The climate policy discourse on Loss and Damage has been considering options for averting, minimizing and addressing critical and increasingly systemic climate-related risks in vulnerable countries. Research has started to identify possible finance sources and mechanisms, but stopped short of positioning those options along a comprehensive risk management framework in line with the whole scope of Loss&Damage.
As a key issue in recent international climate summits, the Green Climate Fund (GCF) is confronted with the problem of insufficient financing. This paper intends to explore several schemes for raising the public finance of the GCF among developed countries. Lessons from three main ongoing international financing mechanisms have been drawn, including the United Nations (UN) membership dues, Official Development Assistance (ODA), and the Global Environment Facility (GEF). The indexes that reflect historical emission responsibility (HR) and ability to pay (AP) are also used to share the burden.
Urban areas account for 70% of carbon emissions, and are likely to be the locus of attention to reduce future emissions in developing countries. However, only a small share of Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) projects under the Kyoto Protocol and only 30% of public climate finance is invested in urban areas. One of the main reasons is that most urban climate change mitigation projects rather provide development than climate benefits, so the question is whether alternative mechanisms can mobilize urban mitigation projects.
Given the challenge of offering a development perspective to a rapidly growing population, it might be tempting for Africa to pursue a strategy of fueling growth with the cheapest source of energy available and take care of the environment later. Such an approach, however, would disregard the social cost of fossil fuels, which the population would have to bear. Using the Sustainable Development Goals as a benchmark for inclusive and sustainable growth we identify the synergy effects provided by renewable energy.
The last few years have seen a phenomenal upsurge in the number of corporate bankruptcies. The vulnerabilities that were lying dormant within contemporary bankruptcy regimes suddenly became apparent, causing concerns within the international corporate community. Consequently, researchers, practitioners, and policy makers from all over the world became actively engaged in emphasizing the importance of efficient bankruptcy reforms to promote a rescue culture.
