Methodology & Assumptions
There is currently no internationally recognised definition of ‘climate change financing’. A common understanding of climate change financing is that it refers to financial flows for ‘mitigation’ and ‘adaptation’ related activities. Furthermore, specific, country-focussed definitions have been utilised where they exist in national policies.
The quantitative analysis utilised in this tool relies on a range of assumptions and methodologies to help quantify the amount and shape of climate change and disaster risk finance received by a country.
The tool is based on methodology developed in 2013 for the Pacific Climate Change Finance Assessment Framework.
The tool draws information from the inputted database of climate change and disaster risk-related projects for each country.
The tool estimates the total volume (as a USD value) of climate change and disaster risk-related expenditure by weighting individual projects. This weighting is undertaken according to the proportion of expenditure considered relevant to CCDRM from a scale of 0-100%.
The guidelines for this weighting system are available in the following table:
|Classification of CCDRM-related activities|
|High relevance||Rationale||Clear primary objective for delivering specific outcomes that improve climate resilience or contribute to mitigation|
|Weighting of 80%||Examples||
|Medium relevance||Rationale||Either (i) secondary objectives related to building climate resilience or contributing to mitigation, or (ii) mixed programmes with a range of activities that are not easily separated but include at least some that promote climate resilience or mitigation|
|Weighting of 50%||Examples||
|Low relevance||Rationale||Activities that display attributes where indirect adaptation and mitigation benefits may arise|
|Weighting of 25%||Examples||
|Marginal relevance||Rationale||Activities that have only very indirect and theoretical links to climate resilience|
|Weighting of 5%||Examples||
A number of limitations are acknowledged, related to the methodology and the functional components of the tracking tool. These include:
- The subjective nature of the weighting process
- The tool currently tracks projects from 2010-2016 for Solomon Islands and from 2014-2016 for Vanuatu. There may be a gap in capturing projects between 2016 and when the tool commenced pilot status in 2020
- The tool captures only climate change finance in the form of grants
- Values in USD have been converted from local currencies utilising an exchange rate at the time the data was entered
- The disbursement feature cannot be utilised with the weighted values. This will measure disbursement of the full project value
- Regional projects are particularly challenging to quantify as country allocations are often not clear and not always made known to national governments. Hence an approximated value is often used