Publications

France should publish mid-year its first multi-annual strategy for financing the ecological transition. This is a long way from the first 2015 climate strategy, which barely touched funding aspects. And it is good news. We at I4CE believe that such plans are essential tools to support the transition to low-emission, climate-resilient economies. Credible, multi-year public spending targets help to embark the private sector and the funders of public action (debt holders, international donors) in the transition, and redirect financial flows as demanded by the Paris Agreement. Comprehensive financing plans also avoid simplistic approaches based on case-by-case project appraisal on the basis of limited cost-benefit considerations, which can ultimately result in significant additional costs.

The Global Stocktake at COP28 in Dubai marked the start of a cycle for reviewing governments’ decarbonization trajectories. The cycle will end at COP30 in Brazil at the end of 2025, and 2024 will hopefully show progress in the ambition of these trajectories. We equally hope that this renewed ambition will be accompanied by a reflection on the financing plans for national low-carbon trajectories, covering the amounts and evolution over time of domestic and international resources, and the respective roles of the private and public sectors. Because simply put, a low-carbon transition with no associated financing plan is not a transition, it is mere wishful thinking.

COP28 in Dubai kicks off amidst a worrying climate backdrop. For the first time, the threshold of a 2°C temperature rise compared to the pre-industrial era was exceeded in one day. In addition, a report published by the UN this week warns that current policies are placing the planet on a warming trajectory of 2.9°C, and that the chances of maintaining the increase at +1.5°C are now of only 14%. The results of the first Global Stocktake, a worldwide assessment of the actions taken by countries since the Paris Agreement, will be published at the COP and should confirm the urgent need to change the trajectory of greenhouse gas emissions. 

Much of the discussions at COP28 will focus on the 100 billion USD/year target decided at Copenhagen to support climate investments in the Global South, and on the new climate finance goal set to replace it. But, whilst keeping our eyes on the volumes laid on the table, we also need to look more into the impact of every dollar spent. Identifying and building on the value added of every actor in the economy is essential to avoid overlaps and maximise synergies. Three types of actors have a pivotal role to play in the paradigm shift: governments, public financial institutions and private financial institutions.

After several years of strong growth, the revenue generated by carbon pricing mechanisms (carbon taxes or markets) worldwide, as reported in our 2023 edition of the Global Carbon Accounts, stabilized at nearly USD 100 billion. This stabilization could not be more deceptive.  The future has rarely been so uncertain for carbon prices, caught between very strong opposing trends, and the next two years could mark a major turning point, for good or bad, for the use of these climate policy instruments worldwide. 

What are the carbon taxes and markets around the world, the range of carbon prices, the revenues generated, the emissions covered by these mechanisms? Find the answers to these questions, and many more, in the new edition of the Global Carbon Accounts from I4CE.

NewClimate Institute and the Institute for Climate Economics (I4CE) submitted a response to a public consultation on the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero’s proposed set of voluntary guidance for financing the early retirement of coal-fired power plants in Asia-Pacific. This blog post highlights key points from our submission. Preventing the worst impacts of the climate crisis, particularly for the most vulnerable, requires halting coal-fired power plants (CFPPs) in the pipeline and retiring a substantial portion of the existing global coal fleet before the end of their technical lifetime. While countries have committed to phase out unabated coal in the Glasgow Climate Pact, 350 GW of new capacity is proposed globally with an additional 192 GW under construction.

The reform for a new global financing pact - as it was ambitiously designated by the French President Emmanuel Macron - allows little time for rest, combining several agendas that collectively seek to rethink how the Global South can finance its low-emission development pathways, with support from the Global North. The sequence of international events that starts this week with the Finance in common Summit, the African climate summit, G20 and followed by World Bank Group and International Monetary Fund’s Annual Meetings will be key to see if the multiple resolutions to reshape development finance outlined during the first semester of 2023 were merely wishful thinking or if they can be seen as the first bricks of a new international financial architecture. 

Sustainable development and climate change are two pressing and interconnected issues that countries have committed to address at the international level. The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, with the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) including climate action, at its core was adopted by the United Nations (UN) in 2015. The same year, the Paris Agreement was adopted by Parties of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. Both instruments have clear global and national targets in the medium- and long-term that are still far from being met.

On 22nd and 23rd of June, the Summit for a new Global Financing Pact, initiated by Emmanuel Macron and Mia Mottley, Prime Minister of Barbados, will take place in Paris. This Summit will be a success for climate if it enables us to spend more on the climate transition, to spend better, and if it influences the ongoing reform of international development financing.

National budgets, as the main driver of public action, need to be ‘greened’ by governments to achieve the transition to low-carbon, climate-resilient, and sustainable economies. That is, budgeting processes need to ensure sufficient funds are directed towards green activities and are directed away from environmentally harmful ones.

This blog-post is conducted by [i4ce] and IDDRI. The international community recognizes that the global development finance architecture is no longer fit for purpose. The World Bank, the IMF, and other institutions of the broader development finance system are today asked to invest more in global goods (specifically to fight against climate change and to preserve biodiversity, but their internal structure and the paradigms on which they ground their decisions have not changed since they were created with development – poverty and macroeconomic stability notably – as their main mandate. In this context, it should be no surprise that the response of these international institutions remains inadequate in terms of volume, structure and accessibility. 

This is it. In a few days, thousands of people from around the world will be gathering in Washington to look back on the latest achievements and discuss the future of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund – the two institutions that structure international cooperation for development. But this isn’t just one of a series of biannual get-togethers. These Spring Meetings will be the last for future ex-President of the World Bank David Malpass, who is leaving at what might be a turning point for the institution’s history. The expectations are high: this is the moment where the World Bank’s shareholders will confirm their vision and ambition for the institution by officially including climate in its global mission

After years of waiting, the World Bank finally approved and released its alignment approach with the mitigation and adaptation goals of the Paris Agreement. Presented by the World Bank as “the most comprehensive institutional undertaking ever done by the Bank Group to reconcile development and climate”, this alignment approach is an important step towards the reform of the World Bank currently under discussion. But this approach won’t be sufficient, argue Alice Pauthier and Sarah Bendahou in this blog post. It could be more ambitious.  

After the sudden resignation of David Malpass, the World Bank’s Trump-appointed President, mid-February, Washington surprised the world again last Thursday, with the nomination of Ajay Banga, long-time Mastercard CEO, as his potential successor. Not only was the timing very rapid, but the controversial profile of the nominee also generated some sense of puzzlement. His limited […]

This report co-written with NewClimate provides practical guidance for international financial institutions to support financial institutions’ alignment with the Paris Agreement goals, and to more broadly contribute to transforming local financial systems. This guidance is developed around three pillars: a harmonised alignment assessment; the alignment of financial intermediaries; and the alignment of financial systems at the national level.

2022 ended up on a consensus that the global financial architecture is no longer “fit for purpose”. In other words, the financial ecosystem created post-war to support international development - at the centre of which are the IMF and the World Bank who were joined later by other international public financial institutions - wasn’t designed to address the multiplicity of challenges the world is facing today, foremost among which climate change. Time is running, and the good news is that 2023 is set up to be a busy year with key events setting the milestones for a reform of the international financial architecture, including a Paris Summit in June. The year will close at COP 28, where we will officially take stock of current achievements.

2023 will be busy with many events organised to address different parts of the financial architecture reform, including a Paris Summit in June. Alice Pauthier from [i4ce] tells you more about this agenda and identifies two conditions for a successful reform process. First, it has to be led by countries’ financing needs… wheras we are still lacking a granular analysis of countries’ investment needs for a sustainable development. Second, it has to be guided by the objective of maximising the impact of public finance. What we should count is the impact of public finance on the transition and not only volumes.

This year again, expectations for the COP are high regarding developed countries’ commitments towards the funding of action against climate change and its impacts. The question of loss and damage, which pertains to questions of climate justice and of who should pay for the significant impacts of climate change endured by the poorest countries, has just been added to the official COP agenda. And climate finance will again be a hot topic: the pledge made back in 2009 by rich nations to channel US$100bn every year by 2020 to help less wealthy nations mitigate the rise in temperatures and adapt to climate change is still falling short of targets.

Long term national climate strategies, such as Long-Term Strategies (LTS) published to the UNFCCC, are key documents developed by governments to envision the transition to a low-carbon and climate resilient economy at the 2050 (or later) time-horizon. As of the beginning of COP 27 in Sharm-el-Sheikh, Egypt, on November 2022, 55 countries had submitted an LTS to the UNFCCC, answering renewed calls for countries to develop such strategies at COP 26. It is expected that additional LTS will be published shortly.