Just a few days ago at COP 29 in Baku, we witnessed a deeply disappointing outcome on climate finance. For a Conference advertised as the “Climate Finance COP,” COP 29 was expected to deliver a meaningful, achievable, and widely supported financial framework to support developing countries in addressing the devastating consequences of climate change.
The failure of COP 29 to deliver an ambitious climate finance goal that could have resolved gaps in especially Loss and damage finance deepens even further the urgency for the newly fund for responding to Loss and damage to deliver, not only to deliver but to deliver sufficiently, meaningfully and even urgently .
Thus, the fourth meeting of the board of the Loss and damage fund is not just about defining the Fund’s trajectory to meet the expectations placed upon it but also to correct the disappointment from COP 29 by defining the best possible outcome for the Lnd Fund to meet the expectations set into it. Decisions made during this fourth meeting will directly influence the Fund’s ability to provide equitable, transparent, and impactful support to the world’s most vulnerable communities. Below are our key messages and supporting messages:
Early disbursement of the fund
Main message: The Fund for responding to Loss and Damage must start distributing funds in 2025, while current and future pledges must be turned into contributions.
For the fund to start early disbursement :
- Countries that pledged to the Fund must without any delay turn pledges into available and accessible financial contributions.
- The board must already in the fourth meeting communicate with donors on the accessibility of the pledges and establish mechanisms for the existing pledges to be disbursed by the as early as possible in 2025.
- The board should already launch needs assessments to identify potential beneficiaries and target regions requiring support.
- The board should already develop and implement a streamlined, and simplified access process to minimize administrative burdens and fast-track fund disbursement.
- The board should create and approve a detailed roadmap, including the timeline for the disbursement, the priority beneficiaries and how existing resources can already be allocated .
- The board should also explore innovative financing mechanisms and advocate for increasing pledges to ensure a continuous finance flow from 2025 and beyond.
Options and choices for the Fund to further operationalize a bottom-up country-led approach
Main message: They must prioritize a bottom-up approach that allows direct access for all developing countries, youth groups, and local initiatives to ensure that it is inclusive, equitable and responds to the specific needs of each country
Supporting Messages:
- The fund must be wary of intermediaries and subgranting actions, and privilege direct access from local communities who have an on-ground and practical knowledge of the needs.
- The board must establish operational modalities which are informed and driven by locally led solutions to ensure it reflects the needs and priorities of the locals.
- The board must ensure smaller organisations, mainly youth led and community driven can access funding without bureaucratic burdens.
- The board must find ways to closely collaborate with the Santiago network to ensure that local actors and national contact points are sufficiently equipped through capacity buildings to effectively drive the funds where they should be.
- The board must support the integration of loss and damage response measures in national policies through the national contact points, and ensure its coherence with broader existing policies such as NDCs.
Participation of active observers in Board meetings and Dialogue with Civil Society
Main message: The Board meetings must be accessible for observers and civil society organisations to ensure decision making is inclusive, transparent and accountable toward all stakeholders
Supporting Messages:
- The board must adopt clear guidelines to ensure civil society can meaningfully participate in the board’s processes and that their ideas are meaningfully integrated.
- The board should ensure that any accreditation process is simply accessible and equitable particularly for small grassroot organisations and that the process is well streamlined in the board’s communication means and beyond.
- The board should create a process to facilitate civil society inputs during and beyond inputs, and that all necessary documentation is shared upon their request.
- It should be on the boards’ responsibility to ensure the diversity of observers which can be reflected as well on the diversity of the inputs.
- The board should continuously revise and be open for feedback to improve observer participation