Can civil society organizations and faith‐based organizations in Fiji, Samoa, and Solomon Islands access climate finance?

Kristina Fidali, Ofusina Toamua, Hemah Aquillah, Sereima Lomaloma, Placida Riah Mauriasi, Steve Nasiu, Aliti Vunisea and Sangeeta Mangubhai

Development Policy Review, 2023, vol. 41, issue S2

Abstract: Motivation Despite global rhetoric to increase climate finance to civil society organizations and faith‐based organizations (CSOs‐FBOs), little is known about how accessible climate funds are for these organizations in the Pacific Islands. Purpose We posed three broad questions: (1) what types of climate finance did CSOs and FBOs obtain? (2) what barriers did CSOs and FBOs face to obtain climate finance? and (3) what innovative approaches or solutions did CSOs and FBOs use to obtain climate finance? Methods and approach In 2022, key informant interviews and focus group discussions were held in Fiji, led by House of Sarah; in Samoa, led by the Samoa Women's Association of Growers; and in Solomon Islands, led by the Coalition of Youths for Environmental Sustainability. Most CSOs and FBOs had fewer than 10 employees, with many relying on volunteers. Findings CSOs and FBOs generally pursued funding aligned to their values, priorities, and needs. None of the organizations had obtained funds from the large multilaterals, such as Green Climate Funds and Adaptation Fund. Their funds were seen as poorly suited to local organizations. The main barriers to obtaining climate finance were: (1) poor dissemination of information on the availability and suitability of funding sources for CSOs and FBOs; (2) overly complex donor processes and requirements; (3) insufficient capacity to write grant proposals and to manage funds; (4) poor recognition by donors of the role of CSOs and FBOs in development; and (5) difficult relationships with national governments and donors marked by differences in power. To overcome some barriers, some CSOs and FBOs partnered with regional or global organizations with the capacity to absorb the administrative burden of writing proposals and managing grants. In other cases, CSOs and FBOs made use of professionals with experience of donors who volunteered their time to craft or edit proposals. Policy implications Donors can create or inhibit equitable access to climate funding. If donors are genuinely committed to helping CSOs‐FBOs obtain climate finance, they should reduce the complexity of grant‐making and tailor it to local contexts and priorities. They should also work through regional or national intermediaries to reach grassroots organizations.

Date: 2023
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1111/dpr.12728

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:bla:devpol:v:41:y:2023:i:s2:n:e12728

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.blackwell ... bs.asp?ref=0950-6764

Access Statistics for this article

Development Policy Review is currently edited by David Booth

More articles in Development Policy Review from Overseas Development Institute Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().