What Does the World Owe Nations Suffering the Most From Climate Change? Philanthropy Weighs in
/
Flooded streets in bangladesh. Sk Hasan Ali/shutterstock
If you weren’t paying close attention to COP26 last month, you might have missed a couple of historic, if relatively small bids for global climate equity.
Sandwiching the two weeks of multimillion- and multibillion-dollar promises and pledges at the annual United Nations climate change conference were a pair of comparably tiny but potentially more meaningful announcements. And philanthropy was a key player in each.
First, on the opening Monday of the conference, the Scottish government broke an international taboo by becoming the first nation to set aside funding to address loss and damage, the legal jargon used to describe the catastrophic impacts climate change will bring to many countries, particularly lower-income nations in the Global South. The COP26 co-host committed 2 million pounds and will partner with the Climate Justice Resilience Fund, a global intermediary fund started by the Oak Foundation.
Next, as negotiations entered their final days, a group of philanthropies led by the Children’s Investment Fund Foundation pledged $3 million in startup assistance for an international fund to support loss and damage for highly vulnerable countries, such as small island nations dealing with sea level rise. It was the philanthropic equivalent of applying pressure, or maybe leading by example, as loss and damage funding was a key sticking point in negotiations. As rich countries fought such payments, philanthropies seemed to be saying, “Here, we’ll be the first to pitch in.”
The immediate results were minimal. The gathering’s final agreement included no such fund and it appears that so far, only one other territory—Wallonia, a region in Belgium—has joined Scotland in pledging funds for loss and damage. The amounts, too, only scratch the surface of the problem, as studies estimate that between $300 billion to $500 billion will be needed annually.
Yet philanthropy’s role in these two efforts to pressure the world’s richest nations to pay up for the damage their emissions have caused—an idea they have long and strenuously resisted—may mark the beginning of expanded engagement on the much-neglected topic of what is owed to the world’s most vulnerable nations as climate catastrophes multiply.
What happens to the $3 million?
The commitment by CIFF and its partners—the European Climate Foundation, William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, Open Society Foundations and the Global Greengrants Fund also joined the pledge—won high-profile praise.
“I’m absolutely delighted by this development,” tweeted Nicola Sturgeon, first minister of Scotland. Mary Robinson, the former president of Ireland, who is a prominent global climate justice advocate and established an organization devoted to the cause, cited the “much-needed funds” in the announcement’s press release.
But given the hoped-for fund was not included in the meeting’s final agreement, the funding will have to be repurposed. The partners’ initial comments suggest it will be used to move the debate on loss and damage forward.
Open Society Foundations, which accounted for $1 million of the $3 million fund, plans to use the funds “to advance loss and damage financing” over the following year in the run-up to the next U.N. climate summit, wrote Heloisa Griggs, deputy director of OSF’s Latin America program and the acting co-lead for the institution’s climate justice work, in a statement to IP.
“Philanthropy can play a catalytic role in alleviating the damage caused by the climate crisis by spurring financing for loss and damage,” she wrote.
For OSF, such efforts will likely include work in the Caribbean, which is one focus of its new climate justice portfolio. The grantmaker is supporting governments, nonprofits and others in the region to push for increased financing for both climate adaptation and loss and damage.
In a statement to IP, CIFF stated it would “explore next steps” in consultation with partners, including the United Nations. Representatives from the foundation were not available for an interview by press time.
Next steps for philanthropy
Climate philanthropy has traditionally focused on reducing greenhouse gas emissions (climate mitigation, in the field’s jargon) with an emphasis on policy and expanding renewables, while moving less money toward helping communities adjust to the impacts of climate change (climate adaptation or resilience). Loss and damage funding is complementary to adaptation, but has been less a topic for philanthropy than for governments and multilateral organizations, with some nations equating it to the climate change equivalent of reparations.
But the $3 million pledge marks a high-profile acknowledgement by some of the biggest players in philanthropy that global action is urgently needed on the damage being exacted here and now by climate change, said Heather McGray, director of the Climate Justice Resilience Fund.
McGray said funders should approach the next steps with “humility and with ears open” using a community-driven process, while working to get money out the door quickly. Philanthropy should consider the full scope of its response, both what’s needed immediately versus in the long-term, as well as what’s necessary across the local, national and global levels, she said.
“The role of philanthropy in this could be really groundbreaking,” she said. “It didn’t win the day in Glasgow, but the story is not over.”
McGray acknowledged the amount pledged is relatively tiny—“it’s just a drop in the ocean”—but said the next year presents an opportunity for learning on a topic with which few funders have engaged to date, but one that will be a pressing matter for decades to come.
One key in moving forward is ensuring loss and damage funding is neither muddled with similar support, such as climate adaptation grants, nor held wholly apart, McGray said. The needs are distinct, but often aligned.
What philanthropy should consider
Among those excited by the $3 million pledge was Salote Soqo, director of advocacy for global displacement at Unitarian Universalist Service Committee and a member of the Climate Justice Resilience Fund’s council of advisors, who called it “amazing progress.”
But Soqo, who is an Indigenous Fijian from the provinces of Cakaudrove and Lau, also cautioned that the pledge is only a first step. Philanthropy needs to make sure smaller groups can directly access funding, reporting requirements are not onerous, and funding is distributed widely, unlike programs like the UNFCCC’s Green Climate Fund, which is out of reach for many organizations, she said.
“To access these large pots of funds, really, it’s a matter of climate justice and reparations and self-determination and building our own power,” she said.
More philanthropies joining the cause would also help. To date, Soqo is aware of only two funds that target loss and damage: her own at UUSC and CJRF. Joining the effort, however, may require a deeper type of reflection than merely determining where to send the next round of checks.
“Philanthropy is also a sector that needs to and is understanding its own role in the loss and damage that particularly Indigenous peoples have historically faced through colonialism, land grabs, land theft,” she said.
“Especially when it comes to climate… and loss and damage, it forces us to look within our own sector and to question ourselves about the role we have historically played,” Soqo said. “It needs to happen because that’s what true transformational justice really means.”
