the absence of a time bound commitment and also lack of accurate categorization of finance using Rio Marker, how the 50:50 balance for adaptation and mitigation and based on the ‘Polluters Pay Compensation Principle’ whether for the adaptation in the developing countries the ‘additional’ and ‘new’ to ODA would be only grants as but not loans. For climate change adaptation in the LDCs only US$3.3 billion has been so far disbursed and in the last six years the Green Climate Fund (GCF) has allocated US$429 (29%) for adaptation only since there is a lack of universal definition of what counts as climate finance that creates ambiguity and GCF allocated only 36% is grant, 28% is loan, and 36% equity. Need to raise voice for grant based adaptation finance by vulnerable countries.
Under the Paris Agreement, ‘strongly urges developed country Parties to scale up their level of financial support, with a concrete roadmap to achieve the goal of jointly providing USD 100 billion annually by 2020 for mitigation and adaptation’ (para 115). Pursuant to the Paris Agreement, ahead of COP22 developed countries have declared a “Roadmap to US$100 billion” per year that projects that amount of public climate finance might be increased to US$67 billion in 2020 (ODI, 2016). However it is not clear in the Roadmap that the means of scaling up the adaptation finance in the absence of a time bound commitment and also lack of accurate categorization of finance using Rio Marker, how the 50:50 balance for adaptation and mitigation and based on the ‘Polluters Pay Compensation Principle’ whether for the adaptation in the developing countries the ‘additional’ and ‘new’ to ODA would be only grants as but not loans. For climate change adaptation in the LDCs only US$3.3 billion has been so far disbursed and in the last six years the Green Climate Fund (GCF) has allocated US$429 (29%) for adaptation only since there is a lack of universal definition of what counts as climate finance that creates ambiguity and GCF allocated only 36% is grant, 28% is loan, and 36% equity. Need to raise voice for grant based adaptation finance by vulnerable countries.
Since there is a race among all vulnerable countries in accessing funds from the different global sources that’s why, though a project of US$40 million has been rewarded to Bangladesh through MIE it is required for Bangladesh to be equipped to meet the expected standards related to disclosures of information, fiduciary, environmental, economic and and other social issues set by the GCF and other adaptation fund windows. Moreover, the PA apprises that developing countries including other Parties have committed that adaptation action should follow a country-driven, gender-responsive, participatory and transparent approach that takes into account the interests of vulnerable groups, communities and ecosystems (Article 7.5). However, the GoB’s 7th Five Year Plan 2015 (covering 2016-2020) recognized a number of implementation challenges in climate change projects, e.g., lack of proper prioritization, low fund management capacity, weaknesses in implementation and monitoring, and limited scope of sharing and learning. TIB also identified that absence of area specific vulnerability assessment and allegations of political consideration in fund allocation, poor disclosures of information, absence of meaningful participation of the community in project design and monitoring of implementation and also lack of the citizens’ friendly grievance redress mechanism.
In this context, according to 7FYP, IMED and MoEF will develop a system to encourage community participation to provide a platform for their voices and need to develop the mechanism soon. Furthermore, the concerned staff from both the Planning Commission and the Implementation Monitoring and Evaluation Division (IMED) need to get proper capacity building along with adequate resources to assess the project proposal as well as monitoring the implemented climate financed projects properly. In order to ensure transparency, accountability and integrity of all concerned climate change and climate fund governance related stakeholders as well as ensuring citizens’ participation in decision making especially in planning, project design and monitoring implementation a new high-powered Climate Change Foundation (CCF)/Climate Change Trust (CCT) should be established soon in Bangladesh. By 2030, to tackle the climate change and also meeting the SDG on climate change a comprehensive integrated policy/strategy is required. After all effective climate finance is fundamental to protect lives and livelihoods of millions vulnerable people. The youth should be active to carry out evidence -based advocacy and campaign for transparency, accountability and participation in climate finance.
In this context, according to 7FYP, IMED and MoEF will develop a system to encourage community participation to provide a platform for their voices and need to develop the mechanism soon. Furthermore, the concerned staff from both the Planning Commission and the Implementation Monitoring and Evaluation Division (IMED) need to get proper capacity building along with adequate resources to assess the project proposal as well as monitoring the implemented climate financed projects properly. In order to ensure transparency, accountability and integrity of all concerned climate change and climate fund governance related stakeholders as well as ensuring citizens’ participation in decision making especially in planning, project design and monitoring implementation a new high-powered Climate Change Foundation (CCF)/Climate Change Trust (CCT) should be established soon in Bangladesh. By 2030, to tackle the climate change and also meeting the SDG on climate change a comprehensive integrated policy/strategy is required. After all effective climate finance is fundamental to protect lives and livelihoods of millions vulnerable people. The youth should be active to carry out evidence -based advocacy and campaign for transparency, accountability and participation in climate finance.
*Writer works for Transparency International Bangladesh,
contact:zhkhan@ti-bangladesh.org
contact:zhkhan@ti-bangladesh.org
No comments:
Post a Comment