Vulnerability-based allocations in loss and damage finance

The recent creation of a loss and damage fund under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change was heralded as a major breakthrough for Global South negotiators. As details of the fund are currently being negotiated, some analysts are calling for 'objective' means through which funding would be allocated to 'particularly vulnerable' developing countries. On the basis of a review of past debates relating to the identification of priority beneficiaries of international adaptation finance, we caution that such an approach is likely to bring division and delay. Quantitative vulnerability indicators remain conceptually fraught and methodologically complex. Furthermore, the adoption of vulnerability indicators will not fully depoliticize allocation decisions, given the power dynamics between and among contributor and beneficiary countries. Establishment of the loss and damage fund is a major step in climate negotiations for Global South countries, yet resource allocation remains unsettled. This Review shows how vulnerability-based approaches are variable and complex, with the adoption of quantitative measures likely to bring division.

Automated summary

The recent establishment of a loss and damage fund under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change was seen as a significant breakthrough for Global South negotiators. However, previous debates on the identification of priority beneficiaries of international adaptation finance suggest that the use of quantitative vulnerability indicators may lead to division and delay.