African Civil Society Groups Call for Greater Accountability in the 2 nd round of Replenishment for GCF
African Civil Society Groups (CSGs), convened by the Pan African Climate Justice Alliance (PACJA), Care International and German Watch in Niamey, Niger on the sidelines of ninth Africa Regional Forum on the Sustainable development (ARFSD-9) expressed disappointment with the GCF 1st replenishment period and called on the facility to improve the quality of GCF-funded programs in Africa in the second replenishment of the facility.
CSOs expressed disappointment of the just concluding 1st replenishment period under which the GCF underperformed in climate funding mobilization and with low trickle-down of funding to frontline communities. Inaccessibility of funding mechanisms by poor and less developed countries and widespread inaccessible information in the first replenishment period further compromised on accountability making it difficult for CSOs and any other body pursuing accountability to discern the cost of delivering a dollar to communities at the frontline of climate crisis, in few cases where this happened.
CSGs noted the growing contribution of GCF to global inequality as large amount of GCF funding
(66 percent of all GCF funding) flows through just a few (five) large multilateral entities to fund
projects that are not even elaborated at country level. Probably this was the epitome of global
conspiracy to defraud less developed countries and the poor of resources they most needed to
address the growing climate crisis, but in this case large multilateral entities used these funds to
sustain their bureaucracy. This was generally found out during the GCF Funded projects
monitoring undertaken by CSOs in Africa.
Said Chakri from Morocco based organization “Association des Enseignants des Sciences de la vie et de la Terre Maroc (AESVT)” highlighted that the monitoring process done on the implementation of GCF funded projects left the gap between implementing entities and the communities for whom the project is conceived.
“A platform made up of the key actors should be established at local level to promote greater
coordination and better communication among entities at all levels and greater participation of
local communities to enhance the confidence of the rights holders,” said Chakri before recommending that the second replenishment involve the communities and local environmental CSOs in the governance of all GCF funded projects at all levels.
Lack of transparency and accountability and bureaucratic processes were bolded out as some of
the key bottlenecks to the performance of GCF funded projects in Africa. Dr. Mithika Mwenda, the Executive Director of Pan African Climate Justice Alliance (PACJA), reminded the delegates of the road the Civil Society Organizations walked and the pressure they exerted for the GCF to be established. However, the processes of accessing funds remain a nightmare and less inspiring for countries and as such a new approach for African CSOs must be forged.
“CSOs were vocal in influencing for the establishing of the Green Climate Fund. The climate fund
was supposed to much more accessible, providing resources at speed to countries and communities at the frontline of climate crisis but bureaucracy has made this very challenging. In fact, GCF is more bureaucratic than the World Band and it is much easier to access funding from WB than the GCF,” said Mithika Mwenda.
In 2019, the International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED), in their study
observed that less than 10% of funding committed under international climate funds to help
developing countries take action on climate change is directed at the local level.
Currently the flow of GCF funds is not helping countries to address the real issues pertaining to
the essence of establishment of the Fund.
“Funds disbursed compared to needsis like a drop in ocean. I am afraid that the climate crisis is
getting out of hand and we may not be able to reverse the situation with the prevailing levels of
climate finance,” warned Charles. He warned of the disparity among countries on the amounts
of GCF funds that African countries are receiving that is far below fund received by other
countries from other continents and is a potential recipe of inequality, a draw back on
realization of SDG mantra.
The CSOs maintained their position that the Fund should promote stronger local partnerships
to ensure that GCF-funded Projects do not undermine, but complement existing initiatives,
while also making sure that projects and programmes strengthen national and local governance
and provide capacity-building support to ensure sustainability. The CSOs tasked GCF to
facilitate access to climate funds to climate vulnerable countries and communities with at least
50% of the total funding supporting adaptation projects. To do this, the GCF is requested to
provide large parts (90 percent) of its funding in form of grants and with a greater focus on
adaptation, assigning fair weights to social and environmental returns on investments.
About The Author
