ABSTRACT

Transformational adaptation is increasingly viewed as necessary to prevent the worst offsets in development gains due to severe climate impacts. However, clarity regarding how to produce transformational adaptation in practice is lacking, creating problems for project design and implementation. This paper examines (1) how transformational adaptation has been defined by major funders of adaptation; (2) how the concept has influenced funding priorities and the financing of projects. The study is based on a comparative analysis of the investment criteria, board meeting minutes, documents, and reports of the primary financial mechanisms under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change: the Least Developed Country Fund, the Special Climate Change Fund, the Adaptation Fund and the Green Climate Fund. Our study demonstrates an increasing emphasis on transformational adaptation across funds over time, particularly in the Green Climate Fund. Transformative potential does guide funding decisions, but a clear understanding of whether transformational change is achievable, feasible, and desirable under all conditions has not yet emerged, an issue acknowledged by the funds and regularly discussed. Our analysis suggests that acknowledging tensions which arise with transformation in adaptation finance is critical because investment criteria and definitions of transformation impact the approaches to adaptation countries take.

摘要

越来越多地认为，为了防止由于严重的气候影响而对发展成果造成最严重的抵消，必须进行转型适应。但是，缺乏关于如何在实践中进行转化适应的明确说明，这给项目设计和实施带来了问题。本文研究（1）适应的主要资助者如何定义转型适应；（2）这个概念如何影响了资金的优先次序和项目的资金筹措。这项研究是根据对《联合国气候变化框架公约》的投资标准，董事会会议记录，文件和主要财务机制报告的比较分析得出的：最不发达国家基金，特别气候变化基金，适应基金和绿色气候基金。我们的研究表明，随着时间的推移，越来越重视跨基金的转型适应，特别是在绿色气候基金中。变革潜力确实可以指导筹资决策，但是对于变革变革是否在所有条件下都是可以实现，可行和可取的问题，人们尚未形成清晰的认识，这一问题得到了基金的认可并得到了定期讨论。我们的分析表明，认识到适应融资转型带来的紧张关系至关重要，因为投资标准和转型定义会影响适应国家采取的方法。在所有条件下可行和令人满意的问题尚未出现，这是基金承认并定期讨论的问题。我们的分析表明，认识到适应融资转型带来的紧张关系至关重要，因为投资标准和转型定义会影响适应国家采取的方法。在所有条件下可行和令人满意的问题尚未出现，这是基金承认并定期讨论的问题。我们的分析表明，认识到适应融资转型带来的紧张关系至关重要，因为投资标准和转型定义会影响适应国家采取的方法。