Copenhagen Accord Finance: A Complex Promise

The Copenhagen Accord, born from the fraught negotiations of the 2009 United Nations Climate Change Conference, included a significant financial commitment from developed countries to support climate action in developing nations. This commitment, often referred to as "Copenhagen Accord finance," pledged a collective goal of mobilizing $100 billion per year by 2020. This funding was intended to assist developing countries in both mitigating their greenhouse gas emissions and adapting to the impacts of climate change.

The pledge was broken into two phases. The first was a "fast-start finance" period, covering 2010-2012, with developed countries committing to provide $30 billion of new and additional resources during this timeframe. This initial funding was meant to kickstart critical projects and build confidence in the overall commitment. The second phase focused on scaling up financing to reach the $100 billion annual goal by 2020. The source of these funds was intended to be a mix of public and private finance, with public finance playing a leading role.

However, the Copenhagen Accord's financial provisions have been a source of considerable debate and contention. One of the main points of contention has been the definition of "new and additional" finance. Developing countries have argued that the pledged funds should be truly additional to existing Official Development Assistance (ODA), and not simply re-labeled or diverted from existing aid budgets. Determining the "additionality" of climate finance has proven to be difficult, leading to concerns about whether the pledges were genuinely increasing overall support.

Transparency and accountability have also been significant challenges. Tracking the flow of climate finance from developed to developing countries is complex, involving multiple channels and instruments. Different reporting methodologies and interpretations of what constitutes climate finance have made it difficult to accurately assess the extent to which the $100 billion goal has been met. This lack of transparency has eroded trust between developed and developing nations.

Furthermore, the composition of climate finance has been a point of concern. While grant-based finance is generally favored by developing countries as it avoids adding to their debt burden, a significant portion of the pledged finance has been delivered as loans, often at market rates. This has raised questions about the long-term sustainability of climate finance and its impact on the financial stability of developing countries. The balance between mitigation and adaptation finance has also been debated, with developing countries often emphasizing the need for greater support for adaptation measures, given their vulnerability to the impacts of climate change.

While developed countries have consistently reported increases in climate finance flows, independent assessments have suggested that the $100 billion target was not fully met by 2020. The ongoing debates surrounding the definition, delivery, and composition of Copenhagen Accord finance highlight the need for greater transparency, accountability, and a more equitable distribution of climate finance to effectively support developing countries in addressing the climate crisis. The Paris Agreement, building on the Copenhagen Accord, reaffirms the $100 billion goal and emphasizes the importance of scaling up finance beyond this level, signaling the continuing significance of climate finance in international climate negotiations.