WHAT IS THE GREEN CLIMATE FUND AND HOW CAN IT HELP THE PHILIPPINES?
WHAT IS THE GREEN CLIMATE FUND AND HOW CAN IT HELP THE PHILIPPINES?
We often complain that there is “no money” for climate action. The truth is, there is money—lots of it—but we are not always good at accessing it, absorbing it, or translating it into real protection for communities on the ground. One of the biggest pools of climate finance available to countries like ours is the Green Climate Fund (GCF), and many Filipinos—especially at the local level—still barely know how it works.
The GCF is the world’s largest dedicated climate fund, created under the UN climate convention in 2010 and serving as the main financial arm of the Paris Agreement. As of 2026, it manages more than US$19 billion in commitments. For a country ranked among the most climate-vulnerable in the world, this should matter to us a great deal.
What makes the GCF different is its 50/50 mandate: half of its funds must go to climate mitigation (cutting emissions through renewables, clean transport, energy efficiency) and half to adaptation—helping communities survive floods, droughts, stronger typhoons, and rising seas. Even more important, at least half of adaptation money is reserved for the most vulnerable countries, which clearly includes the Philippines.
This is where Locally Led Climate Action (LLCA) comes in. With the launch of its LLCA framework in 2025, the GCF finally acknowledged what communities have long known: climate solutions designed in air-conditioned offices far from the frontlines often fail. LLCA shifts decision-making downward—to LGUs, farmers, fisherfolk, indigenous peoples, and local institutions. It emphasizes devolved decisions, local ownership, and long-term capacity, not one-off projects.
So how can this help the Philippines?
First, yes—Philippine LGUs and even provinces can benefit, but usually not by applying directly to the GCF. The fund works through Accredited Entities. In our case, we already have strong Direct Access Entities such as the Land Bank of the Philippines and the Development Bank of the Philippines (DBP). LGUs can partner with them to develop projects—flood control using nature-based solutions, “sponge city” drainage, climate-resilient agriculture, or coastal protection. The Department of Finance acts as the National Designated Authority, issuing the crucial “no-objection” letter.
Second, the Philippines already has active GCF projects. These include the Adapting Philippine Agriculture (APA) project, a US$39 million initiative reaching over a million farmers with climate information systems and resilient crops; multi-hazard early warning systems that improve “last-mile” disaster alerts; and new climate technopreneurship programs supporting green startups in energy, transport, and waste management. As of 2026, GCF grants to the Philippines exceed US$140 million, leveraging over US$1 billion in total project value.
Third, the Readiness Program may be the most underappreciated opportunity. The GCF can provide up to US$1 million per year just to help countries—and by extension LGUs—learn how to design bankable climate projects. In plain language: the fund will pay us to learn how to access bigger funds later. Why aren’t more provinces lining up?
Finally, there is a bigger strategic picture. With the Philippines hosting the Loss and Damage Fund Board, we are now at the center of global climate finance discussions. This should make it easier—not harder—for our institutions and local governments to engage the GCF.
The question now is not whether the Green Climate Fund can help us. It clearly can. The real questions are: Are our LGUs ready? Are we investing enough in local capacity? And are we willing to let communities—not just consultants—decide what resilience really means?
RAMON IKE V. SENERES
Comments
Post a Comment