U4 Anti-Corruption Resource Centre

This Anti-Corruption Helpdesk brief was produced in response to a query from a U4 Partner Agency. The U4 Helpdesk is operated by Transparency International in collaboration with the U4 Anti-Corruption Resource Centre based at the Chr. Michelsen Institute.


What evidence exists on corruption risks particular to climate finance, focusing on current climate finance architecture, related programming and measures and approaches being used to mitigate risks in different contexts?


1. State of research on corruption risks in climate finance
2. Emerging good practice for mitigating corruption risks in climate finance
3. References


There are major governance and corruption challenges associated with climate finance, with huge amounts of money from a wide variety of sources flowing through new, complex and relatively untested funding mechanisms at international, national and local levels.

Yet, as climate governance is still in a formative stage, research on the corruption risks associated with climate finance is nascent and represents a rapidly evolving field of investigation. An important stream of research focuses on understanding the complex web of actors and institutions involved in climate finance decisions, the scale and nature of money flows, as well as where the money is coming from and where it is going. While there is an emerging body of research on national and global mechanisms, it is also important to explore the risks and opportunities presented by local-level climate financing, and to gain a better understanding on how the global, national and local levels relate to each other, so that various interests can be better balanced, articulated and integrated to promote greater responsibility and accountability in climate finance.

Research into the governance and accountability frameworks of the various actors involved and how these are implemented at the international, national and local levels, is also important in gaining a clearer picture of how best to mitigate corruption risks and identify emerging good practice.

Lessons learnt on best practice from development assistance as well as other sectors can help inform the debate.


Marie Chêne, Transparency International, [email protected]


Robin Hodess, Transparency International




Close search

Responsive versions of the site in progress.