The Global Climate Change Initiative (GCCI):
Budget Authority and Request, FY2010-FY2013
Richard K. Lattanzio
Analyst in Environmental Policy
July 27, 2012
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
R41845
CRS Report for Congress
Pr
epared for Members and Committees of Congress
The Global Climate Change Initiative: Budget Authority and Request, FY2010-FY2013
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 platform within the President’s 2010
Policy Directive on Global Development. The GCCI aims to integrate climate change
considerations into U.S. foreign assistance through a full range of bilateral, multilateral, and
private sector mechanisms to foster low-carbon growth, promote sustainable and climate-resilient
societies, and reduce emissions from deforestation and land degradation. The GCCI is
implemented through programs at three “core” agencies—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, $939 million in FY2010, $819 million in FY2011, and $773 million in
FY2012, 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; P.L. 111-
117); the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2010 (H.R. 4899; P.L. 111-212); the Department of
Defense and Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011 (H.R. 1473; P.L. 112-10); and the
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2012 (H.R. 2055; P.L. 112-74). The Administration’s GCCI
FY2013 budget request is $770 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 activities 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, FY2010-FY2013
Contents
The Global Climate Change Initiative ............................................................................................. 1
Adaptation ................................................................................................................................. 1
Clean Energy ............................................................................................................................. 1
Sustainable Landscapes ............................................................................................................. 2
Budget Authority ............................................................................................................................. 2
FY2010 Budget Authority ......................................................................................................... 4
FY2011 Budget Authority ......................................................................................................... 5
FY2012 Budget Authority ......................................................................................................... 6
FY2013 Budget Request............................................................................................................ 6
Key Issues for Congress .................................................................................................................. 7
Figures
Figure 1. Global Climate Change Initiative: Budget Authority, FY2010-FY2013.......................... 4
Tables
Table A-1. Global Climate Change Initiative, Core Agencies Budget Authority, FY20010-
FY2013, by Category ................................................................................................................. 10
Table A-2. Global Climate Change Initiative,
All Agencies Budget Authority, FY2010-FY2013, by Program................................................. 11
Appendixes
Appendix. GCCI Budget Tables .................................................................................................... 10
Contacts
Author Contact Information........................................................................................................... 14
Congressional Research Service
The Global Climate Change Initiative: Budget Authority and Request, FY2010-FY2013
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) adaptation
assistance, (2) clean energy assistance, and (3) sustainable landscapes assistance.
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 Fund3 and the Special
Climate Change Fund,4 which focus on climate resilience and food security provisions in
countries with the greatest needs; and the Pilot Program for Climate Resilience,5 which is tasked
with coordinating comprehensive strategies in several of the most vulnerable countries to support
actions that respond to the potential risks of a changing climate.
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
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 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.
4 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.
5 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, FY2010-FY2013
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,6 which aims to spur large-scale clean energy
investments in lower-income countries with rapidly growing emissions; the Global Environment
Facility,7 which provides incremental funding8 for energy and infrastructure projects that support
global environmental benefits; and the Program for Scaling-Up Renewable Energy in Low
Income Countries,9 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
(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,10 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.
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. Recent trends in the GCCI budget authority show it
6 For more information on this program, see CRS Report R41302, International Climate Change Financing: The
Climate Investment Funds (CIF), by Richard K. Lattanzio.
7 For more information on this program, see CRS Report R41165, International Environmental Financing: The Global
Environment Facility (GEF), by Richard K. Lattanzio.
8 “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.
9 For more information on this program, see CRS Report R41302, International Climate Change Financing: The
Climate Investment Funds (CIF), by Richard K. Lattanzio.
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, FY2010-FY2013
having decreased slightly each year since FY2010,11 and currently accounts for approximately
1.4% of total programming in the International Affairs Function 150 account budget request.12
Recent budget authority for the GCCI was reported as $939 million in FY2010, $819 million in
FY2011, and $773 million in FY2012.13 The Administration’s FY2013 GCCI budget request is
$770 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 FY2010 to FY2013 is represented in Figure 1. Funding levels by category and by
agency account, in both core and complementary agencies (where available), from FY2010 to
FY2013, 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; and
11 While the GCCI was instituted as a development initiative during the Obama Administration’s first budget
submission to Congress for FY2010, the United States has actively contributed congressionally appropriated funds for
international climate assistance for many years. However, it should be noted that prior contributions to climate
assistance were often accounted for and defined in different ways. Thus, it may be difficult to compare past spending
patterns and priorities against those of the current Administration. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
reported FY2009 budget authority for activities defined as international climate change assistance for the three core
agencies as approximately $323 million. See OMB, Federal Climate Change Expenditure Reports to Congress, June
2010, at http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/legislative_reports/FY2011_Climate_Change.pdf;
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).
12 Estimate based on the FY2013 International Affairs, Function 150 account, budget request of $56.2 billion for
foreign operations programming at the Departments of State, Treasury, and USAID. Considering that the International
Affairs budget generally accounts for approximately 3% of U.S. discretionary spending, the GCCI accounts for less
than 0.1% of all U.S. discretionary spending. For more detail on recent Department of State, Foreign Operations, and
Related Programs budgets, see CRS Report WRE00045, FY2013 International Affairs Budget: Issues for Congress, by
Susan B. Epstein, Marian Leonardo Lawson, and Jeremy M. Sharp.
13 Beginning with FY2010, the State Department began reporting international climate change assistance on its foreign
aid website, ForeignAssistance.gov, at http://www.foreignassistance.gov/InitiativeLanding.aspx. Many GCCI activities
are funded at agency sub-account levels, with allocations left to the discretion of the agencies, under congressional
consultation. Thus, obligations and/or outlays could change from the enacted budget authority as offices, bureaus,
and/or missions update priorities in their operational budgets.
Congressional Research Service
3
The Global Climate Change Initiative: Budget Authority and Request, FY2010-FY2013
• the U.S. Senate Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on State, Foreign
Operations, and Related Programs.
Figure 1. Global Climate Change Initiative: Budget Authority, FY2010-FY2013
(US$ in millions, nominal)
Sources: U.S. Department of State, Congressional Budget Justification, Volume 2, Foreign Operations, Fiscal
Years 2010-2013; and the U.S. Administration’s foreign assistance website, http://www.foreignassistance.gov/.
Note: See Table A-1 for corresponding figures.
FY2010 Budget Authority
H.R. 3288, the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2010, was enacted December 16, 2009, as P.L.
111-117. It included appropriations for the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related
Programs (Division F) 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. 111-
117. Allocations for FY2010 GCCI sub-account programmatic activities in this report are as
reported by agencies on the U.S. Department of State’s “Foreign Assistance” website.14
Appropriations enacted in P.L. 111-117 related to GCCI activities include the following:
• $86.5 million for the Global Environment Facility (of which the U.S. Department
of State estimates that $37 million was 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.);
• $300 million for the Clean Technology Fund;
14 http://www.foreignassistance.gov/.
Congressional Research Service
4
The Global Climate Change Initiative: Budget Authority and Request, FY2010-FY2013
• $75 million for the Strategic Climate Fund (including the Pilot Program for
Climate Resilience and the Forest Investment Program);
• larger account level appropriations at the Department of State, USAID, and the
Department of the Treasury, including “Development Assistance” at $2,520
million; “Assistance for Europe, Eurasia and Central Asia” at $741.6 million;
“Economic Support Fund” at $6,344 million (with another $2,490 million
enacted in FY2010 Supplemental Appropriations (H.R. 4899; P.L. 111-212);
“Department of the Treasury, Debt Restructuring” at $60 million; and
“International Organizations and Programs” at $394 million. From these larger
accounts, agencies reported that $508 million in sub-account level bilateral and
regional development programming was allocated for GCCI activities.
See the Appendix for a breakdown of the FY2010 actual budget authority.
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. Allocations for FY2010 GCCI sub-account programmatic
activities in this report are as reported by agencies on the U.S. Department of State’s “Foreign
Assistance” website.
Appropriations enacted in P.L. 112-10 related to GCCI activities include the following:
• $89.8 million for the Global Environment Facility (of which the Global
Environment Facility reports that approximately 51% was 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.);
• $184.6 million for the Clean Technology Fund;
• $49.9 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, including “Development Assistance” at $2,520
million; “Assistance for Europe, Eurasia and Central Asia” at $696 million;
“Economic Support Fund” at $5,946 million; “Department of the Treasury, Debt
Restructuring” at $50 million; and “International Organizations and Programs” at
$354 million.15 From these larger accounts, agencies reported $523 million in
sub-account level bilateral and regional development programming was allocated
for GCCI activities.
15 The larger account figures 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
5
The Global Climate Change Initiative: Budget Authority and Request, FY2010-FY2013
See the Appendix for a breakdown of the FY2011 request and estimated budget authority.
FY2012 Budget Authority
H.R. 2055, the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2012, was enacted December 23, 2011, as P.L.
112-74. It included appropriations for the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related
Programs (Division I) 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-
74. Thus, allocations for FY2012 GCCI sub-account programmatic activities are at the discretion
of the agencies, under committee consultation, and some have yet to be fully reported.
Appropriations enacted in P.L. 112-74 related to GCCI activities include the following:
• $89.8 million for the Global Environment Facility (of which the Global
Environment Facility reports that approximately 51% was 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.);
• $184.6 million for the Clean Technology Fund;
• $49.9 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, including “Development Assistance” at $2,520
million; “Assistance for Europe, Eurasia and Central Asia” at $627 million;
“Economic Support Fund” at $5,763 million; “Department of the Treasury, Debt
Restructuring” at $12 million; and “International Organizations and Programs” at
$349 million. From these larger accounts, agencies reported that an estimated
$482 million in sub-account level bilateral and regional development
programming was allocated for GCCI activities;
• further, there are provisions for funding transfers, such that in consultation with
the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of State may transfer up to $200
million of the funds made available under the Economic Support Fund to funds
appropriated under the headings ‘‘Multilateral Assistance, Funds Appropriated to
the President, International Financial Institutions’’ for additional payments to
such institutions, facilities, and funds (e.g., the Global Environment Facility,
Clean Technology Fund, or Strategic Climate Fund). No transfers have been
reported at this time.
See the Appendix for a breakdown of the FY2012 request and estimated budget authority.
FY2013 Budget Request
The President’s FY2013 budget request follows on the December 2010 United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) negotiations in Cancun, Mexico, and the
Congressional Research Service
6
The Global Climate Change Initiative: Budget Authority and Request, FY2010-FY2013
December 2011 negotiations in Durban, South Africa.16 Parties in Cancun formulated a package
of “nationally appropriate”17 measures toward the goal of avoiding dangerous climate change.
These measures include mitigation actions, verification systems, an adaptation framework, a
forestry program, a financial 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. Parties in Durban continued negotiations on the Cancun
package, agreeing in principal to work toward a set of legally binding emission reduction targets
by 2020 for all Parties (i.e., both developed and developing countries), as well as implementing
the Green Climate Fund to serve as the operational entity for the UNFCCC’s financial
mechanism. The President’s FY2013 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 $770 million across three areas:
• adaptation ($203 million),
• clean energy ($390 million),
• sustainable landscapes ($177 million).
See the Appendix for a breakdown of the FY2013 request.
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 the following:
• 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.
16 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.
17 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
7
The Global Climate Change Initiative: Budget Authority and Request, FY2010-FY2013
• 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.18 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.
• Uncertainties in Climate Science. Prevailing scientific research on the current
and future impacts of greenhouse gas emissions on the global climate exhibit
varying degrees of analytical uncertainty. The lack of definitiveness in some data
and in certain model projections has been offered by some as a reason to
postpone and/or reconsider international climate change assistance policies and
programs.
Some issues that may support providing assistance include the following:
• Commercial Interests. Some maintain that international climate change
assistance benefits U.S. businesses, as support for low-emission economic
growth may increase trade, commerce, and economic activity in the global
marketplace for U.S. goods and services. Increased assistance 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. 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 future capital and other losses,
18 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
8
The Global Climate Change Initiative: Budget Authority and Request, FY2010-FY2013
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.19
• 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.20 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.21
19 Both the World Bank and U.S. Geological Survey estimate that every dollar spent on disaster preparedness saves $7
in disaster response. The World Bank, Natural Disasters: Counting the Cost, March 2, 2004, at
http://go.worldbank.org/NQ6J5P2D10.
20 National Intelligence Council, National Intelligence Assessment on the National Security Implications of Global
Climate Change to 2030, Statement for the Record by Dr. Thomas Fingar, Deputy Director of National Intelligence for
Analysis, National Intelligence Council, before the U.S. Congress, House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence
& House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, June 25, 2008, at http://www.dni.gov/nic/
special_climate2030.html.
21 For more information on the political issues involved in the international climate change negotiations, see CRS
Report R40001, A U.S.-Centric Chronology of the International Climate Change Negotiations, by Jane A. Leggett.
Congressional Research Service
9
The Global Climate Change Initiative: Budget Authority and Request, FY2010-FY2013
Appendix. GCCI Budget Tables
Table A-1. Global Climate Change Initiative,
Core Agencies Budget Authority, FY20010-FY2013, by Category
(US$ in millions; figures appearing as an asterisk—*—have yet to be reported by the agencies)
FY2010
FY2011
FY2011
FY2012
FY2012
FY2013
Category/Core Agencya
Actual
Request
Estimate
Request
Estimate
Request
Adaptationb 245.8
335.9
194.0
255.0
197.0
202.5
State
68.0 58.5 47.0 48.5 43.0 46.0
USAID
122.8 187.4 137.0 166.5 141.5 144.0
Treasury
55.0 90.0 10.0 40.0 12.5 12.5
Clean Energyc 531.6
703.5
409.1
662.1
387.1
390.0
State
97.6 66.8 60.5 66.0 68.0 62.5
USAID 108.0
128.7
124.0
129.1
92.0
86.5
Treasury
326.0 508.0 224.6 467.0 227.1 241.0
Sustainable Landscapesd 161.9 351.0 215.8 410.5 189.0
177.0
State
35.9 30.0 17.0 27.5 22.0 12.0
USAID
75.0 175.0 137.4 213.0 115.0 118.5
Treasury
51.0 146.0 61.4 170.0 52.0 46.5
Total State
201.5
155.3
124.5
142.0
133.0
120.5
Total USAID
305.7
491.2
398.4
508.6
348.5
349.0
Total Treasury
432.0
744.0
296.0
677.0
291.6
300.0
Total
939.2
1390.5
818.9
1327.6
773.1
769.5
Sources: U.S. Department of State, Congressional Budget Justification, Volume 2, Foreign Operations, Fiscal
Years 2010-2013; and the U.S. Administration’s foreign assistance website, http://www.foreignassistance.gov/.
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
10
The Global Climate Change Initiative: Budget Authority and Request, FY2010-FY2013
Table A-2. Global Climate Change Initiative,
All Agencies Budget Authority, FY2010-FY2013, by Program
(US$ in millions; figures appearing as an asterisk—*—have yet to be reported by the agencies)a
FY2010
FY2011
FY2011
FY2012
FY2012
FY2013
Agency/Program/Account
Actual
Request
Estimate
Request
Estimate
Request
Department of Stateb 201.5 155.3 124.5 142.0 133.0 120.5
International Organizations—
7.5 8.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
International Conservation
Programs (IO&P)c
International Organizations—
13.0 13.5 10.0 13.5 10.0 13.0
Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change / UN
Framework Convention on
Climate Change (IO&P)
International Organizations—
23.5 23.5 25.5 29.2 27.0 27.5
Montreal Protocol (IO&P)
Oceans and International
145.5 100.3 80.0 90.3
90.0 75.0
Environment and Scientific
Affairs (ESF)d
Western Hemisphere
12.0 10.0 9.0 9.0
6.0 5.0
Regional (ESF)
U.S. Agency for
305.7 491.2 398.4 508.6 348.5 349.0
International
Developmente
Bilateral Country
119.0 214.0 212.5 297.0 178.0 173.1
(DA,f ESF,g AEECAh)
Africa Regional (DA)
8.5
13.0
8.0
6.0
8.0
5.0
Asia Middle East Regional
(DA) 11.5
12.0
6.0
3.0
2.0
3.0
Barbados and Eastern
Caribbean
(DA)
5.0 5.0 5.5 8.0 4.5 5.5
Bureau for Policy, Planning
and Learning (DA)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
1.0
Central Africa Regional (DA)
0.0
14.0
5.4
20.0
9.4
9.4
Central America Regional
(DA) 6.0
13.0
4.0
4.0
6.5
7.0
Central Asia Regional (ESF)
4.6
0.5
1.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
Democracy, Conflict and
Humanitarian Assistance—
FEWSNet (DA)
18.0
18.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Democracy, Conflict and
Humanitarian Assistance—
PPM
(DA)
2.0 10.0 5.0 15.0
8.5 11.0
East Africa Regional (DA)
5.8
14.0
8.0
10.0
7.0
7.0
Economic Growth,
Agriculture and Trade (DA)
76.0
87.5
82.0
76.0
73.0
72.0
Eurasia Regional (ESF)
10.0
10.0
10.0
5.1
3.5
3.5
Congressional Research Service
11
The Global Climate Change Initiative: Budget Authority and Request, FY2010-FY2013
FY2010
FY2011
FY2011
FY2012
FY2012
FY2013
Agency/Program/Account
Actual
Request
Estimate
Request
Estimate
Request
Europe Regional (ESF)
0.0
0.5
1.0
2.0
1.0
1.0
Latin America and Caribbean
Regional (DA)
3.5
18.2
3.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
Office of Development
Partners—Development
Grants Program (DA)
0.0
7.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Office of Development
Partners—Private Sector
Alliances
(DA)
0.0 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Regional Development
Mission for the Pacific (DA)
0.0
9.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Regional Development
Mission-Asia (DA)
18.8
14.0
23.0
27.5
17.0
20.5
South America Regional (DA)
0.0
0.0
4.0
0.0
5.6
9.0
South Asia Regional (DA)
2.0
4.5
2.0
2.0
1.5
0.0
Southern Africa Regional
(DA) 4.2
10.5
7.0
10.0
7.0
6.0
USAID Forward: Program
Effectiveness Initiatives (DA)
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
West Africa Regional (DA)
10.9
14.5
10.5
17.0
10.0
10.0
Department of the
432.0 744.0 296.0 677.0 291.6 300.0
Treasuryi
Tropical Forest Conservation
20.0 20.0 16.4 15.0 12.0 0.0
Act (Debt Restructuring)j
Global Environment Facilityk
37.0 89.0 45.0 72.0 45.0 65.0
(IFI)l
Clean Technology Fundm
(IFI)
300.0 400.0 184.6 400.0 184.6 185.0
Strategic Climate Fund: Pilot
55.0 90.0 10.0 40.0 12.5 12.5
Program for Climate
Resiliencen (IFI)
Strategic Climate Fund:
20.0 95.0 30.0 130.0 25.0 25.0
Forest Investment Programo
(IFI)
Strategic Climate Fund:
0.0 50.0 10.0 20.0 12.5 12.5
Scaling Up Renewable Energy
Programp (IFI)
Total
939.2 1,390.5
818.9 1,327.6
773.1 769.5
(Core Agencies)
Complementary
360.8
981.1 *
Agenciesq
Development Finance and
400.0
1,300.0 *
Export Credit Agenciesr
Total
1,700.0
3,100.0 *
(All Agencies)
Congressional Research Service
12
The Global Climate Change Initiative: Budget Authority and Request, FY2010-FY2013
Sources: U.S. Department of State, Congressional Budget Justification, Volume 2, Foreign Operations, Fiscal
Years 2010-2013; the Department of State’s “U.S. Fast Start Climate Finance” website, http://www.state.gov/e/
oes/climate/faststart/index.htm; and the U.S. Administration’s foreign assistance website,
http://www.foreignassistance.gov/.
a. Figures appearing as an asterisk—*—in this table represent funding estimates that have yet to be allocated
and reported fully by the agencies. As of this publication, the complementary agencies and the development
finance and export credit agencies have yet to report FY2012 estimates.
b. U.S. Department of the State GCCI figures not reported as actual are considered estimates and may change
as offices update operational budgets and outlays are finalized.
c. International Organizations and Programs account (IO&P) includes sub-account programmatic activities to
support international climate change activities, including contributions to the International Panel on Climate
Change, U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change, and the Montreal Protocol Multilateral Fund.
d. Economic Support Fund account (ESF) 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).
e. 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.
f.
Development Assistance account (DA) includes sub-account programmatic activities to support USAID
bilateral and regional climate change activities.
g. Economic Support Fund account (ESF) includes sub-account programmatic activities to support USAID/DOS
bilateral and regional climate change activities.
h. Assistance for Europe, Eurasia, and Central Asia account (AEECA) includes sub-account programmatic
activities to support USAID bilateral and regional 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.
i.
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.
j.
Debt Restructuring account (DR) includes sub-account programmatic activities to support international
climate change activities in sustainable landscapes programming including funding for the Tropical Forest
Conservation Act.
k. 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). The figures in the above table only
present the GEF “climate change” allocation.
l.
International Financial Institutions account (IFI) includes sub-account programmatic activities to support
organizations at the World Bank, the regional development banks, and other multilateral institutions.
m. Clean Technology Fund (CTF) (one of the two World Bank entrusted Climate Investment Funds) 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.
n. Strategic Climate Fund (SCF) (one of the two World Bank entrusted Climate Investment Funds): Pilot
Program for Climate Resilience (PPCR) 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.
o. Strategic Climate Fund (SCF) (one of the two World Bank entrusted Climate Investment Funds): Forest
Investment Program (FIP) is a multilateral environmental trust fund that supports climate change activities in
Congressional Research Service
13
The Global Climate Change Initiative: Budget Authority and Request, FY2010-FY2013
sustainable landscapes programming. Established in 2008. The United States has contributed funds annual y
since 2010.
p. Strategic Climate Fund (SCF) (one of the two World Bank entrusted Climate Investment Funds): Scaling Up
Renewable Energy Program (SREP) 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.
q. 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 Chal enge Corporation; and U.S. Trade and Development Agency; but do
not include Overseas Private Investment Corporation or Export-Import Bank. Figures represented in this
table are as reported by the Department of State’s “U.S. Fast Start Climate Finance” website,
http://www.state.gov/e/oes/climate/faststart/index.htm. Activities in complementary agencies are not
officially defined as GCCI programming.
r. Development finance and export credit agencies include the Overseas Private Investment Corporation
(OPIC) and the Export-Import Bank of the United States (Ex-Im) which use public money to mobilize much
larger sums of private investment to be directed at industry sectors (such as climate change mitigation
activities) through loans, loan guarantees and insurance for the deployment of clean energy technologies in
developing countries. Figures represented in this table are a combination of public and private funding as
reported by the Department of State’s “U.S. Fast Start Climate Finance” website, http://www.state.gov/e/
oes/climate/faststart/index.htm. Activities in the development finance and export credit agencies are not
officially defined as GCCI programming.
Author Contact Information
Richard K. Lattanzio
Analyst in Environmental Policy
rlattanzio@crs.loc.gov, 7-1754
Congressional Research Service
14