A further question is why  developing nations should fund adaptation and mitigation of a problem that they did not contribute to in the first place? Should the heavily industrialised countries, who have contributed significantly to the change in conditions, be liable for this expense?

Some of the expected costs of adaptation as assessed by various organisations are:

World Bank (2006) - $9-41 million/year.
Stern Review (2006) - $4-37 million/year
Oxfam (2007) – At least $50 million/year
UNDP (2007) - $86-109 million/year
UNFCCC (2007) - $28-67 million/year
UNFCCC (2007) $49-171 million/year

(Source: Shardul Agrawala, Senior Economist, OECD Environment Directorate)

These figures range from $4-171 million/year and hence represent a large difference in estimations. In order to form a sufficient budget, a smaller gap in estimations is required.
 

Developing countries and industrialised countries are far apart on how much money should be stumped up to help vulnerable economies that are most exposed to the impacts of changing weather patterns. Leaders in December must agree a new deal on funding which will allow a substantial fall in greenhouse gas emissions.

Changes in rainfall are already affecting food production and changes in temperature are increasing exposure to malaria. These changes will become increasingly evident as time progresses and the conditions worsen. 

There have been some calls for developing nations to be the recipient of a 600-billion-dollar "Marshall Plan" annually to tackle climate change with support from rich nations on a scale not seen outside wartime recovery, however justifying such expense to taxpayers during an economic downturn is not an easy sell.

The World Economic and Social Survey called for a "Global Sustainable New Deal" to overcome the "woefully inadequate" estimate of 21 billion dollars currently set aside internationally to adapt to and cope with climate change.

Despite the need for 'green' development there is conflict over the restrictions that these policies will place on the ability of poorer nations to develop their economies and industrialise. Some developing nations still have limited access to electricity and hence some argue that electricity should be prioritised over low carbon growth.

The Adaptation Fund is unique among the financial instruments of the international climate change regime in being exclusively dedicated to the funding of concrete adaptation activities. Given the relatively large but nonetheless limited size of the funding that is projected to be available through this instrument, potential interest in this funding source is bound to be considerable.

 

What do you think? Leave a reply and let us know...

Want to learn more?
"Policies for Funding a Response to Climate Change", Brian Roach, Global Development and Environment Institute, Working Paper No. 08-03, July 2008

"Costs of adapting to climate change significantly under-estimated", IIED, August 2009

"National Adaptation Funding: Ways forward for the poorest Countries", IIED Briefing Paper, April 2009

"African Countries Ask for Climate Change Funding", AP/Michael von Bülow, COP15, 2 June 2009

Outline of the sources of funding for Climate Change Adaptation from the World Health Organisation

"Ethical Issues in Funding for Adaptation in Countries Vulnerable to Climate Change; the Example of Bhutan", ClimateEthics.org