Answers

Name:

Morten Gøbel

Organisation:

Oxfam DK

Response:

By providing 1.6 billion DKK to GCF, Denmark takes a giant step forward in meeting its international obligations to provide climate finance. This is highly acknowledged. Yet, the project document also points at critical factor: “The insufficient capacity in the GCF Secretariat to manage the increase in programming resources and number of AEs and project proposals within a reasonable timeframe”. It is presented as a risk, but it is more than that: It is a reality! This has created a huge backlog of unprocessed applications - both for accreditation and project support. Seen from the perspective of civil society, the GCF is extremely bureaucratic and complicated to access. Another key concern is the top-down approach of the GCF and its allocation of resources. Although the GCF is committed to supporting local adaptation finance in developing countries, the fund has failed to adequately operationalize this commitment. Some of the reasons are given in a research article on GCF and adaptation finance (Climate Policy 2022, Omukuti et.al.): First, GCF lacks a unified framework for identifying and defining the local level, local actors, and local adaptation processes. Second, GCF exhibits limited transparency and accountability in relation to how approved funding for adaptation is spent, particularly for projects that claim to generate local level adaptation outcomes. Third, some Accredited Entities have limited experience and capacity for designing and implementing projects that deliver finance to the local level. This is because the local delivery of finance is not prioritized by GCF during the accreditation of entities or provision of readiness support to Accredited Entities. It is therefore recommended that Denmark use the leverage that this grant gives to pro-actively address some of the serious shortcomings of the GCF.

Name:

Lisbet Dinsen

Organisation:

Danish Family planing assocaition

Response:

please see attached response.

File: