WRI Insights

As the risks that climate change poses to business becoming ever clearer, corporate executives are increasingly recognizing that policy action is essential. The *[Guide to Responsible Corporate Engagement in Climate Policy](http://www.wri.org/publication/guide-responsible-corporate-engagement-climate-policy)*—from the U.N. Global Compact, U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change, U.N. Environment Programme, World Resources Institute, CDP, WWF, Ceres, and The Climate Group—for the first time establishes a shared, practical definition of responsible corporate engagement. The [new guide](http://www.wri.org/publication/guide-responsible-corporate-engagement-climate-policy) details three essential steps businesses can take to effectively engage in climate policy.

Strategies to mitigate and adapt to climate change’s impacts will be costly, so [success at COP 19](http://www.wri.org/blog/5-issues-watch-cop-19-%E2%80%9Cconstruction-cop%E2%80%9D) hinges on making progress on climate finance. It’s important that negotiators pursue three actions: scaling up [adaptation finance](http://www.wri.org/blog/adaptation-short-changed-imbalance-climate-finance-commitments); developing pathways to secure $100 billion in climate finance by 2020; and moving the [Green Climate Fund](http://www.wri.org/blog/green-climate-fund-inception-launch-0) forward.

Forests are the life blood of Equatorial Guinea. They cover roughly 98 percent of the total national land area, providing services and sustenance to hundreds of thousands of Equatoguineans. But despite the critical role of forests, the country lacked a comprehensive information system to support monitoring and responsible management of these ecosystems. [Leer esta entrada del blog en español](/blog/las-%C3%A1reas-protegidas-en-guinea-ecuatorial-se-incrementaron-en-un-60-por-ciento-seg%C3%BAn-nuevo) [Lire ce blog post en Français](/blog/la-superficie-des-aires-prot%C3%A9g%C3%A9es-augment%C3%A9-de-63-en-guin%C3%A9e-%C3%A9quatoriale-r%C3%A9v%C3%A8le-le-nouvel-atlas)

One of the biggest successes from 2009’s COP 15 conference was securing funding for climate change adaptation and mitigation in developing countries. Donor nations agreed to “provide new and additional resources […] approaching $30 billion for the period 2010–2012, with balanced allocation between adaptation and mitigation.” They also committed to mobilize $100 billion a year by 2020. But the agreement left a key question unresolved: how should funding be “balanced” between adaptation and mitigation? Should the funding balance be 50/50 between adaptation and mitigation or should it based on each country’s needs? Should funding include both private and public sector investment? These are some of the questions that negotiators will need to address during COP 19 in Warsaw. But whatever they decide as being a “balanced commitment,” one thing is clear: finance for adaptation needs to increase in the coming years.

In order to understand where the climate finance agenda is likely to go, it is first necessary to grasp where it stands today. To that end, Overseas Development Institute, WRI, and IGES – in partnership with the [Open Climate Network](http://www.wri.org/our-work/project/open-climate-network) – have conducted [the first in-depth examination of Fast Start Finance (FSF)](http://www.wri.org/publication/mobilising-international-climate-finance), the period from 2010-2012 in which developed nations pledged to deliver US$ 30 billion in climate finance. As of September 2013, countries reported providing $35 billion in public FSF from 2010 through 2012, exceeding their pledge. Just five countries – Germany, Japan, Norway, the United Kingdom and the United States— provided US$ 27 billion of this finance.

The issue of "loss and damage" will be a critical component of the discussions at COP 19 in Warsaw. These negotiations could be contentious and emotional—and not surprisingly, given what is at stake. Losses and damages under scenarios well below [four degrees of warming](http://climatechange.worldbank.org/sites/default/files/Turn_Down_the_heat_Why_a_4_degree_centrigrade_warmer_world_must_be_avoided.pdf) could, over time, include the submergence of mega-cities, the collapse of major ecosystems, and the loss of entire island nations. But the loss and damage (L&D) negotiations need to succeed for COP 19 to succeed—and for the global community to get on track to achieve an ambitious, effective, and equitable [climate change agreement in 2015](http://www.wri.org/blog/qa-how-do-we-secure-strong-international-climate-agreement-2015).