Updated March 23, 2017
The Global Climate Change Initiative (GCCI):
Budget Authority and Request, FY2010 - FY2018
On September 22, 2010, President Obama signed the
governance, (2) forest cover and land use change
Presidential Policy Directive on Global Development. The
monitoring systems, (3) law-based resource management
directive called for the elevation of foreign development
and land tenure, and (4) on-the-ground efforts to halt
assistance as a national priority and outlined an integrated
deforestation and foster sustainable forest-based
approach to development, diplomacy, and national security.
livelihoods. Multilateral funds supporting sustainable
The Global Climate Change Initiative (GCCI) was one of
landscape initiatives have included the Green Climate Fund
the three main pillars of the 2010 directive. It aimed to
and the Global Environment Facility.
integrate climate change considerations into relevant
foreign assistance through a range of bilateral, multilateral,
Budget Authority
and private sector mechanisms to promote sustainable and
The GCCI has been funded through programs at the State
resilient societies, foster low-carbon economic growth, and
Department, the Department of the Treasury, and USAID.
reduce greenhouse gas emissions from deforestation and
Funds for these programs have been requested in the
land degradation. The GCCI was divided into three main
President’s budget under the International Affairs Function
programmatic initiatives or categories: (1) adaptation, (2)
150 account for State, Foreign Operations, and Related
clean energy, and (3) sustainable landscapes.
Programs. Many GCCI activities have been funded at
agency sub-account levels, with allocations left to the
Adaptation programs have aimed to assist low-income
discretion of the agencies, under congressional consultation.
countries with reducing their vulnerability to climate
change impacts and building climate resilience. Bilateral
GCCI budget authority has fluctuated between $810 million
and regional programs at the Department of State and the
and $950 million since FY2010. When FY2016 is fully
U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) have
reported, it may be higher due to State Department
targeted vulnerable countries in Africa, Asia, and Latin
contributions to the Green Climate Fund. During the period,
America. They have striven to (1) address climate risks in
the GCCI has accounted for about 2% of total programming
areas including infrastructure, agriculture, health, and water
in the Function 150 account. Federal reports of U.S.
services; (2) develop capacity for countries to use the best
funding for international climate change initiatives are not
science and analysis for decisionmaking; and (3) promote
always consistent, as some have included contributions by
sound governance to carry out these decisions. Multilateral
federal agencies outside of the strictly defined GCCI (e.g.,
funds supporting adaptation initiatives have included the
the Millennium Challenge Corporation, the Export-Import
Green Climate Fund, the Least Developed Country Fund,
Bank, and the Overseas Private Investment Corporation).
and the Special Climate Change Fund.
FY2017 Budget Request (Obama)
Clean energy programs have aimed to reduce greenhouse
The Obama Administration’s FY2017 budget request for
gas emissions from energy generation and energy use by
the GCCI was $1,334.3 million, including $352.2 million
accelerating the deployment of clean energy technologies,
for USAID; $631.7 million for the State Department
policies, and practices. The United States has delivered
(including $500.0 million for the Green Climate Fund,
much of its assistance for clean energy deployment through
$13.0 million for the U.N. Framework Convention on
multilateral trust funds. These funds are commonly
Climate Change and the Intergovernmental Panel on
associated with international financial institutions (e.g., the
Climate Change, and $32.5 million for the Montreal
World Bank). The funds have taken advantage of existing
Protocol Multilateral Fund); and $350.4 million for the
large-scale greenhouse gas reduction opportunities and have
Treasury Department (including $250.0 million for the
established investment channels for larger private sector
Green Climate Fund and $87.9 million for climate-related
financing. Multilateral funds supporting clean energy
programming at the Global Environment Facility).
initiatives have included the Green Climate Fund and the
Global Environment Facility. Bilateral efforts at the State
FY2018 Budget Request (Trump)
Department and USAID have sought to complement the
The Trump Administration’s FY2018 Budget Blueprint,
multilateral investments by influencing development policy
released on March 16, 2017, indicated that the
and regulatory environments in the recipient countries.
administration would pursue policies such as these:
“Eliminates the Global Climate Change Initiative and
Sustainable landscape programs have aimed to reduce
fulfills the President’s pledge to cease payments to the
greenhouse gas emissions from deforestation and forest
United Nations’ (UN) climate change programs by
degradation. Bilateral and regional programs at the State
eliminating U.S. funding related to the Green Climate Fund
Department and USAID have supported country-driven
and its two precursor Climate Investment Funds.”
policies for several activities, including (1) forest
https://crsreports.congress.gov

---

link to page 2 link to page 2 The Global Climate Change Initiative (GCCI):
Budget Authority and Request, FY2010 - FY2018
Table 1. GCCI Budget Authority, FY2010-FY2017
(Nominal US$ in thousands; N/A indicates “not available”)
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013
FY2014
FY2015
FY2016
FY2017
Agency
Actual
Actual
Actual
Actual
Actual
Actual
Estimate
Request
State/USAID
507,200
522,900
481,500
461,000
478,000
478,000
N/A
983,900
Development Assistance
280,032
368,400
322,500
308,000
N/A
N/A
N/A
310,300
Economic Support Fund
183,168
119,000
122,000
118,000
N/A
N/A
N/Aa
628,100b
International Organizations
44,000
35,500
37,000
35,000
N/A
N/A
N/A
45,500
and Programs
Treasury
438,000
295,900
376,400
380,169
356,405
346,375
331,258
350,438
Debt Restructuring
26,000
16,400
12,000
11,392
0
0
0
0
Risk Insurance Program
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
12,500
Clean Technology Fund
300,000
184,600
229,600
196,183
209,630
201,237
170,680
0
Global Environment Facility
37,000
44,900
59,900
62,420
71,875
81,938
100,958
87,938
Green Climate Fund
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
250,000
Strategic Climate Fund
75,000
50,000
74,900
110,174
74,900
63,200
59,620
0
Total
945,200
818,800
857,900
841,169
834,405
824,375
N/A
1,334,338
Source: CRS, with data from U.S. Department of State, Congressional Budget Justification, Volume 2, Foreign Operations, FY2010-FY2017; U.S.
Department of the Treasury, The Budget in Brief, FY2010-FY2017; and correspondence with State and the Treasury.
a. The Obama Administration made two contributions to the Green Climate Fund using FY2016 budget authority from the Economic
Support Fund. Those contributions were for $500 million on March 8, 2016 and $500 million on January 17, 2017.
b. The FY2017 request for the Economic Support Fund included $500 million for the Green Climate Fund.
Issues for Congress
Commercial Interests. Some stakeholders maintain that
Congress undertakes several activities in regard to the
international climate change assistance can benefit U.S.
GCCI, including (1) authorizing federal agency programs
businesses, as support for low-emission economic growth
and multilateral fund contributions, (2) appropriating funds
may increase trade, commerce, and economic activity in the
for those authorizations, (3) providing direction and
global marketplace for U.S. goods and services.
guidance to the agencies, and (4) overseeing U.S. interests
in the programs. Stakeholders have defined a number of
Investment Efficiencies. Some economists theorize that
concerns and considerations for Congress as it debates
the future costs of responding to tomorrow’s climate-related
potential authorizations and/or appropriations for the GCCI.
catastrophes could be significantly higher than the costs of
Some concerns and considerations include:
preventing them today. Further, they suggest that economic
efficiencies can be found more readily in developing
Fiscal Concerns. Budget policy may lead to questions
countries because the cost of adopting new technologies is
about sustaining existing levels of support for international
often less than the cost of retrofitting existing ones.
development assistance in general and international climate
change assistance in particular.
National Security. Some analysts promote international
climate change assistance as a way to address and mitigate
Potential for Misuse. Some observers have criticized
risks to national security. They see this assistance as one
national and international institutions that dispense financial
method through which lower-income countries may combat
assistance for bureaucratic inefficiencies, lack of
poverty, social tensions, environmental degradation, and
transparency, and misuse of funds.
weak political institutions for the benefit of both the
country and the security interests of the United States.
Uncertain Results. Some analysts question the overall
effectiveness of international financial assistance in
International Leadership. Some observers see
spurring economic development and reform in lower-
international climate change assistance as a means through
income countries and, more specifically, in mitigating
which to increase U.S. global leadership. Through such
climate change and its risks.
leadership, they argue, the United States may influence and
set important international economic and environmental
Uncertainties in Climate Science. Prevailing scientific
policies, practices, and standards.
research on the current and future impacts of greenhouse
gas emissions on the global climate exhibits varying
Richard K. Lattanzio, Specialist in Environmental Policy
degrees of analytical uncertainty. Some policymakers have
offered this uncertainty as reason to withhold assistance.
IF10397
https://crsreports.congress.gov

---

The Global Climate Change Initiative (GCCI):
Budget Authority and Request, FY2010 - FY2018


Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to
congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress.
Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has
been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the
United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be
reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include
copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you
wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF10397 · VERSION 3 · UPDATED

---