IDC negotiators call for unified climate finance rules to rebuild trust

At the Bangladesh Pavilion at COP30, the Bangladesh Environmental Lawyers Association (BELA), 350.org South Asia, and Friends of the Earth Asia Pacific (FoE APAC) convened a high-level side event entitled "Towards an Operational Definition of Climate Finance".

The discussion brought together negotiators, climate finance experts, civil society leaders, and youth representatives to push for a unified, justice-driven definition of climate finance that ends double counting and strengthens transparency, equity, and accountability for the Global South.

Speakers noted that climate finance remains one of the most politically contested areas in UNFCCC negotiations. Ambiguous definitions and inconsistent accounting practices continue to undermine trust—particularly for Least Developed Countries (LDCs) that depend on predictable, new, and additional finance. Without an operational definition, they warned, developing countries remain exposed to mislabelled funds, inflated reporting, and loan-heavy packages that deepen debt vulnerabilities.

Speakers warn of misreporting, loan dependence and greenwashing

Opening the panel, Amanullah Porag, South Asia Mobilisations Coordinator at 350.org, said weak definitions have allowed powerful countries to manipulate accounting frameworks:
"Climate finance has become a diluted issue. Without proper rules, big countries can mispackage ODA, false financing or other flows and present them as climate finance."

BELA representative and Bangladesh negotiator, Bareesh Chowdhury, stressed that quality must be central:"Access and quality of climate finance are the missing links. We need to talk about them much more seriously."

Brandon Wu, Director of Policy and Campaigns at ActionAid USA, highlighted how OECD methodologies have distorted reporting for more than a decade, citing concessional and commercial loans, private finance, and export credits being counted towards the USD 100 billion goal: "Germany delivers 50% of its finance as loans; France too. Only about 12% of development bank finance is actually grants. The Global North is using climate finance channels to generate profit through export credits."

LDC negotiators demand clarity and concessionality

Somaia Abdoun, LDC finance negotiator and climate expert, called the definition "essential for adequacy, accounting, and transparency": "Today we see massive double counting — ODA, migration, displacement and development aid all passed off as climate finance. We need a clean distinction between climate finance and development finance, with high concessionality for vulnerable countries."

Civil society: 'This is political, not technical'

Mariana Paoli, Global Advocacy Lead at Christian Aid, said the definition must reflect political priorities:"Our biggest demand is for developed countries to deliver public finance. Debt — especially commercial debt — should never be counted as climate finance."

She warned that developed countries remain reluctant to acknowledge the USD 1.3 trillion annual finance need identified by the G77:"We are still stuck in a post-Baku refusal to provide figures. Between now and 2028, we must push for stronger guidance on what counts and what does not."

Bangladesh experts underline trust deficit

Bangladesh negotiator, Dr Fazle Rabbi Sadeque Khan, said trust has eroded due to inconsistent reporting:"Every country reports different numbers because we lack a proper definition. To rebuild trust, we must eliminate double-counting."

He added that adaptation remains severely underfunded:"Adaptation needs are USD 300 billion, yet only 1–2% of global finance flows through the UNFCCC. There is no dedicated fund for LDCs."

Call to action from Bangladesh's ERD

Closing the session, Additional Secretary, A K M Sohel, said:"We must begin with the operational definition. Without it, everything remains vague. Funds may be available, but without clarity we risk pushing countries into debt traps — something we must avoid."