Climate change is already wreaking havoc throughout the developing world. Vietnam, for example, has reported that natural disasters, some of them exacerbated by climate change, have caused annual losses equivalent to 2 percent of its GDP. In agriculture-dependent countries like Ethiopia, longer droughts and more frequent flooding are threatening livelihoods and food supplies.
As the international community gears up for the UN Climate Change Conference in Paris in December, identifying and streamlining sources of financing for the fight against climate change must be a top priority. Development banks like the French Development Agency (AFD) are well placed to contribute.
For starters, development banks can finance projects that benefit both development and the environment. Global warming is now a vital factor to consider when planning any development project. For example, the effects of climate change can pose critical risks to infrastructure — agricultural irrigation, public transportation or nearly anything else. Meanwhile, rising incomes — a goal of any development effort — nearly always means increased consumption of natural resources and energy, resulting in more emissions and further warming.
Such interlocking relationships between global warming and development explain why the French government requires that at least 50 percent of the funding provided by the AFD be directed toward development projects that also have a positive impact on the environment. Examples include wind farms in Ethiopia, better forest management in Madagascar, nationwide climate plans in Indonesia and Vietnam, and clean urban transport in Colombia.
Development banks can also play an important role in designing financial tools that allow private investors to contribute to the fight against climate change.
However, today’s funding challenge is no longer just about quantity. Though potential sources for climate-friendly development financing now include pension funds, insurance companies, foundations and sovereign wealth funds, what is often missing are mechanisms to ensure that investments are channeled into well-targeted and effective projects.
One solution is “green” (or “climate”) bonds. These instruments have all the characteristics of conventional bonds, but they are backed by investments that contribute to sustainable development or the fight against climate change.
Until recently, only a few organizations or governments, including the World Bank, the US state of Massachusetts and the French region of Ile de France, issued green bonds, and generally the amounts involved were modest. However, in the past two years, other players have entered the market, and volumes have skyrocketed. Last year, emissions of green bonds exceeded the total in all previous years combined.
Indeed, demand is outstripping supply. The latest bond offers were all oversubscribed — and the trend is likely to continue. The insurance industry has committed to double its green investments, to US$84 billion, by the end of the year. And in September last year, three major pension funds from North America and Europe announced plans to increase their holdings in low-carbon investments by more than US$31 billion by 2020.
As the market for these bonds expands, they must be better labeled and certified. Today, harmonized standards do not exist. The quality of the assets backing the bonds depends solely on issuers’ goodwill and technical skills. Specific guidelines and rating methods need to be developed. In this context, the recent decision by a coalition of institutional investors to measure and disclose the carbon footprint of at least US$500 billion in investments is a step forward.
In September last year, the AFD issued 1 billion euros (US$1.2 billion) in climate bonds, with one goal being to contribute to the development of concrete quality standards. With the help of a major agency that rates corporate social responsibility, we were able to provide investors with solid information — and an accountability process — about the portfolio’s direct impact on greenhouse-gas emissions.
Indeed, the projects financed by these bonds were required to meet stringent criteria, including a prior analysis of their carbon footprint, proof of a clear and significant impact on climate change and a design that is aligned with the broader strategies being pursued by local actors and countries.
Climate bonds have the potential to empower countries and institutions as they move toward meeting enforceable commitments to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. However, if they are to be effective, they will require clear guidelines and a reliable framework for assessment. As leaders from countries and institutions from around the world prepare to meet in December, getting the financing right should be a top priority.
Anne Paugam is chief executive of French Development Agency. France will host COP21 in December in Paris
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US