18 Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies 481 (2011)
As part of a multilateral climate change treaty, the parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) have discussed establishing an international aid mechanism, or fund, to support low-carbon energy generation and energy efficiency projects in developing countries. The selection of a fund administrator has been particularly contentious. Many developed countries believe that, rather than creating a new fund, the COP should use an already established one-the World Bank's Clean Technology Fund (CTF)-and select the World Bank as fund administrator.H owever, many developing countries believe the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the UNFCCC should create a new fund with administrative control retained by the COP. This Note first uses a public choice economic analysis to examine why different countries support different fund administrators. Second, it evaluates the arguments for and against the World Bank's CTF and concludes that the World Bank must make several important changes for the COP to select its fund and give it administrative control. Lastly, this Note discusses how conflict may arise between the World Bank and the United Nations if the COP does not select the World Bank as fund administrator. The United Nations does not have any direct control over the World Bank's decision to continue to operate its fund, but the countries that are parties to the UNFCCC may have a legal obligation to support whichever fund the COP selects.
"The Fight for Clean Technology Funds: Who Should Control the Future of Low-Carbon Technology in the Developing World,"
Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies: Vol. 18
, Article 19.
Available at: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/ijgls/vol18/iss1/19