Report shows why climate funds are not reaching Africa

International climate funds are pledged. Promises are made. But the money is not moving.

A new analysis released on the sidelines of COP30 in Belém, Brazil, reveals a crippling bottleneck in climate finance for Africa: billions of dollars in committed adaptation funds never reach the projects they are meant to support. This “delivery gap” is a structural failure that stalls efforts to protect vulnerable communities from escalating climate impacts.

The report, Reforming Climate Finance: Adaptation Finance in Africa, highlights a stark reality — less than half of committed adaptation funds in Africa were actually disbursed between 2014 and 2018. The central problem is not a shortage of pledges but a systemic failure to deliver.

Africa’s climate finance architecture is built in ways that actively disadvantage African nations. Accessing major funds like the Green Climate Fund (GCF) requires navigating complex, multi-stage procedures that favour countries with stronger bureaucracies and pre-existing capacity.

“From the donor perspective, climate finance architecture also disadvantages Africa, preventing funds from reaching vital projects,” the report finds. Mohammed Adow of Power Shift Africa described the application process as a “full-time job for a team we don’t have,” noting that African officials spend months wrestling with reporting requirements while communities face recurring floods and droughts.

The report identifies insufficient institutional capacity, coordination challenges and cumbersome international procedures as core structural barriers. Adaptation projects themselves are inherently local: building sea walls for specific coastal towns, developing drought-resistant crops for particular regions, or establishing early-warning systems for vulnerable villages. This localised nature clashes with the design of large international funds, which are built for massive, centralised projects such as solar farms and favour metrics that quantify easily measured outcomes like CO₂ avoided.

The report contrasts adaptation with mitigation. Adaptation projects have long time horizons, non-standardised metrics and less predictable returns. They are mostly small to medium-scale, addressing local vulnerabilities that do not generate direct cash flows. A mangrove-restoration project that protects a fishing village, for example, yields indirect benefits — avoided losses from storm surges — making it less “bankable” in traditional finance terms despite its immense community value.

The consequences of this delivery gap are quantifiable. Sub-Saharan Africa requires around USD 51 billion in adaptation finance annually but received just USD 12.9 billion in 2023. The issue is not simply raising more money — it is fixing a broken pipeline.

Data from the Climate Policy Initiative show that 95 percent of Africa’s adaptation funding comes from public sources, revealing overwhelming reliance on government-led systems that are currently failing to deliver efficiently. A 2023 OECD report noted that the time between a fund’s commitment and its actual disbursement can span several years, a catastrophic delay for communities facing immediate climate threats.

Solutions exist, but they demand a fundamental redesign of the funding system. Experts point to simplifying application forms, streamlining approval processes and reducing micromanagement by distant headquarters. The report recommends new models of financing and governance, including direct allocation of funds to national climate funds that can disburse money more quickly to smaller, context-specific projects. Building the capacity of local governments and organisations to manage international funds is equally critical — an investment in the system itself.

COP30, dubbed the “COP of adaptation,” faces growing pressure to address these structural barriers. Finalising the Global Goal on Adaptation with clear, standardised indicators could help create common metrics that strengthen donor confidence and accelerate funding flows. But Adow warns that without tackling the delivery gap, even the most ambitious funding targets will remain numbers on a page — celebrated, committed and never translated into a planted tree, a reinforced dam or a protected village.

UNEP’s new Adaptation Gap Report shows that international public adaptation finance to developing countries fell to USD 26 billion in 2023, down from USD 28 billion the previous year. UNEP estimates that global adaptation needs will reach USD 310–365 billion annually by 2035, warning that “slow adaptation is threatening lives and economies.” Sub-Saharan Africa alone needs USD 51 billion annually yet received only USD 12.9 billion in 2023, according to the Climate Policy Initiative.

Between 2014 and 2018, less than half of committed adaptation funds to African countries were disbursed. Researchers attribute this to institutional capacity shortages, coordination problems and complex donor procedures.

The Stockholm Environment Institute puts the adaptation disbursement rate at 46 percent — lower than mitigation and far below general development finance. Africa’s adaptation finance is overwhelmingly public: 95 percent in 2023 came from governments, DFIs and multilateral climate funds. The private sector’s contribution rose to 5 percent, but most of it was philanthropic, not commercial capital.

The challenge is compounded by debt pressures. Around 751 million Africans live in countries that spend more on interest payments than on health or education, increasing reliance on grants and concessional loans. Within the GCF itself, procurement delays, NDA transitions and shortages of local expertise frequently slow readiness programmes and project execution. Studies show that GCF processes can delay first disbursement by a year or more for many projects, with the steepest bottlenecks affecting countries with weaker bureaucracies.

Attribution also complicates delivery: nearly half of adaptation investments carry mitigation co-benefits, timelines are long, and indicators remain inconsistent. COP30 will attempt to finalise about 100 adaptation indicators under the Global Goal on Adaptation. Better metrics alone will not solve delivery failures but could shorten appraisal timelines, support performance-linked grants and standardise emerging tools such as adaptation bonds.

Kenya’s Financing Locally-Led Climate Action (FLLoCA) initiative drew praise at COP30 for offering a rare internal view of a large public programme. Mid-term and implementation reports show steady progress on county climate plans and investments benefiting women. They also document assessment delays and gaps in updating delivery-support plans — bottlenecks in staffing, audits, procurement and verification systems that ultimately slow funds from reaching ward-level projects.

COP30’s presidency has placed adaptation at the centre. “COP30 must be the COP of adaptation,” said President-Designate André Corrêa do Lago, arguing that every climate-proofed school or reinforced road “pays back in avoided losses.” He warned that without rapid adaptation, climate change becomes a “multiplier of poverty.”