Abstract:In order to address the research gaps on climate finance dynamics in developing countries, especially those with low governance scores, this study assesses the 2016–2020 bilateral climate finance to these countries. The total disbursed bilateral climate finance was US$1.3 billion (92 percent for mitigation, 7 percent for adaptation, and 1 percent for mitigation and adaptation simultaneously). Development-focused loans were the prevailing financial instrument cumulatively, and grants were the prevailing instrument on a per-country level. Japan was the biggest provider of bilateral climate finance (US$1 billion) to fund Uzbekistan's natural gas-fired electric power plants. All major bilateral climate finance providers ranked high on governance scores compared to the ten examined countries. Countries examined in this study will need to receive higher amounts of bilateral climate change finance in order to improve their readiness to address this issue and reduce their vulnerability to climate change impacts.
The government of the Republic of Kazakhstan aims to become carbon neutral by 2060. However, this goal, among other climate protection initiatives Astana is carrying out, does not occur in a vacuum. Kazakhstan has a history of environmental degradation dating back to the Soviet era; a case in point is the loss of the Aral Sea, which Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan share. This analysis aims to contribute to the literature on climate change and environmental protection in Central Asia. Kazakhstan will be the focus of this analysis due to the various environmental concerns it faces and the environmental protection projects the country is engaged in. The Central Asian state cannot escape or avoid the effects of climate change and global warming. For example, the country faced a dramatic drought in the summer of 2021, which severely affected its cattle and agricultural industries. These types of extreme weather events will continue for the foreseeable future. The Central Asian country is known for its steppe, and keeping Kazakhstan's steppe green and the country's water bodies blue is a long-term, complex project. To address these challenges, a comprehensive domestic green strategy and a "green multivector foreign policy" must be developed.
Climate change exacerbates electric grid resilience gaps and associated societal risks worldwide. The 2021 Texas polar vortex disaster offers many global lessons on improving resilience. Paradoxically, global warming precipitates not just heat waves, but also bitter cold fronts, paralyzing electric power generation. When an ice storm in Texas caused freeze-ups, the interdependence between intermittent fuels—such as wind and solar power—and gas and nuclear power triggered a cascading energy supply problem. Flawed political choices led to the catastrophic outcome of the crisis. After conceptualizing the gaps and risks related to the disaster, we use cross-time electricity generation mix data and comparative weather data to draw policy conclusions.
Climate change threatens the sovereignty of Pacific Island countries. Sea level rise, wave inundation, and extreme weather events will erode coastlines and undermine the habitability of small island developing states. Together these effects raise new legal questions about the sources of island-state boundaries, identity, and political legitimacy. The Pacific Island region has made efforts over the past few years to secure their maritime boundaries in response to sea level rise, but these actions are limited in scope. Despite regional initiatives like the Pacific Boundaries Project and Vanuatu's case for the International Court of Justice, there are several outstanding considerations for policymakers. Overall, international maritime law was not written with climate change in mind, leaving small island states among the most vulnerable to both physical and legal damage.
The Basel Accords have been adopted by most major economies and have served as the primary international framework for maintaining financial stability through active institutional supervision and regulation. However, existing principles and practices fail to address the physical and transition risks fostered by climate change and instead, focus on internal threats emanating from financial institutions, as well as markets at large. These concerns are existential, thereby requiring different assumptions and instruments to safeguard the global financial system. This paper will examine and explain shortcomings within the Basel Accords and its inability to properly address physical and transition risks related to climate change. This paper also suggests structural reforms that would enable the Basel Accords to improve their long-term oversight of climate-related issues, while encouraging institutions within the global financial system to assume leadership over the transition towards a sustainable economy. These findings contribute to a burgeoning body of scientific and economic literature revealing the necessity of an enhanced international macroprudential policy framework to protect against the catastrophic consequences of inaction on climate change.
