Search

Climate justice is not just a financial transaction to protect the environment. It needs to be seen as the protection of the most vulnerable in society after centuries of resource exploitation. African countries disproportionately face impacts of climate change on their environments, their economies, their resources and their infrastructure. This leads to greater vulnerability and increased exposure to the negative effects of a changing climate. In this article, we highlight the importance of climate justice and its role within the United Nations negotiations, and ultimately in concrete action. We discuss current climate impacts across key sectors in the African region, with a focus on health, infrastructure, food and water scarcity, energy and finance. All sectors are affected by climate change. They are interconnected and under threat. This triggers a ripple effect, where threats in one sector have a knock-on effect on other sectors. We find that the current set of intergovernmental institutions have failed to adequately address climate justice. We also contend that a siloed approach to climate action has proven to be ineffective. As we head towards the next set of negotiations (COP27), this paper argues that the economic and social conditions in Africa can be addressed through financial and collaborative support for adaptation and localised solutions, but that this will only be achieved if climate justice is prioritised by the decision makers. This needs to include a global-scale transition in how climate finance is assessed and accessed. Climate justice underpins real, effective and sustainable solutions for climate action in Africa. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Relying on complex interdependence as a theoretical approach, this paper investigates the hypothetical damage that the U.S. withdrawal from the Paris Agreement could represent for Africa in terms of climate finance. In June 2017, President Donald Trump publicly declared the U.S. intention to withdraw from further participating in the multilateral Paris Agreement. To keen followers and analysts of the U.S. climate policy beyond its borders, such unilateral action was never a surprise. Rather, it is nostalgic of the experience of the Kyoto Protocol, particularly how more or less similar move unduly prolonged the global climate negotiations up till late 2015 when the Paris Agreement came about. Although the Paris Agreement is remarkable as it represents the first states-wide climate deal, it however left a number of issues unresolved. Notable among which is climate finance which has remained the most contentious and of critical concern to developing countries, particularly in Africa. Pitted against the fact that Africa contributes less to climate change and, ironically, the hardest-hit by the phenomenon, the U.S. withdrawal from the Paris Agreement aggravates concerns around climate finance and, indeed, portends additional burdens for a continent that is still struggling to cope with the untoward fallout of climate change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There are several climate funds already in operation before the establishment of the Green Climate Fund (GCF). This paper draws on the analysis of climate funds relevant for climate change activities in Africa to improve stakeholders understanding of what should be different with the GCF in Africa. The analysis indicates that projects financed by climate funds are predominantly small-scale with high transaction costs. The mean amount of total approved projects in Africa is US$7.21 (28.41) million. Over 95% of these projects is funded with grants. The mean disbursement ratio for the projects is 34.9% (45.4) and the mean initial disbursement lag is 1.9 years (1.2). To enhance scalability of projects and predictability of funds, African countries will have to work with the GCF to diversify financial instruments away from grants to loans and private capital to finance medium- and large-scale projects. The analysis also indicates that African countries should rally behind a position for ‘additionality’ of financial flows from the GCF that is realistic. Outsourcing fund management (including risks analysis and due diligence) activities of national funding entities to domestic financial institutions (FIs) will help reduce the expense ratio and enhance mainstreaming of climate finance in FIs in Africa. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

What are the characteristics of recipient countries that attract more climate finance in mitigating and adapting to climate change? In this study, we address this question by looking at recipients in 43 Sub-Sahara African countries for the period 2006–2017, and implement several panel regression techniques, including system generalized methods of moments estimations to address potential endogeneity concerns. We also performed sensitivity analysis using panel quantile regressions. The findings show that Sub-Sahara African countries with higher population growth rate, higher poverty levels, better ease of doing business profile, weaker governance policies, weaker control of corruption, stronger rule of law enforcement, deepened social inequality, and better ICT usage, have attracted more climate finance. Policy implications of the study are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Universal energy access currently looks unachievable according to predictions based on current data. This affects Africa most, as has been observed with the effects of COVID-19 leading to a reversal in gains. The world's ambitious climate goals, which also require the achievement of clean cooking show that there is an opportunity for a shift. Channeling climate finance towards decentralized renewable energy and clean cooking can support achievement of universal energy access through more localized action. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Climate finance investments and international policy are driving new community-based projects incorporating payments for ecosystem services (PES) to simultaneously store carbon and generate livelihood benefits. Most community-based PES (CB-PES) research focuses on forest areas. Rangelands, which store globally significant quantities of carbon and support many of the world's poor, have seen little CB-PES research attention, despite benefitting from several decades of community-based natural resource management (CBNRM) projects. Lessons from CBNRM suggest institutional considerations are vital in underpinning the design and implementation of successful community projects. This study uses documentary analysis to explore the institutional characteristics of three African community-based forest projects that seek to deliver carbon-storage and poverty-reduction benefits. Strong existing local institutions, clear land tenure, community control over land management decision-making and up-front, flexible payment schemes are found to be vital. Additionally, we undertake a global review of rangeland CBNRM literature and identify that alongside the lessons learned from forest projects, rangeland CB-PES project design requires specific consideration of project boundaries, benefit distribution, capacity building for community monitoring of carbon storage together with awareness-raising using decision-support tools to display the benefits of carbon-friendly land management. We highlight that institutional analyses must be undertaken alongside improved scientific studies of the carbon cycle to enable links to payment schemes, and for them to contribute to poverty alleviation in rangelands. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]