Climate change adaptation

Adaptation response measures I: Financing and governance

Page contents:

• International policy framework for adaptation
• Financing adaptation
• National and sub-national governance
• Additional online resources

International policy framework for adaptation

The principle international policy framework for dealing with climate change is the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Signed at the Rio Earth Summit in 1992, the UNFCCC represents an attempt to stabilise greenhouse gas (GHG) concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic climate change (an average global temperature rise of no more than 2°C). Under the convention, the Kyoto protocol sets binding GHG emissions targets for those industrialised countries which have signed up to it, amounting to an average of five per cent against 1990 levels over the five-year period 2008-2012. Recent attempts to agree on a successor to Kyoto beyond 2012, most notably at the 2009 UNFCCC Conference of Parties (CoP) in Copenhagen, have had limited success.

Within the context of the UNFCCC and international policy discussions on climate change, the issue of adaptation has only recently become a priority. The 2007 Bali Action Plan (BAP) was key in raising the political status of adaptation by giving equal importance to action on both mitigation and adaptation. Under the UNFCCC a range of programmes have been established to assist developing countries in formulating and implementing adaptation plans, chiefly:

• National Adaptation Programmes of Action (NAPAs): NAPAs are multi-stakeholder assessments through which least developed countries (LDCs) identify their urgent and immediate adaptation needs. As of July 2009, 42 out of 49 NAPAs had been submitted and 439 projects had been identified, at a total aggregate cost of $1.7 billion (see also national-level adaptation planning).
• The Nairobi Work Programme on impacts, vulnerability and adaptation to climate change (NWP): The NWP is a five-year (2005-2010) programme on the scientific, technical and socio-economic aspects of vulnerability and adaptation. It aims to assist countries to improve their understanding of impacts, vulnerability and adaptation to make informed decisions on practical adaptation actions and measures to respond to climate change.

Schipper, E., L., Cigarán, M., P., Hedger, M., 2008, ‘Adaptation to Climate Change: the New Challenge for Development in the Developing World’,  UNDP Environment & Energy Group, New York
What are the challenges facing countries in adapting to climate change? Adaptation involves a process of sustainable and permanent adjustment to climate change and has clear policy links to economic development, poverty reduction, and disaster management strategies. Successful adaptation policies will require long-term thinking and consideration of climate change impacts at international, national, regional, local and community levels. Adaptation planning must consider vulnerabilities to climate change, appropriate technologies, capacity, and local coping practices as well as government policies and actions.
Access full text online

Financing adaptation

Funding for adaptation under the UNFCCC is delivered through the Global Environment Facility (GEF) and the Adaptation Fund Board (AFB).

The GEF administers three climate funds:

• The Strategic Priority on Adaptation (SPA) to support pilot and demonstration projects that generate both local (development-focused) and global benefits;
• The Least Developed Countries Fund (LDCF) to support the preparation and implementation of NAPAs; and
• The Special Climate Change Fund (SCCF) to support long-term adaptation measures that increase the resilience of national development sectors to the impacts of climate change.

The AFB operates the Adaptation Fund under the Kyoto Protocol to finance concrete adaptation projects and programmes in developing countries that are Parties to the Kyoto Protocol. Unlike other funds that rely mainly on donor contributions, this fund is financed with a 2% share of proceeds from clean development mechanism (CDM) projects.

In addition, funding for adaptation is now increasingly being delivered through a proliferation of multilateral and bilateral channels, most notably through the World Bank’s Pilot Programme for Climate Resilience (PPCR), the adaptation component of the Banks’ multi-donor Climate Investment Funds. In fact these now significantly outweigh UNFCCC channels in terms of the levels of funding available (see Figure 1).

To date, adaptation finance from all these sources has been allocated primarily towards adaptation assessment, planning and capacity-building. There are now calls for the focus to begin switching to the implementation of adaptation initiatives.

Recent developments

One of the few areas in which progress was made at the 2009 Conference of Parties (CoP) in Copenhagen was in the area of climate finance. Although not legally binding, the Copenhagen Accord committed developed countries to provide $100 billion dollars a year by 2020, including a $30 billion ‘fast-start’ pledge between 2010 and 2012 to address the needs of developing countries with balanced allocation between adaptation and mitigation. This funding is to come from a wide variety of sources, public and private, bilateral and multilateral, including alternative sources of finance.  Crucially however, there remains much uncertainty and disagreement on appropriate principles and mechanisms for administering, channelling and allocating these funds. A further issue is how funding will be generated and the extent to which it represents ‘new and additional’ resources over and above existing overseas development assistance (ODA) commitments. 

Persson, A. et al., 2009, ‘Adaptation Finance under a Copenhagen Agreed Outcome’, Research Report, Stockholm Environment Institute, Stockholm
How can an agreement on adaptation finance be reached as part of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)? This report examines the issues in relation to the three stages of adaptation finance: generation, governance and delivery. The block in negotiations can often be attributed to different perceptions of what is 'equitable' and 'fair' burden-sharing. Recommendations include the need for agreement on measurable allocation criteria to facilitate objective decision-making.
Access full text online

Schalatek, L., Bird, N. and Brown, J., 2010, ‘Where’s the Money? The Status of Climate Finance Post-Copenhagen’, Heinrich Böll Foundation and ODI
What progress was made regarding climate finance at the 2009 talks in Copenhagen? The 'Copenhagen Accord' gives some clear promises and numbers for both short- and long-term financial support to help developing countries, especially the most vulnerable, to address climate change. It pledges US$10 billion per year from 2010-2012, then US$100 billion per year from 2020. However, as the Accord is a non-binding political agreement, if and how those commitments can be fulfilled remains uncertain. The Advisory Group on Climate Change Financing will submit its final recommendations before the Cancun meeting in December 2010.
Access full text online

Bapna M. and McGray H., 2008, 'Financing Adaptation: Opportunities for Innovation and Experimentation', World Resources Institute, Washington DC
How should funding for climate change adaptation be generated, channelled and spent? This paper explores the opportunities and challenges involved in financing adaptation efforts in developing countries. Helping developing countries adapt to climate change will involve enormous resources, above those already assigned for development. Finance mechanisms that can deliver this additional level of resource need to be designed. Separating the different processes around generating, channelling and spending adaption finance offers a way forward. Donor country policymakers need to understand that effective approaches to adaptation finance will require attention to all three phases of decision-making, and to the interplay among them in any political context.
Access full text online

Glemarec, Y., Waissbein, O. and Bayraktar, H., 2010, ‘Human Development in a Changing Climate: A Framework for Climate Finance’, Discussion Paper, Energy and Environment Group, United Nations Development Programme, New York
How can climate finance be raised from a variety of sources at scale? How can this finance be delivered to where it is most needed with sufficient speed and in way that is nationally owned? A country-driven, multi-stakeholder climate finance framework is proposed to meet these objectives, built on four country-level mechanisms. It involves: 1) formulation of low-emissions, climate-resilient development strategies (to bring about bottom-up national ownership, incorporate human development goals, and take a long-term outlook); 2) financial and technical support platforms (to catalyse the required scale of finance and associated capacity; 3) National Adaptation Plan-type instruments (for balanced and fair access to international public finance); and 4) coordinated implementation and Monitoring, Reporting  and Verification systems (to facilitate long-term, efficient results).
Access full text online

The World Resources Institute (WRI) has carried out a preliminary analysis of countries’ immediate fast-start pledges announced thus far. The analysis looks at both the amounts and the mechanisms by which funding would be delivered and the extent to which funds can be deemed 'new and additional'.

World Resources Institute: Summary of Developed Country ‘Fast-Start’ Climate Finance Pledges

Similarly, the following document analyses the current (midway) status of the ‘fast-start’ financing scheme:

Brown, J., Stadelmann, M., and Hornlein, L., 2011, ‘Fast-start finance to address climate change: what we know at the mid-point’, ODI Background Note, Overseas Development Institute, London

Sources, delivery and accountability in adaptation finance

Adaptation finance is distinct from development finance in that it is seen by many developing countries as compensation for the damage caused by climate change rather than as a form of discretionary assistance like ODA. Nevertheless, under current arrangements, adaptation finance comes from both voluntary and mandatory contributions through national budgets and market-based levies.

The plethora of funding mechanisms and channels for adaptation to climate change makes for a complex picture (see Climate Funds Update). On the one hand, the GEF is often regarded as cumbersome and non-transparent, and has failed to channel anywhere near the volume of funding necessary to address climate issues.  On the other hand, the recent proliferation of new bilateral and multilateral funding mechanisms is creating a highly fragmented system which poses significant coordination, ownership and accountability challenges. The pace at which this new adaptation architecture is developing has caused some concern, especially given that there is no overarching framework to govern the delivery of these new funds.

In this context, current debates focus on: whether to strengthen the mandate (and effectiveness) of the GEF; what principles should be established to oversee the delivery of climate finance; how to simplify rules and enable more direct access for developing countries to climate finance; how to ensure that funds are appropriate, sufficient and predictable; and how to ensure that funds are managed transparently at the national level and are responsive to local needs.  Increasingly, there are calls for lessons to be drawn from international experience in improving aid effectiveness (underpinned by principles of harmonisation, alignment, country ownership and mutual accountability).

From a development perspective a further key consideration is the extent to which different types of finance are able to target the poorest and most vulnerable. Private finance is seen as particularly ineffective in this regard - as is the GEF - compared to funding channelled through civil society. Targeting of bi-lateral, multi-lateral and state-led funding also needs to be improved. 

Porter, G., Bird, N., Kaur, N. and Peskett, L., 2008, ‘New Finance for Climate Change and the Environment’, WWF and Heinrich Boll Stiftung
What are the implications of the recent proliferation of funding initiatives aimed at addressing global environmental issues? This paper examines eight new bilateral funds and six multilateral funds established to address the challenges related to climate change. It recommends early harmonisation of the financial architecture and greater involvement of developing countries in design processes.
Access full text online

Mitchell, T., Anderson, S. and Huq, S., 2008, ‘Principles for Delivering Adaptation Finance’, Institute of Development Studies, Brighton
This briefing proposes a set of principles for delivering adaptation finance and uses these to assess the efficacy of different country-level adaptation delivery mechanisms. Currently, accessing adaptation funding is difficult, governance processes lack transparency and decision making favours projects rather than programmatic approaches. Instead, effective delivery of integrated adaptation could be guided by principles of country ownership, prioritising the most vulnerable, mutual accountability and harmonisation. Countries should be allowed to set their own adaptation priorities and should be supported by flexible, tailored delivery mechanisms that promote programmatic approaches.
Access full text online

CIDSE and Caritas, 2010, ‘Business as Unusual. Direct Access: Giving power Back to the Poor?, Discussion Paper, CIDSE, Brussels
Finance for climate action in developing countries is widely agreed to be an essential element of a post-2012 climate agreement, and a key factor in negotiating such finance will be 'Direct Access' (DA). This paper explores the DA concept, examining its challenges and merits, by discussing existing funds that have adopted this modality. Whilst DA is an efficient and effective means of delivering financial support to developing countries, it cannot of itself guarantee inclusivity or engagement with the most vulnerable. Civil society participation and empowerment, multi-stakeholder engagement, and a bottom-up approach are crucial elements in developing a comprehensive DA climate financing model.
Access full text online

Ballesteros, A. and Ramkumar, V., 2009, ‘Accounting for Results: Ensuring Transparency and Accountability in Financing for Climate Change’, IBP Budget Brief, International Budget Partnership, Washington DC
How will climate change funds be collected, distributed, and accounted for at the international level? What mechanisms are needed to ensure that recipient countries manage these funds in ways that are transparent and responsive to the needs and input of the public? This Brief argues that gathering resources and managing resources need to be considered simultaneously. The next generation of climate finance needs to strengthen the national institutions that will implement mitigation and adaptation activities and ensure their transparency and accountability to citizens within countries, as well as to the international community.
Access full text online

Allocation and additionality of adaptation finance

To date, there has been no agreement on equitable and measurable allocation criteria that can be used for adaptation finance. Debates revolve around the weight which should be given to different criteria such as climate sensitivity, exposure and vulnerability, adaptive capacity, and absorption and implementation capacity, as well as other non-climatic indicators such as population and poverty levels within a country.

In terms of how adaptation finance is actually spent, funding to date has largely been disbursed on a project-by-project basis. Given the piecemeal nature of this approach and the growing recognition of the synergies between many development and adaptation interventions, the emphasis has begun to shift toward integrating adaptation into ongoing development planning (see adaptation guidance and tools: mainstreaming adaptation into development programming). There is some concern however that this could mean diverting existing ODA pledges towards adaptation activities which could lead to a decrease in flows of aid to certain sectors such as education and health or to certain regions such as Sub-Saharan Africa.

In this context there is much debate around the extent to which the commitment under the Copenhagen Accord to provide $100 a year for adaptation by 2020 represents ‘new and additional’ funding, especially given that there is no clear baseline against which to measure these pledges. A range of definitions of additionality have recently been advanced, with a view to reaching a common definition. These include finance that: a) is over and above the 0.7% ODA target; b) represents an increase on 2009 ODA levels directed at climate change activities; c) is set at an agreed percentage in relation to ODA; or d) is altogether separate from ODA. However, each of these interpretations implies trade-offs among different actors and, as such, the current debate is driven largely by political interest rather than considerations of the effectiveness of adaptation finance.

Barr, R., Fankhauser, S. and Hamilton, K., 2010, ‘The Allocation of Adaptation Funding, Grantham Research Institute and Centre for Climate Change Economics and Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science 
How should climate change adaptation funding be allocated? This paper argues that allocation decisions should focus on the concept of vulnerability. While recognising that expert judgment will always play a role in funding decisions, it recommends the adoption of an empirical approach to allocation in order to ensure transparency, efficiency, and equity. Indicators to guide the allocation of adaptation funding should relate to physical impact, adaptive capacity and implementation capacity.
Access full text online

Brown J., Bird, N. and Schalatek L., 2010, 'Climate Finance Additionality: Emerging Definitions and their Implications', Climate Finance Policy Brief No.2, ODI and Heinrich Boll Foundation
What are the emerging definitions of 'climate finance additionality'? What are the technical and political implications of these different definitions? This policy brief explores these questions and looks at their requirements in terms of tracking, measuring, reporting and verifying finance. Additionality is an important issue; sufficient finance must be channelled towards climate change needs while simultaneously avoiding diversion from development needs. The way additionality is defined by donor governments needs focused attention and debate. Innovative approaches to raising the funds required outside development funding are needed.
Access full text online

Brown, J. Cantore, N. and Willem te Velde, D., 2010, ‘Climate Financing and Development.  Friends or Foes?’, ODI Report, ODI, London
Will finance for climate change adaptation in developing countries compromise support for meeting the Millennium Development Goals? This study analyses country proposals for climate change funding put forward at recent UN-led climate change negotiations. It argues that while the aims of development and adaptation to climate change often overlap, additional funds are needed to meet the specific challenges of global warming. If not, aid may be diverted from development needs to adaptation, resulting in the neglect of aid to certain regions and sectors.
Access full text online 

Stadelmann M., Roberts J.T. and Michaelowa A., 2010, 'Keeping a Big Promise: Options for Baselines to Assess “New and Additional” Climate Finance', CIS Discussion Paper no. 66, Center for Comparative and International Studies, Zurich
All major climate policy agreements have stated that climate finance for developing countries will be 'new and additional'. But new and additional to what? This article explores options for agreeing a baseline, and related methodological challenges. It identifies two viable baselines: 'new funding sources only' and 'above pre-defined business as usual level of development assistance'.
Access full text online

National and sub-national governance

Whilst the issue of global governance in relation to climate change adaptation has received much attention over the past few years, much less is understood about how to effectively connect emerging global frameworks with regional, national and local level processes. Because different countries have very different pre-existing adaptive capacities and experiences, approaches to adaptation need to be flexible enough to take this diversity into account. In particular there is a need for a much clearer understanding of the underlying political and institutional factors which will determine whether proposed adaptation interventions are likely to work in a given socio-political context. This is especially true of fragile and conflict-affected states (see adaptation in fragile and conflict-affected states).

Commission on Climate Change and Development, 2009 ‘Governance Gaps’, Chapter 4 in Closing the Gaps, Disaster Risk Reduction and Adaptation to Climate Change in Developing Countries’, Report of the Commission on Climate Change and Development, Stockholm
Climate change has highlighted the urgent need for the reform of governance approaches and institutions. Disaster risk reduction of climate change impacts requires unparalleled international cooperation and new forms of local, national, regional and international governance. This chapter suggests how institutional architecture should be organised to fill 'governance gaps' in order to serve local needs and improve climate change cooperation. Climate change adaptation will require institutions to use local resources, a global vision, and cross-cutting agendas. Recommendations include greater cooperation with city governments and the establishment of national inter-ministerial/inter-agency processes to review adaptation policies and decisions.
Access full text online 

GSDRC, 2007, ‘Climate Change and Governance’, Helpdesk Research Report, GSDRC, Birmingham
Work examining how climate change adaptation knowledge is transferred, the links between mitigation and adaptation and on how institutional and organisational structures contribute to adaptive capacity is beginning to emerge. However, considerable gaps still exist; particularly with research exploring good governance and the design of institutional architecture for adaptation at national, regional and local levels and with studies about how vulnerable communities can be linked more closely into national and international climate policy-making.
Access full text online

Corfee-Morlot , J, Kamal-Chaoui, L., Donovan, M.G., Cochran, I., Robert, A. and Teasdale, P.J., 2009, ‘Cities, Climate Change and Multilevel Governance’, OECD Environmental Working Papers N° 14, OECD, Paris
What forms of national-local policy links are used in implementing mitigation and adaptation policies? What are the key tools for integrated, multilevel governance of mitigation and adaptation activities, and how can these be applied? This paper highlights a 'hybrid' framework of multilevel governance in which local-regional/national collaboration promotes mutual learning and enhanced effectiveness. Systematic efforts are needed to align incentives across sectoral and cross-sectoral policy areas, so that regional and local policy implementation is successful.
Access full text online

National-level adaptation planning

The principle mechanism guiding national level adaptation planning in developing countries is the National Adaptation Programme of Action (NAPA). NAPAs are designed to assist least developed countries (LDCs) to identify priority activities that respond to their urgent and immediate needs based on an assessment of existing local coping strategies rather than future vulnerability and impacts of climate change.

NAPAs have generally been regarded as effective in terms of raising awareness of national stakeholders about adaptation and driving forward country-owned action plans. Crucially however, they have tended to run independently from existing national development planning processes. This is largely because NAPAs tend to be project-oriented with an emphasis on urgent and immediate adaptation activities which do not consider long-term development objectives. Furthermore, responsibility for preparing and implementing NAPAs and national development plans tends to lie with different ministries. As a result, there are increasing calls to incorporate adaptation into poverty reduction strategy papers (PRSPs) and to strengthen coordination and information exchange between ministries, different levels of government and civil society.

Accordingly, climate change adaptation planning is beginning to move beyond  NAPAs to focus on longer-term approaches. One prominent example is the UNDP’s African Adaptation Programme which is assisting 21 African countries to adjust their national development processes to incorporate climate change risks through integrated adaptation actions and resilience plans.

Osman-Elasha, B. and Downing, T. E., 2007, ‘Lessons Learned in Preparing National Adaptation Programmes of Action in Eastern and Southern Africa’, European Capacity Building Initiative, Oxford
What lessons have been learned from the National Adaptation Programmes of Action (NAPAs) in Eastern and Southern Africa? This study looks at the international effort to identify urgent needs and to begin implementing climate adaptation projects in these regions. It concludes that NAPAs have played an important role in creating awareness and a sense of ownership among the different stakeholder groups, from policymakers to the general public at village level. However, the momentum generated must be sustained and funding is now needed to implement projects.
Access full text online

Kramer, A. M., 2007, ‘Adaptation to Climate Change in Poverty Reduction Strategies’, Occasional Paper for the Human Development Report 2007/2008, Human Development Report Office, United Nations Development Programme, New York
How far is climate change adaptation integrated into the poverty reduction strategies of developing countries? This paper examines the Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSPs) and National Adaptation Programmes of Action (NAPAs) of 19 countries and finds low incorporation of adaptation in PRSPs. Countries should develop regional and local climate change institutional frameworks to strengthen the coordination, networking and information flows between different levels of governments and local civil society. The World Bank and United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) must coordinate efforts to support countries developing PRSPs and NAPAs.
Access full text online

Hardee K. and Mutunga, C., 2009, ‘Strengthening the Link Between Climate Change Adaptation and National Development Plans: Lessons from the Case of Population in National Adaptation Programmes of Action (NAPAs)’, Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Volume 15, Number 2
How well are National Adaptation Programme of Actions (NAPAs) integrated with national development strategies in the Least Developed Countries (LDCs)? This paper examines 41 NAPAs from the LDCs. It argues that NAPAs compel developing countries to focus on immediate priorities at the expense of longer-term climate change concerns, such as population growth. The global community needs to adopt longer-term approaches that stress the link between adaptation and development.
Access full text online

World Resources Institute, 2009, 'The National Adaptive Capacity Framework: Key Institutional Functions for a Changing Climate', Pilot Draft, World Resources Institute, Washington, D.C.
How can countries adapt to climate change? The National Adaptive Capacity framework (NAC) identifies national-level functions that all countries will need to perform to adapt effectively to climate change: assessment, prioritisation, coordination, information management and climate risk reduction. The framework can be used to assess how well functions are being performed and to identify opportunities and priorities for building adaptive capacity and implementing key activities.
Access full text online 

Local actors and institutions

Because climate change impacts are local and context specific, the role of local governments is seen as key. They will ultimately have responsibility for implementing adaptation and will need to collaborate with civil society and the private sector. Civil society is deemed particularly important for holding local and national government to account for acting on climate change. There is therefore a pressing need to build institutional capacity at different levels, in particular with regards to: sharing scientific knowledge and incorporating marginalised voices; identifying local needs; ensuring both horizontal and vertical accountability; efficiently transfering resources; coordinating policy across sectors; and cooperating across national boundaries. 

Formal and informal institutions influence adaptation by structuring the way climate impacts are experienced, connecting individual and collective responses to these impacts and channelling external resources for adaptation.  As such, it is widely recognised that adaptation needs to be based on an understanding of local context and in particular the pressures, obstacles and incentives confronted by local actors. Adaptation to climate change is likely to be but one of a range of competing political and economic priorities (e.g. access to markets, food security). Because top down adaptation processes are often based on optimistic assumptions about the capacity for local governments to take on new priorities, there is a strong case for greater alignment with existing efforts of local actors to deal with the threats and opportunities that they already face. The role of decentralised governance structures and in particular the need to strengthen the capacity of local actors to prioritize and implement adaptation responses is thus receiving increasing attention.

Christoplos, I. et al., 2009, 'Human Dimensions of Climate Change. The Importance of Local and Institutional Issues', Commission on Climate Change and Development, Stockholm
Climate change, conflict, and the squeeze on natural resources due to population growth and environmental degradation are intensifying poverty and vulnerability for many people. Local, autonomous adaptation to these challenges is often overlooked by national government and the international development community in their efforts to manage climate change. This paper examines climate-related adaptive capacities – of people, businesses and eco-systems – and suggests a new agenda, supporting individuals and institutions within their local context.
Access full text online

Agrawal A., Perrin N., Chhatre A., Benson C. and Kononen M., 2009, 'Climate Policy Processes, Local Institutions, and Adaptation Actions: Mechanisms of Translation and Influence', Social Dimensions of Climate Change, World Bank, Washington DC
How can national climate policy processes be translated into local adaptation initiatives? What can be learned from the ways in which natural resource managers have sought to make national resource policies locally responsive and effective? This paper examines national-level adaptation planning efforts and decentralisation reforms. It highlights the need to promote the capacity of local institutions and to strengthen links between local and national adaptation planning. Other recommendations are to: increase local autonomy in adaptation planning and implementation; improve information sharing among decision makers at all levels; and increase the accountability of local decision makers to their constituents.
Access full text online 

Brockhaus, M. and Kambire, H., 2009, 'Decentralization: A Window of Opportunity for Successful Adaptation to Climate Change', Chapter 26 in Adger, N. W. (ed.) Adapting to Climate Change: Thresholds, Values, Governance, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
This chapter examines the opportunities and barriers for successful adaptation to climate change in decentralisation processes. Using a study of two municipalities in Burkina Faso, it stresses the importance of knowledge and institutional flexibility in overcoming resource dependency. The varying degrees of space generated by the decentralisation process in the two municipalities demonstrates the importance of individual understanding and decision-making in determining successful adaptation.
Access full text via document delivery

Christoplos, I., 2008, 'Incentives and Constraints to Climate Change Adaptation and Disaster Risk Reduction - a Local Perspective', The Commission on Climate Change and Development, Stockholm 
How do the capacities of and constraints experienced by local actors affect their engagement in climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction (CCA/DRR)? How can development actors improve their efforts to achieve local 'buy-in' to CCA/DRR? This policy brief finds that CCA//DRR implementation requires the creation of an enabling environment for changes in local institutions, markets, political relationships and public service. The design of CCA/DRR interventions should be linked to local priorities and local efforts to pursue market opportunities, and should avoid overburdening local actors.
Access full text online

Tanner, T.M., Mitchell, T., Polack, E. and Guenther, B., 2009, ‘Urban Governance for Adaptation: Assessing Climate Change Resilience in Ten Asian Cities’, IDS Working Paper 315, Institute of Development Studies, Brighton
How can climate-related impacts be managed in urban settings? What are the links between urban governance, climate adaptation, poverty reduction and sustainable development? This paper develops an analytical framework by combining governance literature with climate resilience assessments conducted in ten Asian cities. The climate-resilient urban governance assessment framework involves: (1) decentralisation and autonomy, (2) accountability and transparency, (3) responsiveness and flexibility, (4) participation and inclusion and (5) experience and support. Use of this framework can assist in assessing and building urban resilience to climate change in a way that reduces the vulnerability of the citizens most at risk from climate shocks and stresses.
Access full text online

Satterthwaite, D., 2008, 'Climate Change and Urbanization: Effects and Implications for Urban Governance', Paper prepared for the United Nations Expert Group Meeting on Population Distribution, Urbanization, Internal Migration and Development, 21-23 January 2008, New York, UNDESA
How can municipal governments in low- and middle-income nations prepare for and adapt to the increasing risks posed by climate change? This paper, published by the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, indicates that most adaptation to the likely climate change-related dangers over the next few decades fits well within a local development agenda. There needs to be a significant increase in development funding to help local governments adapt to climate change challenges.
Access full text online 

Additional online resources

• Climate Funds Update is an independent website that provides information on the growing number of international funding initiatives designed to help developing countries address the challenges of climate change.
• Climate Finance Options, a joint initiative of UNDP and the World Bank, aims to provide comprehensive guidance on financial options available for climate action in developing countries. It includes information on where to access the wide range of funds available from multilateral and bilateral institution, as well as public and private sources.
• UN Secretary-General’s High-level Advisory Group on Climate Change Financing (AGF) was established on 12 February 2010 to develop practical proposals on how to scale-up long-term financing for mitigation and adaptation strategies in developing countries from various public as well as private sources.
• The European Capacity Building Initiative (ECBI) aims to promote a more level playing field between government delegations to the international climate change negotiations, and to facilitate mutual understanding and trust, particularly with regards to climate finance.
• UNDP's African Adaptation Programme, funded by the Government of Japan, aims to assist 21 African countries in implementing integrated and comprehensive adaptation actions and resilience plans.
• The Commission on Climate Change and Development (CCCD) was established by the Government of Sweden in 2008 to develop proposals on how adaptation, risk reduction and climate-proof development can be effectively integrated into development and poverty reduction plans in developing countries with a particular focus on the ethical, human, institutional, and resource dimensions of adaptation.
• The Climate and Development Knowledge Network (CDKN) is a new initiative, funded by the UK government, designed to support developing countries in tackling the challenges posed by climate change.
• Global Environmental Change and Human Security (GECHS) is a project of the International Human Dimensions Programme which situates environmental changes within the larger socioeconomic and political contexts that cause them, and which shape the capacity of communities to cope with and respond to change.
• The World Bank’s Social Dimensions of Climate Change programme focuses on the equity dimensions of the climate change agenda within developing countries. It seeks to understand and address the distributional, poverty and social consequences of climate variability and change.
• UN-HABITAT's Climate Change and Cities programme works with local authorities around the world to enable direct access to global climate funds and to promote local solutions to respond to the impacts of climate change.
• ICLEI - Local Governments for Sustainability is an international association of local governments and national and regional local government organizations committed to sustainable development. ICLEI's programme on climate change focuses on the three pillars of mitigation, adaptation and advocacy.
• The Asian Cities Climate Change Resilience Network (ACCCRN) aims to catalyze attention, funding, and action on building climate change resilience for poor and vulnerable people by creating robust models and methodologies for assessing and addressing risk through active engagement and analysis of various cities.

New additions