Climate finance is at the heart of the world's effort to confront climate change. Yet, for countries
facing the most severe impacts, the central problem is no longer simply whether money has been
pledged—it is whether that money can actually reach the communities and institutions that need
it.
This growing contradiction has created what experts describe as a climate finance paradox:
global commitments continue to rise, while climate-vulnerable countries struggle with
complicated procedures, institutional barriers and limited capacity to access international funds.
For Bangladesh, one of the world's most climate-vulnerable countries, the problem is particularly
acute.
The country faces recurring cyclones, floods, river erosion, sea-level rise and salinity intrusion.
At the same time, it has developed an extensive policy architecture for responding to climate
change, including the Bangladesh Climate Change Strategy and Action Plan, National
Adaptation Plan, Delta Plan 2100 and Nationally Determined Contribution.
But ambitious plans require equally ambitious financing.
Bangladesh needs major investments in climate adaptation, resilient infrastructure, renewable
energy, disaster risk reduction, urban resilience, food security and the management of climate-
induced migration.
The global financing picture, meanwhile, remains deeply uneven.
Under the 2009 Copenhagen Accord, developed countries pledged to mobilise $100 billion
annually for developing countries. The Paris Agreement in 2015 subsequently placed finance at
the centre of global climate action, linking it to mitigation, adaptation and resilience.
At COP29 in Baku, governments agreed on a new collective climate-finance target of $300
billion annually by 2035.
The late Dr Saleemul Huq, founder of the International Centre for Climate Change and
Development, repeatedly argued that climate finance should not be judged by the size of pledges
but by whether it strengthens resilience on the ground.
He also warned that vulnerable countries can spend enormous amounts of time preparing funding
proposals instead of implementing climate solutions.
The challenge extends beyond the volume of money.
Professor Navroz K Dubash of India's Centre for Policy Research has argued that climate finance
must support national development priorities rather than create parallel systems.
Dr Rachel Kyte, the UK's Special Representative for Climate, has emphasised the importance of
predictable finance, noting that private investment cannot scale without clear public policies and
confidence in long-term financing mechanisms.
Mafalda Duarte, Executive Director of the Green Climate Fund, has acknowledged that access
procedures remain too complicated for many developing countries and has called for simplified
accreditation procedures and stronger country ownership.
The issue is also deeply connected to climate justice.
Developing countries argue that industrialised nations bear much greater responsibility for
historical greenhouse gas emissions, while countries such as Bangladesh contribute relatively
little to global emissions but face disproportionate consequences.
This principle is reflected in the UN climate regime's concept of Common but Differentiated
Responsibilities.
Bangladesh is also confronting a difficult development balancing act.
It must expand renewable energy while maintaining affordable electricity; reduce emissions
while creating jobs; attract investment while building resilient infrastructure; and pursue climate
action while reducing poverty.
Another weakness is the short-term, project-based nature of much climate finance. Projects
frequently run for three to five years, after which funding can end and implementation can slow.
Experts therefore argue for a shift towards financing national institutions, public budgeting
systems, long-term planning, policy reform and institutional capacity rather than relying
primarily on isolated projects.
Md Abul Basar, Team Leader of Swisscontact Bangladesh, told Dhaka Tribune that climate
finance represents a strategic opportunity for Bangladesh as traditional aid declines.
He stressed that strengthening technical and institutional capacity is essential to access global
funds, enhance resilience, support low-carbon development and promote more inclusive and
sustainable economic growth.
Shamsuddin Ahmed, Executive Director of the Centre for Participatory Research and
Development, similarly called for reform of the global financing system.
“Climate finance must become simpler, more accessible and aligned with the development
priorities of climate-vulnerable countries like Bangladesh.”
Experts have identified several reforms that could help close the gap: simplifying application
procedures, expanding direct access for vulnerable countries, increasing financing for local
governments, strengthening grant-based finance, improving transparency, aligning funding with
national development plans, expanding blended finance and investing in institutional capacity.
Bangladesh is already well positioned to benefit from a more effective global climate-finance
system. Its extensive climate policy framework provides a foundation for investment in
renewable energy, resilient infrastructure, nature-based solutions, sustainable agriculture and
climate-smart urban development.
SM/CitizenTimes
