THIS is disconcerting that the Green Climate Fund, set up by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in 2010 to help developing countries to respond to climate change, is not serving intended purposes because of irregularities in fund management. Transparency International Bangladesh made the observation in a report, published on May 14, on accessing climate funds and governance challenges. The findings of the study suggest that the financing institution is slow in disbursement and has strayed from its objectives by becoming a lending agency with a greater emphasis on loans than grants. In 2015鈥�2023, 40.6 per cent of the GCF聽 finance was provided in loans, further aggravating the burden on climate-vulnerable nations by increasing loan obligations. The study also highlights the discriminatory tendency in GCF financing practice that it has allocated more for international and regional organisations than national agencies of vulnerable countries and whatever little fund is allocated is not disbursed in time. Of the released money, 39.4 per cent went to only five international entities while 20.2 per cent went to regional and national entities. The climate fund has so far allocated only $442.7 million for Bangladesh, of which it has released merely 13.3 per cent of the money against its nine projects.
The facts and figures presented in the study substantiate the allegation of discriminatory climate financing practice by the fund which is an allegation that the United Nations should take up seriously. Transparency International Bangladesh also observes that the fund, aimed at mobilising climate finance, has been unsuccessful as it has only been able to mobilise 2 to 3 per cent of the promised $100 billion a year from developed countries. Its glaring failure to secure promised funds from developed countries defeats the purpose of the fund. It was created considering the greater carbon footprint of western nations and their negative contribution to global climate chaos. The organisation also appears disappointed at the role played by the United Nations in governing the fund and said that it is doubtful about the future role of the UN system in ensuring better governance of the fund. It is alleged that the fund often imposed arbitrary clauses on national entities seeking to access the fund while awarding projects free-hand to international entities that have corruption allegations against them. The fund has allocated the highest 38 projects to the United Nations Development Programme, keeping corruption allegations against it unresolved. Bangladesh, already experiencing the impact of global climate change, could have played a strong role in demanding an accountable governance of the UN climate financing system, but its own practice is also mired in corruption controversy.
It is unacceptable that the fund now prefers international development organisations, depriving the most climate-affected countries. Bangladesh, in collaboration with other climate-vulnerable countries, must raise their concern about the reported discriminatory practice of the fund with different forums of the UN system and demand an accountable management of the climate finance.
