The Green Climate Fund: a case study in the legitimacy of global climate finance governance
Creators: name: Adler, Ruth
Publisher: name: University of Tasmania
Year: 2024

description: This thesis examines the legitimacy of the Green Climate Fund (GCF), including whether it is achieving its objectives, whether its outcomes are consistent with principles of justice and equity, and its contribution to the realisation of the goals of the <i>Paris Agreement.</i> It makes recommendations to enhance the Fund’s legitimacy and hence its effectiveness. The GCF was established in 2010 as an operating entity of the financial mechanism of the <i>United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change</i> (UNFCCC) and serves the Paris Agreement. Despite the fundamental importance of the GCF in the global climate finance regime, there has been limited research to date on its legitimacy. <br>The thesis applies the Karlsson-Vinkhuyzen and Vihma legitimacy framework. They argue legitimacy has three components: source-based, procedural and substantive. Source-based legitimacy refers to the knowledge or expertise, the tradition or pedigree, and the discourse or ideology associated with international norms. Procedural legitimacy consists of the fair participation of governments, decision-making procedures that they consider fair or just, the participation of non-governmental actors, accountability and transparency. Substantive legitimacy relates to the effectiveness of norms and their contribution to justice or equity. The thesis applies a mixed methods approach, including a survey of relevant literature, doctrinal analysis of GCF constitutive documents and pertinent treaties, and a thematic review of primary and secondary source materials relating to the Fund’s legitimacy. The thesis argues that the Fund enjoys limited legitimacy and is not well-positioned to deliver the goals of the <i>Paris Agreement. </i><br>The Fund derives source-based legitimacy from its expertise and the fact that the UNFCCC established it. However, differences among developed and developing countries on whether funding for GCF activities should be public or private, the role of the private sector and the application of the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities have compromised the Fund’s legitimacy for developing countries. While the Fund derives procedural legitimacy from the equal representation of developed and developing countries on the GCF Board, its arrangements for observer participation, funding approval and consultation processes, and accountability regime have shortcomings. The thesis recommends reforms to these arrangements. <br>The GCF has limited substantive legitimacy. It has not mobilised sufficient finance from donors or via co-financing from third parties. In addition, while the GCF is achieving its goal of a balance in the allocation of funding between mitigation and adaptation, it has not ensured direct access to Fund resources. Moreover, the Fund’s use of loans can potentially increase developing countries’ indebtedness and is inconsistent with principles of justice. Finally, many funded activities have experienced challenges and there is a lack of information on their performance. The thesis argues the Fund should seek contributions from a broader range of donors, prioritise funding proposals from direct access entities and the use of grants, and commission independent external evaluations of the performance of the GCF’s approved funding proposals.