With rigorous economic research and practical policy solutions, we focus on the issues and institutions that are critical to global development. Explore our core themes and topics to learn more about our work.
In timely and incisive analysis, our experts parse the latest development news and devise practical solutions to new and emerging challenges. Our events convene the top thinkers and doers in global development.
Michele de Nevers was a Senior Associate at the Center for Global Development specializing in climate finance issues. Before joining CGD she was a Visiting Fellow at the Global Economic Governance Programme at University College, Oxford. From 1981 to 2010 she worked for the World Bank, including as Senior Manager of the Environment Department and Director at the World Bank Institute. In the Environment Department she led the preparation of the WB's corporate Environment Strategy and the global consultations on the Bank’s Strategic Framework for Development and Climate Change Michele holds an MS in Management, with a concentration in Finance, from MIT and a BA in Bacteriology from the University of California, Berkeley.
A Conference Co-Hosted by the Center for Global Development (CGD), the Korean Development Institute (KDI), and the Center for International Governance Innovation (CIGI)
Mobilizing and allocating finance to address the global public goods dimensions of climate change—both emissions reductions and resilience—is one of the great policy challenges of our age. Within the development and climate finance policy communities, most of the attention has focused, understandably, on how to raise the hundreds of billions of dollars that will be needed. After all, if you can’t raise it you can’t spend it. However, one major obstacle in mobilizing climate finance has been a lack of consensus on how new public climate money would be best spent.
The October 9th, 2013, conference, “How to Spend It (If We Had It): Priorities for Allocating International Climate Change Finance” jointly organized by Center for Global Development, the Korean Development Institute (KDI), and the Center for International Governance Innovation (CIGI), will showcase perspectives from technical experts and policymakers on how to make the best use of international public climate finance. This day-long conference is designed to provide potential solutions to address challenges such as evaluating criteria for country allocations, identifying priorities among sectors and approaches, establishing effective disbursement mechanisms, and exploring innovative financing techniques that can successfully leverage public funds for climate change finance.
Are climate finance contributor countries, multilateral aid agencies and specialized funds using widely accepted best practices in foreign assistance? How is it possible to measure and compare international climate finance contributions when there are as yet no established metrics or agreed definitions of the quality of climate finance? As a subjective metric, quality can mean different things to different stakeholders, while of donor countries, recipients and institutional actors may place quality across a broad spectrum of objectives.
CGD's Forest Conservation Performance Rating (fCPR) uses satellite-based forest clearing indicators from FORMA (Forest Monitoring for Action) to measure tropical forest conservation in three dimensions: (1) progress toward elimination of tropical forest clearing by 2050; (2) progress toward achieving more ambitious REDD+ goals; and (3) achieving an immediate reduction in forest clearing. The system can be implemented for local areas, countries, regions, and the entire pan-tropics.
Many obstacles to development transcend national borders and therefore cannot be adequately addressed within a single country. These include issues such as drug resistance and other cross-border health risks, financial crises contagion, money laundering, water scarcity, fisheries collapse and, of course, climate change. Economists call efforts to address these problems Global Public Goods (GPGs). Like other public goods, funding for GPGs is chronically in short supply: of $125 billion in annual official development assistance (ODA ) only about $3 billion goes to GPGs.
What do the stalled climate talks getting underway in Doha, Qatar, this week and the partisan jousting in Washington over the impending “fiscal cliff” have in common? Not much if you get your information from the mainstream media, which has mostly either ignored the idea or poured cold water on it. Below the surface, however, there is fresh interest in the United States in taxing carbon pollution, including from some unexpected quarters. Such a move can’t come soon enough.
Update November 17: As expected, the United States and Japan announced their pledges of $3 billion and $1.5 billion, respectively, to the Green Climate Fund at the G-20 summit in Australia. The United Kingdom is set to announce a £650 million ($1 billion pledge) in Berlin later this week and Canada said it will contribute, although it did not announce how much. Together with pledges from 11 other countries, total pledges amount to $7.5 billion, getting close to the $10 billion target for beginning operations of the Green Climate Fund. Pledges are also expected from Australia (despite the step-back from climate action by the new government), Italy, Norway, and Spain. The agreement reached by the Green Climate Fund board a few weeks ago, which approved a logical framework for REDD+, may spur Norway to pledge given it lays the groundwork for GCF support to forests.
The Center for Global Development hosted two side events in Lima during the 20th UNFCCC Conference of Parties. On December 3rd and December 5th, CGD experts Frances Seymour and Jonah Busch presented findings from their forthcoming book, Why Forests? Why Now?, which draws upon science, economics, and political analysis to show that tropical forests are essential for climate stability and sustainable development, that now is the time for action, and that payment-for-performance finance is a course of action with great potential for success. Background paper authors presented highlights from their analyses and discussed how their findings contribute to the mounting evidence of the urgency, affordability, and feasibility of scaled-up funding to reduce the rate of deforestation, particularly through performance-based approaches.