The Global Climate Change Initiative (GCCI):
Budget Authority and Request, FY2008-FY2012
Richard K. Lattanzio
Analyst in Environmental Policy
June 1, 2011
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
R41845
CRS Report for Congress
P
repared for Members and Committees of Congress
The Global Climate Change Initiative: Budget Authority and Request, FY2008-FY2012
Summary
The United States supports international financial assistance for global climate change initiatives
in developing countries. Under the Obama Administration, this assistance has been articulated
primarily as the Global Climate Change Initiative (GCCI), a major strategic platform within the
President’s 2010 Policy Directive on Global Development. The GCCI aims to integrate climate
change considerations into relevant foreign assistance through a full range of bilateral,
multilateral, and private sector mechanisms to foster low-carbon growth, promote sustainable and
resilient societies, and reduce emissions from deforestation and land degradation. The GCCI is
implemented through programs at the Department of State, the Department of the Treasury, and
the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), and is funded through the
Administration’s Executive Budget, Function 150 account, for State, Foreign Operations, and
Related Programs.
Congress is responsible for several activities in regard to the GCCI, including (1) authorizing
periodic appropriations for federal agency programs and multilateral fund contributions, (2)
enacting those appropriations, (3) providing guidance to the agencies, and (4) overseeing U.S.
interests in the programs and the multilateral funds. Recent budget authority for the GCCI was
$323 million in FY2009 and $1,003 million in FY2010, and has been enacted through legislation
including the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009 (H.R. 1105; P.L. 111-8); the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2010 (H.R. 3288/div.F; P.L. 111-117); the Supplemental Appropriations Act,
2010 (H.R. 4899; P.L. 111-212); and the Department of Defense and Full-Year Continuing
Appropriations Act, 2011 (H.R. 1473; P.L. 112-10). The Administration’s GCCI FY2012 budget
request is $1,328 million. Congressional committees of jurisdiction for the GCCI include the U.S.
House of Representatives Committees on Foreign Affairs (various subcommittees); Financial
Services, Subcommittee on International Monetary Policy and Trade; and Appropriations,
Subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs; and the U.S. Senate
Committees on Foreign Relations, Subcommittee on International Development and Foreign
Assistance, Economic Affairs, and International Environmental Protection; and Appropriations,
Subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs.
As Congress considers potential authorizations and/or appropriations for initiatives administered
through the GCCI, it may have questions concerning U.S. agency initiatives and current bilateral
and multilateral programs that address global climate change. Some potential concerns may
include cost, purpose, direction, efficiency, and effectiveness, as well as the GCCI’s relationship
to industry, investment, humanitarian efforts, national security, and international leadership. This
report serves as a brief overview of the GCCI, its structure, intents, and funding history. For a
more detailed discussion of international financial assistance for climate change activities, see
CRS Report R41808, International Climate Change Financing: Needs, Sources, and Delivery
Methods, by Richard K. Lattanzio and Jane A. Leggett.
Congressional Research Service
The Global Climate Change Initiative: Budget Authority and Request, FY2008-FY2012
Contents
The Global Climate Change Initiative ......................................................................................... 1
Clean Energy ........................................................................................................................ 1
Sustainable Landscapes......................................................................................................... 2
Climate Change Resilience and Adaptation ........................................................................... 2
Budget Authority ........................................................................................................................ 2
FY2011 Budget Authority ..................................................................................................... 4
FY2012 Budget Request ....................................................................................................... 5
Key Issues for Congress .............................................................................................................. 6
Figures
Figure 1. Global Climate Change Initiative: Budget Authority FY2008-FY2012.......................... 4
Tables
Table A-1. Global Climate Change Initiative, Core Agencies Budget Authority FY2009-
FY2012, by Category ............................................................................................................... 8
Table A-2. Global Climate Change Initiative,
All Agencies Budget Authority FY2008-FY2012, by Program.................................................. 9
Appendixes
Appendix. GCCI Budget Tables .................................................................................................. 8
Contacts
Author Contact Information ...................................................................................................... 11
Congressional Research Service
The Global Climate Change Initiative: Budget Authority and Request, FY2008-FY2012
The Global Climate Change Initiative
On September 22, 2010, President Obama signed the Presidential Policy Directive on Global
Development.1 The directive called for the elevation of foreign development assistance as a
national priority and outlined an integrated approach to development, diplomacy, and national
security. The Global Climate Change Initiative (GCCI)—one of the three main pillars to the 2010
directive2—aims to integrate climate change considerations into relevant foreign assistance
through the full range of bilateral, multilateral, and private mechanisms to foster low-carbon
growth, promote sustainable and resilient societies, and reduce emissions from deforestation and
land degradation.
The GCCI is divided into three main programmatic initiatives, or categories: (1) clean energy
assistance, (2) sustainable landscapes assistance, and (3) adaptation assistance.
Clean Energy
Clean energy programs aim to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from energy generation and
energy use by accelerating the deployment of clean energy technologies, policies, and practices.
The United States delivers much of its assistance for clean energy deployment through
multilateral trust funds. These funds are primarily housed in international financial institutions
(e.g., the World Bank), are currently supported by the financial contributions of donor country
governments, and provide financial assistance for projects implemented by a variety of
organizations, including U.N. agencies, multilateral development banks, nongovernmental
organizations, and national institutions. These funds take advantage of existing large-scale
greenhouse gas reduction opportunities and establish investment channels for larger private sector
financing. They include the Clean Technology Fund,3 which aims to spur large-scale clean energy
investments in lower-income countries with rapidly growing emissions; the Global Environment
Facility,4 which provides incremental funding5 for energy and infrastructure projects that support
global environmental benefits; and the Program for Scaling-Up Renewable Energy in Low
Income Countries,6 which endeavors to assist the poorest countries expand energy access and
stimulate economic growth through the scaled-up deployment of renewable energy strategies.
Bilateral efforts at the Department of State and U.S. Agency for International Development
1 See White House Fact Sheet: U.S. Global Development Policy at http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2010/
09/22/fact-sheet-us-global-development-policy.
2 The GCCI was one of three main initiatives to the 2010 Global Development Policy that also included the Global
Health Initiative and Global Food Security.
3 For more information on this program, see CRS Report R41302, International Climate Change Financing: The
Climate Investment Funds (CIF), by Richard K. Lattanzio.
4 For more information on this program, see CRS Report R41165, International Environmental Financing: The Global
Environment Facility (GEF), by Richard K. Lattanzio.
5 “Incremental” funding refers to costs associated with transforming a project with national benefits into one with
global environmental benefits. Global Environment Facility (GEF) grants aim to cover the difference or “increment”
between a less costly, more polluting option and a costlier, more environmentally sound option. In this way, GEF
funding is structured to “supplement” base project funding and provide for the environmental components in national
development agendas.
6 For more information on this program, see CRS Report R41302, International Climate Change Financing: The
Climate Investment Funds (CIF), by Richard K. Lattanzio.
Congressional Research Service
1
The Global Climate Change Initiative: Budget Authority and Request, FY2008-FY2012
(USAID) seek to complement the multilateral investments by helping to shape development
policy and regulatory environments in the recipient countries.
Sustainable Landscapes
Sustainable landscape programs aim to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from deforestation and
forest degradation. Bilateral and regional programs at the Department of State and USAID
support country-driven policies for forest governance, forest cover and land use change
monitoring systems, law-based resource management and land tenure, and on-the-ground efforts
to halt deforestation and foster sustainable forest-based livelihoods. Multilateral initiatives
include the Forest Investment Program,7 which tries to address the circumstances that lead to
deforestation and increased greenhouse gas emissions in select lower-income countries by
improving regulation and enforcement, mobilizing private financing, and securing the social and
economic benefits of sound forest management; and the Global Environment Facility, which
provides incremental funding for projects that support global environmental benefits such as
biodiversity and sustainable land use.
Climate Change Resilience and Adaptation
Adaptation programs aim to assist low-income countries reduce their vulnerability to climate
change impacts and build climate resilience. Bilateral and regional programs at the Department of
State and USAID target the more vulnerable countries in Africa, Asia, and Latin America and
strive to address climate risks in areas including infrastructure, agriculture, health, and water
services; to develop capacity for countries to use the best science and analysis for decision
making; and to promote sound governance to carry out these decisions. Multilateral initiatives
supported by the United States include the Least Developed Country Fund8 and the Special
Climate Change Fund,9 which focus on climate resilience and food security provisions in
countries with the greatest needs; and the Pilot Program for Climate Resilience,10 which is tasked
with coordinating comprehensive strategies in nine of the most vulnerable countries to support
actions that respond to the potential risks of a changing climate.
Budget Authority
The Global Climate Change Initiative is funded through programs at the Department of State, the
Department of the Treasury, and USAID (i.e., GCCI “core” agencies). Funds for these programs
are appropriated in the Administration’s Executive Budget, Function 150 account, for State,
Foreign Operations, and Related Programs. Budget authority for GCCI programming has
increased approximately 500% since FY2008, and currently accounts for approximately 2% of
7 For more information on this program, see CRS Report R41302, International Climate Change Financing: The
Climate Investment Funds (CIF), by Richard K. Lattanzio.
8 For more information on this program, see the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change website at
http://unfccc.int/cooperation_and_support/financial_mechanism/least_developed_country_fund/items/3660.php.
9 For more information on this program, see the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change website at
http://unfccc.int/cooperation_and_support/financial_mechanism/special_climate_change_fund/items/3657.php.
10 For more information on this program, see CRS Report R41302, International Climate Change Financing: The
Climate Investment Funds (CIF), by Richard K. Lattanzio.
Congressional Research Service
2
The Global Climate Change Initiative: Budget Authority and Request, FY2008-FY2012
the total State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs budget (approximately 3% if
considering only the Foreign Operations budget).11 Recent budget authority for the GCCI was a
reported $323 million in FY2009 and $1,003 million in FY2010.12 Allocations for GCCI
programming from the enacted FY2011 appropriations are still under agency consideration. The
Administration’s FY2012 GCCI budget request was $1,328 million. Some additional funds for
international climate change financing flow through programs at complementary agencies within
the federal government (e.g., the Department of Energy, the Environmental Protection Agency,
the Department of Agriculture); however, these allocations are defined outside of the GCCI.
Budget authority for GCCI programming in core agencies from FY2008 to FY2012 is represented
in Figure 1. Funding levels by category and by agency account, in both core and complementary
agencies, from FY2008 to FY2012 are presented in Table A-1 and Table A-2, respectively.
Congress is responsible for several activities in regard to the GCCI, including (1) authorizing
periodic appropriations for federal agency programs and multilateral fund contributions, (2)
enacting those appropriations, (3) providing guidance to the agencies, and (4) overseeing U.S.
interests in the programs.
Congressional committees of jurisdiction for international climate change programs at the
Department of State, the Department of the Treasury, and USAID include the following:
• the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Foreign Affairs (various
subcommittees)
• the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Financial Services,
Subcommittee on International Monetary Policy and Trade
• the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee
on State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs
• the U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, Subcommittee on International
Development and Foreign Assistance, Economic Affairs, and International
Environmental Protection
• the U.S. Senate Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on State, Foreign
Operations, and Related Programs
11 Estimate based on Division F, the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations
Act, 2010 (P.L. 111-117) in which funding was $16.1 billion for the Department of State, International Broadcasting,
and related agencies and $32.8 billion for Foreign Operations, for a total of $48.9 billion. FY2010 GCCI programming
accounted for just over $1 billion. The GCCI FY2011 and FY2012 requests are comparable. Considering that the
Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs budget generally accounts for approximately 3% of
U.S. discretionary spending, the GCCI accounts for less than 0.1% of all U.S. discretionary spending. For more detail
on recent Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs budgets, see CRS Report R41680, Fact
Sheet: The FY2012 State and Foreign Operations Budget Request, by Susan B. Epstein, Marian Leonardo Lawson, and
Tamara J. Resler; CRS Report R41228, State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2011 Budget and
Appropriations, by Marian Leonardo Lawson, Susan B. Epstein, and Tamara J. Resler; and CRS Report R40693, State,
Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2010 Budget and Appropriations, by Susan B. Epstein, Kennon H.
Nakamura, and Marian Leonardo Lawson.
12 It should be noted that many GCCI activities are funded at agency sub-account levels, and thus, many allocations for
these programmatic activities are left to the discretion of the agencies, under congressional consultation, and could
change as offices, bureaus, and/or missions update priorities in their operational budgets.
Congressional Research Service
3
The Global Climate Change Initiative: Budget Authority and Request, FY2008-FY2012
Figure 1. Global Climate Change Initiative: Budget Authority FY2008-FY2012
(US$ in millions, nominal)
Source: U.S. Department of State, Executive Budget Summary: Function 150 and Other International Programs,
Fiscal Year 2012; U.S. Department of State, FY2011 Budget for International Climate Change Financing: An
Interagency Strategy Document. Office of Management and Budget, Federal Climate Change Expenditure
Reports to Congress, May 2007 and June 2010.
Notes: Enacted funding for the GCCI in FY2008 was not classified by category (see Table A-2 for FY2008
figures by agency). FY2011 is not represented in the figure because funding for FY2011, enacted under P.L. 112-
10, is at the account level, and al ocations for many GCCI sub-account programmatic activities have yet to be
reported by the agencies (see Table A-2).
FY2011 Budget Authority
H.R. 1473, the Department of Defense and Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011, was
enacted April 15, 2011, as P.L. 112-10. It included appropriations for the Department of State,
Foreign Operations, and Related Programs (Title IX) that support Global Climate Change
Initiative programming. Many GCCI activities are funded by allocations at the sub-account level
and were left undefined in P.L. 112-10. Thus, allocations for FY2011 GCCI sub-account
programmatic activities are at the discretion of the agencies, under committee consultation, and
have yet to be fully reported.
Appropriations enacted in P.L. 112-10 at the account level related to GCCI activities include the
following:13
13 These figures do not reflect the 0.2% rescission across all non-defense accounts for FY2011 funds, in accordance
with Section 1119(a) of P.L. 112-10.
Congressional Research Service
4
The Global Climate Change Initiative: Budget Authority and Request, FY2008-FY2012
• $90 million for the Global Environment Facility (of which the Global
Environment Facility reports that approximately 51% is allocated toward projects
related to global climate change activities, with the remainder allocated to
projects related to biodiversity, international waters, ozone protection, organic
pollutants, etc.)
• $185 million for the Clean Technology Fund
• $50 million for the Strategic Climate Fund (including the Pilot Program for
Climate Resilience, the Forest Investment Program, and the Program for Scaling-
Up Renewable Energy in Low Income Countries)
• Larger account level appropriations at the Department of State, USAID, and the
Department of the Treasury from which are drawn funds for sub-account level
programming for GCCI activities. These larger accounts include “Development
Assistance” at $2,525 million; “Assistance for Europe, Eurasia and Central Asia”
at $697 million; “Economic Support Fund” at $5,958 million; “Department of the
Treasury, Debt Restructuring” at $50 million; and “International Organizations
and Programs” at $355 million, of which up to $10 million was made available
for the International Panel on Climate Change/United Nations Framework
Convention on Climate Change
See the Appendix for a breakdown of the FY2011 request and enacted budget authority.
FY2012 Budget Request
The President’s FY2012 budget request follows on the December 2010 United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) negotiations in Cancun, Mexico,14 which
formulated a package of “nationally appropriate”15 measures toward the goal of avoiding
dangerous climate change. These measures include mitigation actions, verification systems, an
adaptation framework, a forestry program, a funding mechanism, and a commitment to near-term
and long-term climate financing for the least developed countries amounting to near $30 billion
for the period 2010-2012 and $100 billion annually by 2020. The President’s FY2012 budget
requests for international climate programs at the Department of State, the Department of the
Treasury, and USAID would fund near-term climate financing of slightly over $1.3 billion across
three areas:
• adaptation ($255 million, up from $238 million enacted for FY2010)
• clean energy ($652 million, up from $531 million enacted for FY2010)
• sustainable landscapes ($421 million, up from $232 million enacted for FY2010)
See the Appendix for a breakdown of the FY2012 request.
14 For more information on the negotiations, see CRS Report R40001, A U.S.-Centric Chronology of the International
Climate Change Negotiations, by Jane A. Leggett.
15 Jonathan Pershing, Deputy Special Envoy for Climate Change and Head of the U.S. Delegation, at a January 5, 2011,
talk at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said that the Copenhagen and Cancun conferences represent a
paradigm shift from a top-down method to a bottom-up structure in which countries make emissions reduction pledges
and move forward and take actions suitable to their national circumstances.
Congressional Research Service
5
The Global Climate Change Initiative: Budget Authority and Request, FY2008-FY2012
Key Issues for Congress
As Congress considers potential authorizations and/or appropriations for initiatives administered
through the Department of State, the Department of the Treasury, USAID, and other agencies
with international programs, it may have questions concerning the purpose, direction, efficiency,
and effectiveness of U.S. agency initiatives and current bilateral and multilateral programs that
address global climate change.
Some issues that may raise concerns over providing assistance include:
• Fiscal Constraints. Budget constraints may lead to questions about sustaining
high levels of support for international development assistance in general, and
international climate change assistance in particular. The burden is exacerbated
during times of economic downturn, when the federal government is hard-
pressed to generate fiscal resources to adequately address domestic challenges
and maintain basic levels of public services and quality of life. Some have
suggested that retaining available funds for immediate domestic priorities, such
as fostering renewed economic growth and creating jobs, should take precedence
over global concerns for which many Americans feel less urgency and
responsibility.
• Potential for Misuse. National and international institutions that dispense
financial assistance have sometimes been criticized for inefficient and bloated
bureaucracies, their lack of transparency about project procurement practices and
operating costs, and the proportion of their funds misused or lost through
instances of graft, corruption, and other political inefficiencies.16 Some suggest
revisiting operational guidance of these institutions before further appropriations
are made.
• Uncertain Results. Questions remain regarding the overall effectiveness of
international financial assistance in spurring economic development and reform
in lower-income countries, and, more specifically, in addressing issues of climate
change and the environment. Many studies have examined the effects of
international assistance provided to lower-income countries, including both
bilateral and multilateral mechanisms, and have returned mixed results, making it
difficult to reach firm conclusions and support continued contributions.
• Lack of Consensus on Climate Science. Current uncertainties and ambiguities
regarding the fields of atmospheric chemistry and climatology have been offered
by some as reasons to postpone and/or reconsider international climate change
assistance policies and programs.
Some issues that may support providing assistance include:
• Commercial Interests. Some maintain that international climate change
assistance benefits U.S. businesses, as support for low-emission economic
16 William Easterly and Tobias Pfutze, “Where Does the Money Go? Best and Worst Practices in Foreign Aid,”
Journal of Economic Perspectives, vol. 22, no. 2 (Spring 2008). For more on foreign aid reform, also see CRS Report
R40102, Foreign Aid Reform: Studies and Recommendations, by Susan B. Epstein and Matthew C. Weed; and CRS
Report R40756, Foreign Aid Reform: Agency Coordination, by Marian Leonardo Lawson and Susan B. Epstein.
Congressional Research Service
6
The Global Climate Change Initiative: Budget Authority and Request, FY2008-FY2012
growth may increase trade, commerce, and economic activity in the global
marketplace for domestic goods and services. Increased U.S. funding may allow
some U.S. industries to make competitive inroads into rapidly expanding
markets, improve the advancement and commercialization of U.S. technologies,
mobilize greater investment in related domestic sectors, and enhance job creation
in the United States. Decreased funding may cede American influence in global
markets to other economic powers still engaged with lower-income countries on
environmental and natural resource issues (e.g., the European Union, China).
• Investment Efficiencies. Some argue that the costs of responding to tomorrow’s
climate-related catastrophes, instabilities, conflicts, and technological needs may
be significantly higher than the costs of working today to prevent them through
emissions reductions. Some economists note that lower-income countries account
for nearly all of the recent growth in global emissions and represent the cheapest
near-term opportunity to mitigate GHG pollution as part of a cost-effective
solution.
• Natural Disaster Preparedness. Some claim that international climate change
assistance is a means to support natural disaster preparedness around the globe.
Assistance for adaptation activities to help “climate-proof” developing countries’
infrastructure and other sectors may help avoid capital and other losses, minimize
the redirection of resources to ad hoc disaster response and urgent humanitarian
needs, and avoid chronic humanitarian crises, such as food shortages, particularly
for the resource poor in the least developed countries.17
• National Security. Some defend international climate change assistance as a way
to address and mitigate risks to national security. According to a 2008 National
Intelligence Assessment, the impacts of global climate change may worsen
problems of poverty, social tensions, environmental degradation, and weak
political institutions across the developing world.18 Some see international
climate change assistance as a means to help make lower-income countries less
susceptible to these threats, for the benefit of both the country and the security
interests of the United States.
• International Leadership. Finally, some see the promotion of international
climate change assistance to lower-income countries as a method through which
to increase U.S. leadership in global environmental issues. Through such
leadership, the United States may be able to influence and set important
international economic and environmental policies, practices, and standards.19
17 Both the World Bank and U.S. Geological Survey estimate that every dollar spent on disaster preparedness saves $7
in disaster response. The World Bank, Natural Disasters: Counting the Cost, March 2, 2004, at
http://go.worldbank.org/NQ6J5P2D10 (accessed May 20, 2011).
18 National Intelligence Council, National Intelligence Assessment on the National Security Implications of Global
Climate Change to 2030, Statement for the Record by Dr. Thomas Fingar, Deputy Director of National Intelligence for
Analysis, National Intelligence Council, before the U.S. Congress, House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence
& House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, June 25, 2008, at http://www.dni.gov/nic/
special_climate2030.html (accessed March 31, 2011).
19 For more information on the political issues involved in the international climate change negotiations, see CRS
Report R40001, A U.S.-Centric Chronology of the International Climate Change Negotiations, by Jane A. Leggett.
Congressional Research Service
7
The Global Climate Change Initiative: Budget Authority and Request, FY2008-FY2012
Appendix. GCCI Budget Tables
Table A-1. Global Climate Change Initiative,
Core Agencies Budget Authority FY2009-FY2012, by Category
(US$ in millions; figures appearing as an asterisk—*—have yet to be reported by the agencies)
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2011
FY2012
Category/Core Agencya
Actual
Enacted
Request
Enacted
Request
Adaptationb
24 238 334
* 255
State
0 60 57 * 49
Treasury
0 55 90 * 40
USAID 24
123
187
*
166
Clean Energyc
169 531 711
* 652
State
43 96 74 * 66
Treasury 26
326
508
*
457
USAID 100
109
129
*
129
Sustainable Landscapesd
128 232 346
* 421
State
10 40 25 * 28
Treasury 20
40
146
*
180
USAID 98
152
175
*
213
Total
State
53 196 156
* 143
Total
Treasury
46 421 744
* 677
Total
USAID
222 384 491
* 508
Total
321 1,001 1,391
* 1,328
Source: U.S. Department of State, Congressional Budget Justification, Volume 2, Foreign Operations, Fiscal Year
2012; Office of Management and Budget, Federal Climate Change Expenditure Reports to Congress, June 2010;
and U.S. Department of State, FY2011 Budget for International Climate Change Financing: An Interagency
Strategy Document.
Notes: Budget authority provided in millions of dollars. Discrepancies may result from rounding and improved
estimates. Mild discrepancies exist between Table A-1 and Table A-2 due to the existence of different source
material for funding reported by category versus funding reported by agency account for FY2008-FY2010.
Figures appearing as an asterisk—*—represent funding for programs at the sub-account level for which
allocations are drawn from larger account level programming and have yet to be reported by the agencies.
Funding for the GCCI in FY2008 was not classified by category, and is not included in this table (see Table A-2
for FY2008 figures by agency).
a. GCCI “core agencies” include the Department of State, the Department of the Treasury, and USAID as
represented in the Department of State’s Executive Budget, Function 150 and Other International Programs
(see Table A-2 for a summary of GCCI core and complementary agencies’ budget al ocations by account).
b. Adaptation programs aim to assist low-income countries reduce their vulnerability to climate change
impacts and build climate resilience.
c. Clean Energy programs aim to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from energy generation and energy use by
accelerating the deployment of clean energy technologies, policies, and practices.
d. Sustainable Landscape programs aim to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from deforestation and forest
degradation.
Congressional Research Service
8
The Global Climate Change Initiative: Budget Authority and Request, FY2008-FY2012
Table A-2. Global Climate Change Initiative,
All Agencies Budget Authority FY2008-FY2012, by Program
(US$ in millions; figures appearing as an asterisk—*—have yet to be reported by the agencies)
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2011
FY2012
Agency/Account
Estimatea
Actualb
Enactedc
Requestd
Enactede
Requestf
Department of Stateg 41
55
199
156 *
142
Diplomatic and Consular
4
2
2
— — —
Affairsh
[6,789]
[7,153]
[12,599]
Economic Support Fundi 32
24
158
110
*
99
[5,323]
[7,105]
[8,834]
[7,812]
[5,958]
[7,185]
International Organizations
5
29
39
46
*
43
and Programsj
[317]
[352]
[394]
[351]
[355]
[349]
Department of the
46 46 421 744
* 677
Treasuryk
Debt Restructuring: Tropical
20
20
20
20
*
15
Forest Conservation Actl
[30]
[60]
[60]
[70]
[50]
[15]
Global Environment Facilitym 26 26
26
89
46
72
[81]
[80]
[87]
[175]
[90]
[144]
Clean Technology Fundn 0
0
300
400
185
400
Strategic Climate Fund: Pilot
0 0 55 90 * 40
Program for Climate
[50]
Resilienceo
Strategic Climate Fund:
0 0 20 95 *
130
Forest Investment Programp
[50]
Strategic Climate Fund:
0 0 0 50 * 20
Scaling Up Renewable Energy
[50]
Programq
U.S. Agency for
115 222 383 491
* 509
International
Developmentr
Assistance for Europe,
26
15
26
26
*
29
Eurasia, and Central Asias
[690]
[922]
[742]
[716]
[697]
[627]
Development Assistancet 81
113
313
446
*
452
[1,624]
[2,000]
[2,520]
[2,981]
[2,525]
[2,918]
International Disaster
2
— — — — —
Assistanceu
[650]
Economic Support Fundv 7
94
44
19
*
28
[5,323]
[7,105]
[8,834]
[7,812]
[5,958]
[7,185]
Total
202 323 1,003 1,391
* 1,328
(Core Agencies)
Complementary
* 50 77 110 * *
Agenciesw
Total
202 373 1,080 1,501
*
*
(All Agencies)
Source: See notes a-f below for sources for each fiscal year.
Congressional Research Service
9
The Global Climate Change Initiative: Budget Authority and Request, FY2008-FY2012
Notes: Budget authority provided in millions of dollars. Discrepancies may result from rounding and improved
estimates. Mild discrepancies exist between Table A-1 and Table A-2 due to the existence of different source
material for funding reported by “category” versus funding reported by “agency account.”
Figures appearing in brackets—[ ]—represent total budget authority for al activities within the account,
from which sub-account al ocations for GCCI programs are represented by the adjoining, non-bracketed figure.
Figures appearing as an asterisk—*—represent funding for programs at the sub-account level for which
al ocations have yet to be reported by the agencies.
a. Office of Management and Budget, Federal Climate Change Expenditure Reports to Congress, May 2007.
These figures are estimates based upon the Administration’s request. There were no Expenditure Reports
published for FY2009 or FY2010 to report actual or enacted funding levels for prior years, and thus sub-
account al ocations for GCCI programming during these years remain unconfirmed. Account level budget
authority from FY2008 Cons. Enacted (P.L. 110-161); FY2008 Supp. Enacted (P.L. 110-252).
b. Office of Management and Budget, Federal Climate Change Expenditure Reports to Congress, June 2010;
account level budget authority from FY2009 Base Enacted (P.L. 111-8); FY2009 Bridge Enacted (P.L. 110-
252); FY2009 Stimulus Enacted (P.L. 111-5); FY2009 Supp. Enacted (P.L. 111-32).
c. Office of Management and Budget, Federal Climate Change Expenditure Reports to Congress, June 2010;
account level budget authority from FY2010 Base Enacted (H.R. 3288/div.F; P.L. 111-117); FY2010 Supp.
Enacted (H.R. 4899; P.L. 111-212).
d. U.S. Department of State, Congressional Budget Justification, Volume 2, Foreign Operations, FY2011.
e. FY2011 Continuing Resolution Enacted (H.R. 1473; P.L. 112-10). The figures in this table do not reflect the
0.2% rescission across al non-defense accounts for FY2011 funds, in accordance with Section 1119(a) of
P.L. 112-10.
f.
U.S. Department of State, Congressional Budget Justification, Volume 2, Foreign Operations, FY2012.
g. U.S. Department of State GCCI figures not reported as actual are considered estimates and may change as
offices, bureaus, and/or missions update operational budgets and outlays are finalized.
h. Diplomatic and Consular Affairs includes sub-account programmatic activities to support international
climate change activities; but because it is not a foreign assistance account, it has been excluded from the
agency cross-cut beginning in FY2011. This funding was not included in the agencies’ category allocations as
reported for FY2011, and thus does not appear in Table A-1.
i.
Economic Support Fund includes sub-account programmatic activities to support international climate
change activities, including funding for the Office of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific
Affairs (which contributes funds for adaptation programming at the U.N. Least Developed Countries Fund
(LDCF) and the U.N. Special Climate Change Fund (SCCF), clean energy programming at the Major
Economies Forum/Clean Energy Ministerial and Climate Renewables and Efficiency Deployment Initiative,
and the Global Methane Initiative, and sustainable landscape programming at the Forest Carbon Partnership
Facility), and the Office of Western Hemisphere (which contributes to the Energy and Climate Partnership
of the Americas).
j.
International Organizations and Programs includes sub-account programmatic activities to support
international climate change activities, including contributions to the International Panel on Climate Change,
UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, and the Montreal Protocol Multilateral Fund. For FY2011,
P.L. 112-10 enacted $355 million to the account, of which up to $10 million may be made available for the
International Panel on Climate Change/United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.
k. U.S. Department of the Treasury GCCI figures not reported as actual are considered estimates and may
change as offices update operational budgets and outlays are finalized.
l.
Debt Restructuring includes sub-account programmatic activities to support international climate change
activities in sustainable landscapes programming including funding for the Tropical Forest Conservation Act.
m. Global Environment Facility (GEF) is a multilateral environmental trust fund that supports climate change
activities in clean energy and sustainable landscapes programming. Established in 1991, the United States has
contributed funds annual y since 1993. Only a portion of GEF funds—as determined through GEF
programming decisions—is al ocated to climate change activities; the remaining al ocation supports other
environmental sectors (e.g., biodiversity, oceans, ozone, chemicals).
Congressional Research Service
10
The Global Climate Change Initiative: Budget Authority and Request, FY2008-FY2012
n. Clean Technology Fund is a multilateral environmental trust fund that supports climate change activities in
clean energy programming. Established in 2008, the United States has contributed funds annual y since 2010.
o. Strategic Climate Fund: Pilot Program for Climate Resilience is a multilateral environmental trust fund that
supports climate change activities in adaptation programming. Established in 2008, the United States has
contributed funds annual y since 2010. FY2011 Continuing Resolution (H.R. 1473; P.L. 112-10) enacted
budget authority of $50 million for the Strategic Climate Fund; allocations between the three sub-programs
are at the discretion of the Department of the Treasury and have yet to be reported.
p. Strategic Climate Fund: Forest Investment Program is a multilateral environmental trust fund that supports
climate change activities in sustainable landscapes programming. Established in 2008, the United States has
contributed funds annual y since 2010. FY2011 Continuing Resolution (H.R. 1473; P.L. 112-10) enacted
budget authority of $50 million for the Strategic Climate Fund; allocations between the three sub-programs
are at the discretion of the Department of the Treasury and have yet to be reported.
q. Strategic Climate Fund: Scaling Up Renewable Energy Program is a multilateral environmental trust fund that
supports climate change activities in clean energy programming. Established in 2008, the United States did
not contribute funds in 2010 because the program was not yet operational. FY2011 Continuing Resolution
(H.R. 1473; P.L. 112-10) enacted budget authority of $50 million for the Strategic Climate Fund; allocations
between the three sub-programs are at the discretion of the Department of the Treasury and have yet to
be reported.
r. U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) GCCI figures not reported as actual are considered
estimates and may change as offices update operational budgets and outlays are finalized.
s. Assistance for Europe, Eurasia, and Central Asia includes sub-account programmatic activities to support
USAID national, regional, and central international climate change activities. Prior to FY2009, this account
was two separate accounts: Assistance for Eastern Europe and the Baltic States and Assistance for the
Independent States of the Former Soviet Union.
t. Development Assistance includes sub-account programmatic activities to support USAID national, regional,
and central international climate change activities.
u. International Disaster Assistance includes sub-account programmatic activities to support USAID national,
regional, and central international climate change activities.
v. Economic Support Fund includes sub-account programmatic activities to support USAID national, regional,
and central international climate change activities.
w. Complementary Agencies (and their programmatic activities) include U.S. Department of Energy (including
the China and India Clean Energy Research Centers); U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (including
Methane for Markets, International Capacity Building, and contributions to the Multilateral Fund to support
the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer); U.S. Department of Commerce
(including the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s International Research Institute for
Climate and Society and the International Trade Administration’s activities under the Asia Pacific
Partnership); National Science Foundation (including the Regional Institutes for Global Change and the Basic
Research to Enable Agricultural Development); U.S. Department of Agriculture (including international
programmatic activities in the Forestry Service); National Aeronautics and Space Administration (including
the SERVIR initiative); Millennium Challenge Corporation; and U.S. Trade and Development Agency; but do
not include Overseas Private Investment Corporation or Export-Import Bank. GCCI funding was not
reported for complementary agencies prior to FY2009.
Author Contact Information
Richard K. Lattanzio
Analyst in Environmental Policy
rlattanzio@crs.loc.gov, 7-1754
Congressional Research Service
11