BAKU, Azerbaijan (PAMACC News) - More than ever before, African environmental Civil Society Organisations, youth groups, and country representatives at the two week 29th climate change summit (COP29) in Baku, Azerbaijan, united under one voice, calling on the Global North to keep the promise of climate finance, but desist from imposing loans on climate burdened countries.
Kenya is one of the countries bedeviled with such climate related loans of which the government has no option, but to keep taxing the already overtaxed and climate burdened citizens in order to service the ‘climate finance’ debts.
“It is quite immoral to burden African communities who are already paying the ultimate prize of climate change with unfair loans to mitigate a disaster, apparently caused by the financier,” said Jessica Mwanzia, the Climate Finance and Gender Lead at the Pan African Climate Justice Alliance (PACJA).
“Africa emits a paltry four percent of the total global greenhouse gases, most of which is absorbed just by one carbon sink – the Congo Basin, leaving the continent with almost no, or extremely insignificant emissions,” said the activist.
The World Bank describes the Congo Basin as the “lungs of Africa”, being one of the largest forest-based carbon sinks in the world, absorbing up to 1.2 billion tons of carbon annually against 1.4 million tons of the emissions from the continent.
“Africa faces a unique climate paradox,” said Dr Augustine Njamnshi, the Director - African Coalition for Sustainable Energy and Access (ACSEA). “We are a continent rich in biodiversity, vast forests, and vital ecosystems that help stabilise the planet, not to mention a continent rich with minerals essential for energy transition, yet, the most impacted by climate disasters,” he said.
The civil society at COP29 intensified the pressure on the developed world to mobilise resources to support African communities with climate adaptation funds that are need-based, and in form of grants.
Ironically, African countries including Kenya are already grappling with loans guised as ‘climate finance’ through projects that purport to ‘prevent further emission,’ or to sequester ‘existing greenhouse gases’ from the atmosphere.
Furthermore, the climate financiers are seeking to recoup back money advanced to the country among other African countries to support climate adaptation projects.
“How can a climate change financier seek to be paid back money invested in a water project for example, set up for a community whose water sources have been destroyed as a result of climate change?” asked Mwanzia. “Loans are supposed to be given to business entities whose main objective is to make profits and not to communities struggling to adapt to climate related disasters,” she said.
Through the Green Climate Fund (GCF), the world largest facility for climate finance that was established within the framework of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) to assist developing countries with climate change adaptation and mitigation activities, Kenyan tax payers are among African communities that have been exposed to debt burdens amounting to hundreds of billions of shillings in the name of climate finance.
According to Charles Mwangi, a Nairobi based environment activist, it becomes even more unfair to the taxpayers because some of the projects do not have footprints of the target communities in terms of prioritisation.
So far, Kenya is involved in 20 GCF climate change mitigation and adaptation projects worth hundreds of billions of shillings, some which cut across multiple countries, yet, most of them are earmarked as loans to be serviced by local taxpayers.
According to data available at the GCF website, all the 20 projects are managed by foreign intermediaries with supervisors based in USA, France, UK, Netherlands, and Italy among other countries, apart from only one – ‘Enhancing community resilience and water security in the Upper Athi River Catchment Area, Kenya,’ whose intermediary is the National Environment Management Authority (NEMA).
One of the country specific grants known as ‘Ending Drought Emergencies: Ecosystem Based Adaptation in Kenya’s Arid and Semi-Arid Rangelands’ which is a Sh4 billion adaptation project, but it is managed by IUCN on behalf of Kenya, under the supervision of a Swizz based consultant.
Another Sh13 billion equity financing project known as ‘KawiSafi Ventures Fund,’ targeting Kenya and Rwanda has also been channeled through Acumen Fund Inc, another foreign entity, under supervision of the US based consultant.
Also of interest, is a climate adaptation loan worth Sh25 billion, known as ‘Africa Rural Climate Adaptation Finance Mechanism (ARCAFIM) for East Africa region,’ targeting four Eat African countries. The loan, which is to be serviced by taxpayers in Kenya, Uganda, Rwanda and Tanzania has been channeled through the International Fund for Agricultural development (IFAD), under the Rome based consultant.
“It will make more sense if most of these projects are adaptation based with a sense of ownership by local communities who are at the frontline of the climate crisis,” said Dr Wilber Ottichilo, the Governor Vihiga County and the Chair for Environment Committee at the Council of Governors.
The activists pointed out that most of the finances are lost in expensive air tickets for foreign consultants, their hotel bills, and allowances at the expense of poor taxpayers who are as well riddled with climate related disasters.
BAKU, Azerbaijan (PAMACC News) - More than ever before, African environmental Civil Society Organisations, youth groups, and country representatives at the two week 29th climate change summit (COP29) in Baku, Azerbaijan, united under one voice, calling on the Global North to keep the promise of climate finance, but desist from imposing loans on climate burdened countries.
Kenya is one of the countries bedeviled with such climate related loans of which the government has no option, but to keep taxing the already overtaxed and climate burdened citizens in order to service the ‘climate finance’ debts.
“It is quite immoral to burden African communities who are already paying the ultimate prize of climate change with unfair loans to mitigate a disaster, apparently caused by the financier,” said Jessica Mwanzia, the Climate Finance and Gender Lead at the Pan African Climate Justice Alliance (PACJA).
“Africa emits a paltry four percent of the total global greenhouse gases, most of which is absorbed just by one carbon sink – the Congo Basin, leaving the continent with almost no, or extremely insignificant emissions,” said the activist.
The World Bank describes the Congo Basin as the “lungs of Africa”, being one of the largest forest-based carbon sinks in the world, absorbing up to 1.2 billion tons of carbon annually against 1.4 million tons of the emissions from the continent.
“Africa faces a unique climate paradox,” said Dr Augustine Njamnshi, the Director - African Coalition for Sustainable Energy and Access (ACSEA). “We are a continent rich in biodiversity, vast forests, and vital ecosystems that help stabilise the planet, not to mention a continent rich with minerals essential for energy transition, yet, the most impacted by climate disasters,” he said.
The civil society at COP29 intensified the pressure on the developed world to mobilise resources to support African communities with climate adaptation funds that are need-based, and in form of grants.
Ironically, African countries including Kenya are already grappling with loans guised as ‘climate finance’ through projects that purport to ‘prevent further emission,’ or to sequester ‘existing greenhouse gases’ from the atmosphere.
Furthermore, the climate financiers are seeking to recoup back money advanced to the country among other African countries to support climate adaptation projects.
“How can a climate change financier seek to be paid back money invested in a water project for example, set up for a community whose water sources have been destroyed as a result of climate change?” asked Mwanzia. “Loans are supposed to be given to business entities whose main objective is to make profits and not to communities struggling to adapt to climate related disasters,” she said.
Through the Green Climate Fund (GCF), the world largest facility for climate finance that was established within the framework of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) to assist developing countries with climate change adaptation and mitigation activities, Kenyan tax payers are among African communities that have been exposed to debt burdens amounting to hundreds of billions of shillings in the name of climate finance.
According to Charles Mwangi, a Nairobi based environment activist, it becomes even more unfair to the taxpayers because some of the projects do not have footprints of the target communities in terms of prioritisation.
So far, Kenya is involved in 20 GCF climate change mitigation and adaptation projects worth hundreds of billions of shillings, some which cut across multiple countries, yet, most of them are earmarked as loans to be serviced by local taxpayers.
According to data available at the GCF website, all the 20 projects are managed by foreign intermediaries with supervisors based in USA, France, UK, Netherlands, and Italy among other countries, apart from only one – ‘Enhancing community resilience and water security in the Upper Athi River Catchment Area, Kenya,’ whose intermediary is the National Environment Management Authority (NEMA).
One of the country specific grants known as ‘Ending Drought Emergencies: Ecosystem Based Adaptation in Kenya’s Arid and Semi-Arid Rangelands’ which is a Sh4 billion adaptation project, but it is managed by IUCN on behalf of Kenya, under the supervision of a Swizz based consultant.
Another Sh13 billion equity financing project known as ‘KawiSafi Ventures Fund,’ targeting Kenya and Rwanda has also been channeled through Acumen Fund Inc, another foreign entity, under supervision of the US based consultant.
Also of interest, is a climate adaptation loan worth Sh25 billion, known as ‘Africa Rural Climate Adaptation Finance Mechanism (ARCAFIM) for East Africa region,’ targeting four Eat African countries. The loan, which is to be serviced by taxpayers in Kenya, Uganda, Rwanda and Tanzania has been channeled through the International Fund for Agricultural development (IFAD), under the Rome based consultant.
“It will make more sense if most of these projects are adaptation based with a sense of ownership by local communities who are at the frontline of the climate crisis,” said Dr Wilber Ottichilo, the Governor Vihiga County and the Chair for Environment Committee at the Council of Governors.
The activists pointed out that most of the finances are lost in expensive air tickets for foreign consultants, their hotel bills, and allowances at the expense of poor taxpayers who are as well riddled with climate related disasters.
BAKU, Azerbaijan (PAMACC News) – African environmental activists at the ongoing COP29 climate summit in Baku are urging climate financiers to stop burdening poor countries with unmanageable loans under the guise of funding climate adaptation and mitigation projects.
Just a few months ago, widespread protests erupted in East and West Africa, led by young people demanding an end to heavy taxes imposed by governments to service foreign loans—many of which have been embezzled by corrupt leaders.
“We reject loans and any form of debt for a continent that had no role in causing global warming. We refuse to borrow from the arsonist to put out the fire they started and which is burning our livelihoods,” said Dr. Mithika Mwenda, Executive Director of the Pan African Climate Justice Alliance (PACJA).
According to PACJA, between 70 and 80 percent of financing from the Green Climate Fund (GCF) to African countries comes in the form of loans, often routed through intermediaries. In practice, only a fraction of these funds—sometimes less than 10 percent—actually reach the climate-burdened communities that need them most.
“We demand that these finances be directed first and foremost toward those most exposed to climate risks and least able to adapt,” Dr. Mwenda continued. “This means moving beyond fragmented and delayed funding and ensuring a reliable, affordable, accessible, and timely flow of finance—preferably in the form of grants—that matches the scale of the crisis,” he said during Africa Day, an annual event organized by the African Development Bank on the sidelines of COP29.
One of the many problematic financial instruments imposed on African countries is the Sustainable Renewables Risk Mitigation Initiative (SRMI) Facility. This initiative, primarily a mitigation project aimed at offsetting 89 million tons of carbon emissions, has seen six African countries and one from Asia-Pacific (Kenya, DR Congo, Namibia, Mali, Botswana, and the Central African Republic) saddled with a loan of USD 1.6 billion. This loan, intended to offset emissions primarily from the Global North, will have to be repaid by the very communities already bearing the brunt of climate change.
Despite Africa contributing less than 4 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions, these countries are expected to repay loans taken for projects designed to mitigate the environmental damage caused by wealthier nations. The GCF approved the project on March 19, 2021, with the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development and the International Development Association overseeing its implementation, under the supervision of Mr. Zhihong Zhang, a Senior Carbon Finance Specialist based in Washington, D.C.
Another example is the Leveraging Energy Access Finance (LEAF) Framework, approved on July 1, 2021, and implemented by the African Development Bank (AfDB). The project, meant to help Ethiopia, Ghana, Guinea, Kenya, Nigeria, and Tunisia avoid emitting 29.9 million tons of greenhouse gases, requires repayment of a loan amounting to USD 959.9 million. The burden of this loan will fall on poor taxpayers, many of whom are already suffering the impacts of climate change.
Activists argue that focusing on mitigation loans for African countries is a misplaced priority. Even if Africa were to stop emitting all greenhouse gases, the continent’s contribution to the global carbon footprint is so minimal that it would not significantly alter the course of global warming.
In addition to mitigation loans, the GCF is also seeking to recoup some of the funds it has disbursed to poor countries for climate adaptation. One such project is the Africa Rural Climate Adaptation Finance Mechanism (ARCAFIM) for East Africa, approved on October 25, 2023. The project, which is being implemented by the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), will provide financing for climate adaptation in Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania, and Rwanda. However, the loan of USD 200 million will need to be repaid by the very taxpayers who are already suffering from the consequences of climate change.
“Many of these projects lack the input of the communities they are meant to serve,” said Charles Mwangi, a Nairobi-based climate activist. “Communities must be at the forefront of decision-making when framing these projects. Instead, much of the funding is lost to exorbitant costs like expensive airfares for foreign consultants, hotel bills, and allowances,” he added.
In contrast to these externally imposed projects, Kenya is piloting the Financing Locally-Led Climate Action (FLLoCA) initiative, a five-year program supported by the Government of Kenya, the World Bank, and other donors. FLLoCA is designed to support locally-led climate resilience actions, strengthening both county and national governments’ capacity to manage climate risks.
“We are advocating for policies that prioritize adaptation, not as an afterthought, but as a central pillar of climate finance,” Dr. Mwenda said. “We must amplify the voices of local organizations and grassroots leaders to ensure that global commitments reflect the real priorities on the ground.”
At COP29, the discussions on the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) offer a critical opportunity to reshape global climate finance in a way that aligns with Africa’s needs.
“It is essential that adaptation finance be needs-based, mobilized from public funds in the Global North, and provided as grants, not loans,” Dr. Mwenda emphasized. “The private sector should be considered a third or fourth option, not the first.”
BAKU, Azerbaijan (PAMACC News) – African environmental activists at the ongoing COP29 climate summit in Baku are urging climate financiers to stop burdening poor countries with unmanageable loans under the guise of funding climate adaptation and mitigation projects.
Just a few months ago, widespread protests erupted in East and West Africa, led by young people demanding an end to heavy taxes imposed by governments to service foreign loans—many of which have been embezzled by corrupt leaders.
“We reject loans and any form of debt for a continent that had no role in causing global warming. We refuse to borrow from the arsonist to put out the fire they started and which is burning our livelihoods,” said Dr. Mithika Mwenda, Executive Director of the Pan African Climate Justice Alliance (PACJA).
According to PACJA, between 70 and 80 percent of financing from the Green Climate Fund (GCF) to African countries comes in the form of loans, often routed through intermediaries. In practice, only a fraction of these funds—sometimes less than 10 percent—actually reach the climate-burdened communities that need them most.
“We demand that these finances be directed first and foremost toward those most exposed to climate risks and least able to adapt,” Dr. Mwenda continued. “This means moving beyond fragmented and delayed funding and ensuring a reliable, affordable, accessible, and timely flow of finance—preferably in the form of grants—that matches the scale of the crisis,” he said during Africa Day, an annual event organized by the African Development Bank on the sidelines of COP29.
One of the many problematic financial instruments imposed on African countries is the Sustainable Renewables Risk Mitigation Initiative (SRMI) Facility. This initiative, primarily a mitigation project aimed at offsetting 89 million tons of carbon emissions, has seen six African countries and one from Asia-Pacific (Kenya, DR Congo, Namibia, Mali, Botswana, and the Central African Republic) saddled with a loan of USD 1.6 billion. This loan, intended to offset emissions primarily from the Global North, will have to be repaid by the very communities already bearing the brunt of climate change.
Despite Africa contributing less than 4 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions, these countries are expected to repay loans taken for projects designed to mitigate the environmental damage caused by wealthier nations. The GCF approved the project on March 19, 2021, with the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development and the International Development Association overseeing its implementation, under the supervision of Mr. Zhihong Zhang, a Senior Carbon Finance Specialist based in Washington, D.C.
Another example is the Leveraging Energy Access Finance (LEAF) Framework, approved on July 1, 2021, and implemented by the African Development Bank (AfDB). The project, meant to help Ethiopia, Ghana, Guinea, Kenya, Nigeria, and Tunisia avoid emitting 29.9 million tons of greenhouse gases, requires repayment of a loan amounting to USD 959.9 million. The burden of this loan will fall on poor taxpayers, many of whom are already suffering the impacts of climate change.
Activists argue that focusing on mitigation loans for African countries is a misplaced priority. Even if Africa were to stop emitting all greenhouse gases, the continent’s contribution to the global carbon footprint is so minimal that it would not significantly alter the course of global warming.
In addition to mitigation loans, the GCF is also seeking to recoup some of the funds it has disbursed to poor countries for climate adaptation. One such project is the Africa Rural Climate Adaptation Finance Mechanism (ARCAFIM) for East Africa, approved on October 25, 2023. The project, which is being implemented by the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), will provide financing for climate adaptation in Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania, and Rwanda. However, the loan of USD 200 million will need to be repaid by the very taxpayers who are already suffering from the consequences of climate change.
“Many of these projects lack the input of the communities they are meant to serve,” said Charles Mwangi, a Nairobi-based climate activist. “Communities must be at the forefront of decision-making when framing these projects. Instead, much of the funding is lost to exorbitant costs like expensive airfares for foreign consultants, hotel bills, and allowances,” he added.
In contrast to these externally imposed projects, Kenya is piloting the Financing Locally-Led Climate Action (FLLoCA) initiative, a five-year program supported by the Government of Kenya, the World Bank, and other donors. FLLoCA is designed to support locally-led climate resilience actions, strengthening both county and national governments’ capacity to manage climate risks.
“We are advocating for policies that prioritize adaptation, not as an afterthought, but as a central pillar of climate finance,” Dr. Mwenda said. “We must amplify the voices of local organizations and grassroots leaders to ensure that global commitments reflect the real priorities on the ground.”
At COP29, the discussions on the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) offer a critical opportunity to reshape global climate finance in a way that aligns with Africa’s needs.
“It is essential that adaptation finance be needs-based, mobilized from public funds in the Global North, and provided as grants, not loans,” Dr. Mwenda emphasized. “The private sector should be considered a third or fourth option, not the first.”
