The European Union is formally committed to keeping global climate change below a 2 degree Celsius increase over preindustrial temperatures. Around the world, a variety of governments and stakeholders are now arguing that this needs to become a global goal. A crucial step forward on this was taken in Gleneagles in 2005, when G8 and other participating countries asked the World Bank and other multilateral development banks to work on a Clean Energy and Development Investment Framework (referred to here as CEIF). The World Bank was the first to prepare report on energy, climate change and poverty reduction.
Other banks are also working on their CEIFs. For example, the African Development Bank has now started revising its energy sector policy to increase renewable energy and energy efficiency funding, to develop adaptation screening tools and national adaptation programmes of action for African countries. The Asian Development Bank has been working on a parallel review of transport policy in Asia. Its own research recognises that the bank has given only limited attention to climate change impacts of its transport investments, and that a major “paradigm shift” is needed. A variety of civil society groups have been very critical of the work done so far. Many have made suggestions on how it could be improved in order to help achieve a 2 degree goal.
This paper finds that the CEIF process so far has undoubtedly led to some useful change in language from the leaders of the multilateral banks. However, this rhetoric has not necessarily been matched with sufficiently fast changes in the way these institutions work on energy. In particular, there appears to be no sign of any willingness to match the promised increase in renewable and efficiency lending with a parallel gradual reduction in fossil fuel lending. In some cases, the opposite seems to be happening.
Download