Overseas Development Institute study reviewing the operations of the Global Environment Facility.
Having been established in 1994, the Global Environment Facility (GEF) is the longest running multilateral climate change fund. An operating entity of the financial mechanism of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, the GEF is now in its fifth funding cycle with more than $1 billion for climate change projects. This study takes stock of the GEF’s evolving priorities and areas of focus, seeking to present an evidence based overview of the operations and achievements of the GEF, as well as the challenges the organisation has faced, and why.
The report begins by explaining the study’s objectives, framework, and methodology. The framework used entails splitting the assessment into two parts. First, the authors analyse five interlinked components of effective spending: resource mobilisation; governance; investment strategy; disbursement of funding and risk management; and monitoring and evaluation. Next, a review is presented of the active portfolio of the fund, using self-reported evidence complemented with data collected on www.climatefundsupdate.org. This review considers recipients of funding (institution type and geographic distribution), and the types of technologies and approaches that have been supported./p>
Among the findings highlighted in the reports summary are that:
The resources entrusted to the GEF by member governments are not adequate given the challenges it seeks to address.
While the fund operates with substantial transparency, civil society has been less active in informing and monitoring its work in recent years.
Balancing rigorous quality control with nimble and flexible approaches is a substantial challenge.
Reporting on the status of operations currently in implementation requires strengthening, and clearer guidance and support regarding compliance issues is needed for partner institutions.
Promotion of low carbon and energy efficient technologies has received the biggest portion of funding in the GEFs present portfolio at over 25%. Meanwhile, a large share of recipients are countries in Asia and the Pacific.
Although the Small Grants Programme has helped empower communities to engage on climate change activities, an enduring challenge for the fund is to deliver at scale.
A high co-finance ratio of 1:14 shows the GEF has had success mobilising additional investment, although much of this co-finance has come from implementing partners.
The GEF’s record to date in supporting technology is mixed, so re-engagement with technology in this fifth funding cycle is welcome.
The establishment of the Green Climate Fund reflects many parties desire to see a new mechanism; the multiple lines of accountability of the GEF presents a complex context for its operations.