Breaking the Funding Gap: New Climate Resilience Fund Models for Fragile States

The Pilot Program for Climate Resilience (PPCR) shows promising results by reaching 55 million people and supporting 4.3 million households, but funding remains insufficient. NOAA's $575 million Climate Resilience Regional Challenge and similar initiatives showcase expanding efforts to bridge this gap through innovative climate finance solutions. This piece explores breakthrough funding models that can help close the widening climate adaptation finance gap, especially for vulnerable regions.

The Widening Climate Finance Gap in Fragile States

Climate finance burdens threaten to trap fragile and conflict-affected states in cycles of vulnerability. These countries face both climate disasters and system-wide instability, unlike their stable counterparts.

Current funding shortfalls: $215-387 billion by 2030

The climate finance scene in fragile states shows a pattern of constant underfunding. Recent analysis shows fragile and conflict-affected countries got just $10.9 billion in 2022. This makes up less than 10% of total international climate finance ($116 billion). The gap looks even worse when we look at what these countries actually need. Official UNFCCC submissions show they need at least $41.5 billion yearly through 2030. Right now, they get no more than 26% of that amount.

Money per person tells an even bleaker story. Very unstable states got just $2.10 per person in climate finance, while fragile states received $10.80 per person. Most countries in the Sahel and Horn of Africa got less money for adaptation than other Least Developed Countries (LDCs). They received only $2-13 per person compared to $18 per person in LDCs. The vertical fund climate financing paints the starkest picture - both very unstable and fragile states got only $8.80 per person on average.

This lack of funding reveals a hard truth: climate finance shies away from risk and rarely reaches those who need it most. Research from both UNDP-Climate Security Mechanism and SPARC proves that more unstable countries get less climate money. World Bank data shows countries in severe conflict get the worst deal. They receive about half the adaptation money per person compared to countries with institutional problems or medium-level conflicts.

Unique vulnerabilities of conflict-affected regions

Fragile states face special climate risks that make their existing problems worse. These nations already deal with higher temperatures and will see more extreme heat and weather in the future. IMF research shows climate shocks hurt fragile states' GDP more deeply and longer than other countries. This happens because existing weaknesses make climate events hit harder.

Real-world problems show up clearly. Food growing in fragile states reacts twice as badly to droughts over time compared to other countries. Droughts also keep pushing inflation up in these states, where food takes up much of what families spend. If emissions stay high, about 50 million more people - 2% more of fragile states' population - could face hunger by 2060.

Climate problems in unstable regions lead to humanitarian crises, forcing people to move and migrate. After bad weather hits, the number of hungry people rises sharply from already high levels. Climate change also makes conflicts worse. Lower incomes and more poverty lead to more violence, fighting, and political chaos.

Why traditional financing models fail in fragile contexts

Standard climate finance systems put fragile states at a disadvantage for several connected reasons:

1. Risk perception and management: Climate funds don't like taking risks with programs, money, environment, or social safeguards. This leads to strict rules and partnership procedures. They prefer investing in stable areas rather than places where conflict might disrupt projects.

2. Capacity constraints: Weak national institutions often lack the skills and knowledge to create complete long-term plans or handle complex approval processes. Countries in long conflicts face big knowledge gaps. They might not have current climate data, economic information, or detailed maps needed for proposals.

3. Structural biases: OECD data shows Least Developed Countries got only 14% of total climate funding from 2016 to 2018. Middle-income countries received nearly 70%. Even when money reaches fragile countries, it often skips conflict zones within those nations.

4. Financial instrument mismatch: More climate money comes as loans instead of grants. This scares off countries that already have too much debt. This approach can add to the debt burden of countries that did little to cause climate change.

These financing systems built for stable countries don't work well with fragile states' unique challenges. A vicious cycle emerges where those needing help most get the least support at their most critical times.

Disaster Risk Instruments for High-Vulnerability Contexts

Budget-friendly disaster risk financing needs specialized tools that work for fragile states' unique challenges. Traditional methods don't work well in conflict-affected areas. Climate and Disaster Risk Finance and Insurance (CDRFI) mechanisms provide pre-arranged solutions that build resilience and address the shortcomings of reactive crisis management.

Parametric insurance adaptations for conflict zones

Parametric insurance products deliver quick payouts based on pre-defined triggers instead of damage assessments. This makes them ideal for conflict-affected regions. These tools provide quick cash—usually within days or weeks after a disaster—without needing lengthy damage surveys that might be impossible in unstable areas.

Parametric solutions use measurable indexes like rainfall, wind speed, or seismic activity to trigger automatic payments when specific thresholds are met. This approach works well in conflict zones because:

• Regular damage assessments might be dangerous or impossible

• Security concerns already stretch government resources thin

• Fast financial help can stop humanitarian crises from getting worse

State-of-the-art developments have expanded parametric insurance through satellite technology and artificial intelligence. This allows coverage for previously uninsurable risks across large areas. Remote monitoring of trigger conditions works even in hard-to-reach conflict zones, making these solutions perfect for fragile areas.

Budget-friendly parametric solutions tackle a major challenge for resource-limited fragile states. These products cost less by cutting out expensive claims assessments and reducing administrative expenses while still offering vital protection.

Climate-resilient debt clauses with sovereign risk considerations

Climate-resilient debt clauses (CRDCs) offer a trailblazing solution to protect against sovereign debt problems during climate disasters. These contract terms let borrowers delay principal and interest payments up to two years after climate events occur. This frees up government money for disaster response and recovery.

The World Bank has made CRDCs available to all existing loans for the most vulnerable countries. Small State Economies, members of the Small States Forum, and Small Island Developing States can now qualify. Eligible borrowers can postpone both principal and interest payments, which gives them breathing room during crises.

CRDCs solve a vital issue for fragile states: climate events hit high-risk countries harder than others. CRDCs offer these key benefits:

1. Quick access to cash when disasters hit

2. No cross-default triggers, which protects external financing access

3. NPV-neutral impact on creditors, offering flexibility without losses

These tools help conflict-affected regions by stopping climate disasters from making debt problems and political instability worse. This breaks the cycle where climate impacts fuel conflict.

Regional risk pools for fragile state clusters

Regional catastrophe risk pools help fragile states by combining risks into one diverse portfolio. Countries can keep some risk through shared reserves while moving excess risk to reinsurance and capital markets. The logic is simple: major disasters rarely hit several countries at once, so spreading the risk makes a more stable and cheaper portfolio to reinsure.

In the last decade, 26 countries across Africa, the Pacific, and the Caribbean/Central America have joined sovereign catastrophe risk pools. They bought parametric insurance coverage worth $870 million with premiums of $56.6 million. These pools have paid out more than $105 million, showing how well they deliver quick financial support.

Regional pools offer special advantages for fragile state clusters:

• Lower costs through larger, more diverse portfolios

• Better knowledge sharing and skill building among members

• Quick payouts within days—crucial to stop disasters from fueling conflicts

To cite an instance, see Vanuatu's case after Tropical Cyclone Pam in 2015. The country received almost $2 million just seven days after the storm through the Pacific Catastrophe Risk Assessment and Financing Initiative (PCRAFI). This amount exceeded the government's emergency fund by eight times and helped fund urgent needs.

This model could transform how fragile state clusters handle disasters. Data-driven early warning systems could release funds before humanitarian appeals become necessary.

Catalytic Financing: Blending Security and Climate Objectives

New financing approaches must bridge the security-climate divide to tackle both challenges at once. Blended finance combines public funds with commercial capital at lower rates. This approach helps fragile states get climate resilience funding when traditional methods don't work.

Risk guarantees with conflict sensitivity parameters

Private investors stay away from unstable regions because they see too many risks - from security threats to political changes and legal issues. Risk guarantees that factor in conflict dynamics help solve these concerns by protecting against specific risks.

These guarantees work by building conflict-aware criteria into their structure. In fact, blended finance can unlock investments that private finance considers too risky, especially in new geographical areas or untested technologies. These tools can:

• Give investors rewards to enter risky markets while supporting stability

• Adjust terms based on security conditions

• Provide extra support when conflicts get worse

Success depends on closing the public-private culture gap that makes working together difficult. Building trust requires everyone to understand each other's goals and limits, plus clear accountability. These guarantees can help solve problems of instability, climate change, and inequality by connecting investors with ready projects.

First-loss capital structures for fragile state investments

First-loss capital stands out as a key tool for fragile states in catalytic finance. Public or charitable funders take the first losses, which makes things less risky for business investors.

Banks can use first-loss capital or special guarantees to reduce borrowing costs. This helps most during project planning when risks peak, as cheaper financing makes projects more viable and moves them forward faster.

Despite its benefits, development partners don't commit much to blended finance - only 2% of official development aid and about $10-15 billion in yearly projects. Climate adaptation alone needs $2.40 trillion each year through 2030.

Projects need to prove they wouldn't happen without this funding and that risks are shared fairly. A clear method must test if blended finance is really needed and ensure all partners share risks equally.

Pooled funding mechanisms across humanitarian-development nexus

Pooled funding offers a third key approach by joining resources across humanitarian, development and peace efforts. More organizations see these mechanisms as ways to fill funding gaps and get money to frontline teams quickly.

Pooled funds offer several benefits:

• Better coordination and less scattered funding

• Lower costs with fewer funding layers, helping local groups

• Quicker decisions during crises

UN inter-agency pooled funds got about 60% of their money from humanitarian funds between 2010-2022. Development funds made up 39% of pooled contributions in 2022 and 8.9% of earmarked UN development funding - missing the 10% Funding Compact goal.

Climate and environment funds have grown in UN pooled funding from $43 million in 2015 to $231 million in 2022. This shows that pooled financing helps groups work better together and creates complete solutions for complex problems.

Climate resilience and security go hand in hand in fragile regions. Creating pooled systems that connect climate and security goals will lead to lasting solutions that build peace and resilience together.

Outcome-Based Financing for Measurable Resilience

Outcome-based financing reshapes climate resilience funding by connecting financial rewards to measurable results instead of activities or inputs. This marks a major change in structuring climate finance solutions, especially in regions recovering from conflict where regular funding methods don't work well.

Adaptation benefits mechanisms with conflict reduction co-benefits

Adaptation benefits mechanisms (ABMs) create new ways to channel climate finance to fragile states by monetizing both climate resilience and peace dividends. These mechanisms measure, verify, and monetize social and environmental outcomes through their sale to outcome buyers—typically foundations, governments, or development agencies. This generates revenue streams for implementing organizations.

ABMs work like carbon markets but focus on adaptation outcomes. These instruments provide dual benefits to fragile states by including conflict reduction metrics with climate resilience indicators. This dual-focus approach recognizes how conflict and climate vulnerability reinforce each other.

The evidence shows that investing in nature-based solutions through ABMs builds climate resilience and strengthens social cohesion. Teams working on ecosystem restoration, sustainable resource management, and climate-smart agriculture have shown great potential to create jobs while reducing tensions over scarce resources. These interventions have generated many benefits beyond their main goals, including better social cohesion, less poverty, and improved public health.

Results-based financing tied to stability indicators

Results-based climate finance (RBCF) takes a groundbreaking approach where payments happen only after pre-agreed targets are met and verified. This creates strong incentives for effective implementation. The model offers several key advantages in fragile contexts:

• Speeds up investments in climate adaptation through additional revenue streams

• Makes domestic institutions and policies stronger through performance incentives

• Brings local communities and private sector entities together

• Gives rewards for good project management by linking payments to verified results

RBCF helps fix the imbalance in climate finance by focusing on effective policy implementation. It drives value for money and gives governments more flexibility. This approach creates accountability frameworks that push forward both climate resilience and peace objectives in conflict-affected regions.

RBCF works best when combined with other financing tools to provide complete support at each stage of climate reform. Unlike traditional financing, RBCF creates lasting change by building technical capacity and lowering risks—which helps bring in crucial private sector financing.

Debt-for-resilience swaps in post-conflict recovery

Debt-for-resilience swaps provide another promising way to finance climate adaptation in post-conflict settings. These financial instruments let countries redirect debt repayments toward resilience-building initiatives. This approach helps fragile states that struggle with debt distress, climate vulnerability, and post-conflict recovery needs.

These swaps free up money so governments can improve resilience without causing fiscal crises or cutting other development priorities. Creditors offer debt relief in exchange for government commitments to invest in climate-resilient infrastructure or ecosystem restoration. This creates benefits for both sides.

The success of debt-for-nature swaps, which brought in $1.2 billion for conservation projects in the 1990s, laid the groundwork for debt-for-resilience swaps. The new concept includes broader resilience goals specific to post-conflict recovery, such as building climate-resilient infrastructure, improving food security, and creating better early warning systems.

These swaps, paired with results-based approaches, motivate governments to focus on resilience investments that bring measurable stability improvements. Barbados completed what it calls the world's first debt-for-climate resilience swap recently. This freed up $165 million for critical investments in water infrastructure, food security, and environmental protection.

Data-Driven Systems for Effective Fund Allocation

Advanced data systems are essential to distribute climate resilience funds effectively in fragile states. Traditional assessment methods don't work in these areas. The funding gap is clear - from 2010 to 2017, very fragile states got only $2.10 per person yearly for adaptation financing. Non-fragile states received $161.70. Technology and analytics can help fix this imbalance.

Geospatial risk mapping to prioritize vulnerable communities

Geospatial technology helps pinpoint climate vulnerability hotspots even in hard-to-reach conflict zones. These technologies mix different datasets to find social, environmental, and climate vulnerabilities in thousands of communities. Geographic information systems helped create vulnerability indexes that predicted COVID-19 spread risks in Syria's conflict-affected northwest.

Security concerns often make site visits impossible. Remote sensing and spatial modeling provide new ways to predict risks in armed conflict areas. This helps target funds to people who need them most. The UN's GEOGUARD initiative shows this approach by providing insights about environmental risk factors. It codes environmental conditions and conflict data with locations in 29 countries.

Early warning technologies for anticipatory funding release

Early warning systems with automatic fund release mark a fundamental change from reactive to proactive climate financing. Right now, less than half of Least Developed Countries and only 40% of Small Island Developing States have multi-hazard early warning systems. Coverage is even lower in fragile areas.

The Climate Risk and Early Warning Systems initiative funds efforts to build these capabilities in places like Burkina Faso and Haiti. These systems enable Anticipatory Action or Forecast-based Financing. This mechanism releases pre-positioned funds before disasters hit based on set triggers.

The returns are impressive. Every dollar spent before a disaster in Nepal saves up to $34 compared to post-disaster response. WFP showed how well this works by responding to flash floods in just four hours—their fastest-ever anticipatory action.

Impact tracking systems for adaptive management

Traditional monitoring and evaluation frameworks don't work well for fragile state investments. Adaptive management approaches let programs progress despite incomplete information. Programs can adjust to quick changes typical in conflict settings.

Effective tracking systems for fragile contexts need:

• Real-time learning elements that keep interventions relevant

• Flexibility to track both expected and unexpected results

• Ways for local stakeholders to participate

• Room to change as situations evolve

This means creating "project compasses" instead of rigid "project maps". Regular investment assessment happens through structured processes of testing, monitoring, feedback, and decision-making.

These analytical systems create a detailed framework to direct climate resilience funds where they're needed most. Continuous improvement happens through adaptive management. These technologies help address the systematic underfunding of climate adaptation in conflict-affected regions.

Community-Led Resilience Planning and Implementation

Local populations are the life-blood of successful climate resilience funding in fragile states. Communities create more eco-friendly and effective adaptation strategies that tackle both climate challenges and conflict dynamics when they can shape decisions about their future.

Participatory vulnerability assessments in divided communities

Participatory Capacity and Vulnerability Analysis (PCVA) provides a systematic way to understand unique climate risks in conflict-affected regions. Communities can analyze their own vulnerabilities instead of external actors gathering information. My field experience shows that communities who take part in problem assessment and priority setting make adaptation processes stronger and help shape national planning.

A well-laid-out PCVA serves multiple functions:

• Creates baseline data to evaluate project outcomes

• Documents existing capacities and vulnerabilities

• Helps programs better address climate risks

These assessments help communities talk openly about shared environmental threats. Ethiopia provides a good example where this approach allowed common training on water facilities usage among previously conflicting groups.

Local governance structures for inclusive fund management

Climate finance needs strong local governance mechanisms to distribute resources fairly. Setting up clear fund management systems prevents resources from making existing inequalities worse in conflict-affected areas. Projects succeed and last longer when local communities own them. Strong alliances between governments, international organizations, civil society, and private sectors are the foundations.

Communities can rehabilitate key infrastructure and support livelihoods even in contested territories if local governance structures play a role. The Climate Resilience Fund shows this approach by focusing on projects that build local abilities and let affected communities help design and implement solutions.

Building social cohesion through shared resilience objectives

My work in vulnerable communities shows that climate action often brings together communities divided by conflict. Research backs this up - communities that interact and organize more show better resilience against extreme weather events.

Social cohesion becomes crucial because low-income communities face unique housing, economic, and health challenges before extreme weather hits. United communities adapt better to climate impacts and overcome conflict more effectively than divided ones.

Projects that bring communities of all types together around common climate challenges encourage understanding beyond environmental cooperation. As one practitioner said, "To build resilience, we need to harmonize not just with nature but with each other".

Building Cross-Sector Partnerships for Climate Finance

Climate resilience funding in fragile states needs strategic collaborations that exceed traditional institutional boundaries. My 13 years of experience in disaster risk reduction and anticipatory action has shown me that collaborative approaches create better lasting outcomes than isolated interventions.

Coordinating humanitarian, development, and climate actors

The humanitarian-development-peace-climate nexus requires strong coordination to tackle complex challenges in fragile states. Government agencies typically run with their own funding sources, authorities, and programming processes. These separate systems make cross-bureau collaboration difficult. Different vocabularies make this problem worse - humanitarian, development, and climate actors might use similar words but understand challenges differently based on their audience.

Recent roundtable stakeholders suggested appointing country-level coordinators to aid nexus discussions. In spite of that, many organizations lack the resources to lead such integration efforts. Organizations already working across sectors could better guide this process.

Private sector engagement strategies for fragile markets

The private sector generates up to 90% of all jobs in fragile contexts. Business involvement becomes crucial to lasting resilience. Investors remain cautious about these environments due to instability, weak institutions, and information gaps.

Private investment grows through innovative financial tools that combine blended and structured financing with risk-sharing mechanisms. Public resources help alleviate investment risks. Global investment funds now direct small percentages of their capital toward climate financial products in emerging markets. These public-private partnerships create multiplying effects.

Multilateral development bank coordination mechanisms

Multilateral development banks (MDBs) have tripled their support to fragile states in the last decade. They now represent over 60% of all multilateral receipts to these regions. The World Bank provides more than two-thirds of total MDB assistance to fragile contexts.

MDBs currently operate as a "loosely coupled system" instead of a unified force. Better coordination requires a common FCS classification system, aligned eligibility criteria for concessional resources, shared analytical tools for assessing fragility, and support for unified country strategies in each fragile state.

Case Studies: Successful Climate Resilience Funding Models

Looking at practical examples shows how climate resilience fund models work in tackling specific challenges. Case studies highlight approaches that put resources to work where traditional financing methods don't deal very well with the problems.

Pakistan's flood resilience financing innovations

Pakistan leads the way in climate financing through several complementary initiatives. The World Bank gave its approval to the Resilient and Accessible Microfinance Project, which has allocated $102 million to make microcredit available and build resilience against climate shocks. This project will help nearly 1.89 million people, with over 1 million women and 350,000 youth in vulnerable communities. The Asian Development Bank also provided a $500 million policy-based loan that supports climate change and disaster risk reduction. The program's groundbreaking feature is the Contingent Disaster Financing option—the first of its kind in Central and West Asia—that offers quick budget support during disasters. The Recharge Pakistan project shows what nature-based solutions can do with a $77.8 million investment that will help over 680,000 people directly.

Small island developing states' adaptation fund access strategies

Small Island Developing States (SIDS) have created trailblazing solutions to get adaptation financing while facing unique structural challenges. The Adaptation Fund has supported initiatives in nine SIDS, including Belize, Jamaica, and Maldives. SIDS need about 3.4% of GDP each year for adaptation—this is a big deal as it means that it's more than double the 1.4% other developing countries need. Adaptation costs reach $5.1 billion yearly but actual flows sit at only $1.4 billion, which means SIDS get less than one-third of what they need. About 37% of adaptation finance comes through loans, which adds to debt problems when almost half of SIDS are close to debt distress.

Post-conflict watershed management financing in Africa

Water management in post-conflict areas creates a chance to build resilience and peace together. Good water restoration helps prevent humanitarian crises and lets you retain control. Water investments support peacebuilding as communities work together on shared resources, which helps rebuild trust among divided groups. Recent projects show the value of fixing both physical infrastructure (roads, bridges, water supply) and rebuilding social/economic systems. Post-conflict financing needs the right context-based frameworks and policy guidance that matches long-term development goals.

My Final Remarks

My work in disaster risk reduction and climate resilience has shown me how innovative financing models can revolutionize vulnerable communities. New approaches like parametric insurance adaptations and outcome-based mechanisms provide practical solutions to bridge the climate finance gap in fragile states.

The numbers tell a stark story: fragile states get only $2.10 per person in climate finance while stable nations receive $161.70. Yet success stories from Pakistan, Small Island Developing States, and post-conflict African regions show that targeted funding mechanisms deliver results with proper design and implementation.

Project leadership experience in Pakistan and the Maldives points to three keys for success. Strong data systems enable precise targeting. Community's ownership of resilience planning and strategic collaborations between sectors are the foundations of lasting change. These elements, paired with innovative financing tools, create adaptable solutions that tackle both climate and conflict challenges.

We need to expand these tested approaches and develop new financing tools for fragile environments. Climate resilience funding works best when humanitarian, development, and climate specialists work together. You can reach me at contact@imranahmed.tech to discuss potential collaborations.

Time is running out and we need to act now. The challenges are daunting, but these models and case studies offer a practical roadmap to close the climate finance gap in vulnerable regions. Our steadfast dedication from all stakeholders will help climate resilience funding reach those who need it most.

FAQs

Q1. What is the climate finance gap for fragile states? Fragile states face a significant climate finance gap, receiving only about $2.10 per person in climate adaptation funding compared to $161.70 for non-fragile states. This gap is estimated to reach $215-387 billion by 2030, highlighting the urgent need for increased funding to these vulnerable regions.

Q2. How do innovative financing models help address climate resilience in fragile states? Innovative financing models like parametric insurance, climate-resilient debt clauses, and regional risk pools provide rapid, flexible funding tailored to the unique challenges of fragile states. These approaches enable swift payouts, accommodate fluctuating security conditions, and pool risks across multiple countries to enhance cost-effectiveness.

Q3. What role does community engagement play in climate resilience funding? Community engagement is crucial for effective climate resilience funding in fragile states. Participatory vulnerability assessments, local governance structures for fund management, and building social cohesion through shared resilience objectives ensure that interventions are sustainable, locally-owned, and address both climate and conflict challenges.

Q4. How can data-driven systems improve climate fund allocation in fragile contexts? Data-driven systems like geospatial risk mapping, early warning technologies, and impact tracking systems enable more precise targeting of vulnerable communities, anticipatory funding release, and adaptive management of interventions. These tools are especially valuable in conflict zones where traditional assessment methods may be impossible.

Q5. What are some successful examples of climate resilience funding in vulnerable regions? Successful examples include Pakistan's flood resilience financing innovations, which combine microfinance access with disaster risk reduction; Small Island Developing States' strategies for accessing adaptation funds despite unique vulnerabilities; and post-conflict watershed management financing in Africa that simultaneously builds peace and climate resilience.

References

[1] - https://academic.oup.com/jae/article-abstract/18/suppl_1/i53/784657
[2] - https://www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Blended-Finance-for-Scaling-Up-Climate-and-Nature-Investments-1.pdf
[3] - https://caribbeantradelaw.com/tag/debt-for-climate-swap/
[4] - https://www.proparco.fr/en/article/what-tools-finance-private-sector-fragile-states-experience-international-finance
[5] - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877343523001288
[6] - https://eba.se/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/WP-November-2021_Adaptive-ToC-webb.pdf
[7] - https://www.wfp.org/anticipatory-actions
[8] - https://www.adaptationcommunity.net/climate-disaster-risk-finance-insurance/
[9] - https://blogs.icrc.org/law-and-policy/2024/11/12/climate-action-in-conflict-and-fragile-settings-closing-the-implementation-gap/
[10] - https://www.mercycorps.org/sites/default/files/2023-10/Overcoming-the-Fragility-Barrier-Policy-Paper-10232023.pdf
[11] - https://www.weforum.org/stories/2024/02/climate-adaptation-and-resilience-innovative-funding/
[12] - https://wwf.panda.org/wwf_news/?11951466/Historic-Recharge-Pakistan-project-launched-to-tackle-floods-and-build-climate-resilience
[13] - https://www.gfdrr.org/sites/default/files/publication/WB%20DRFIP_Cat%20Risk%20Pool%20for%20G20_full%20report.pdf
[14] - https://www.weforum.org/stories/2025/01/frontiers-of-change-collaborative-finance-for-climate-resilience/
[15] - https://www.convergence.finance/news/4HzPSM7h7ZTwJMOkvsg713/view
[16] - https://www.nrc.no/globalassets/pdf/reports/pooled-funds/nrc_pooled-funds_the-new-humanitarian-silver-bullet_report.pdf
[17] - https://financingun.report/un-financing/un-funding/inter-agency-pooled-funds
[18] - https://www.ifc.org/content/dam/ifc/doc/2025/unlocking-social-and-environmental-impact-outcome-based-finance.pdf
[19] - https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/15423166221132149
[20] - https://www.unicef.org/indonesia/media/17201/file/Study%20on%20The%20Role%20of%20Mitigation-Adaptation%20Co-Benefits%20For%20Creating%20A%20More%20Resilient%20Future%20For%20All.pdf
[21] - https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2022/08/17/what-you-need-to-know-about-results-based-climate-finance
[22] - https://www.tcafwb.org/sites/default/files/2023-05/WB_RBCF_Report_FINAL.pdf
[23] - https://academic.oup.com/book/41117/chapter/350425087
[24] - https://www.imf.org/en/Blogs/Articles/2022/12/14/swapping-debt-for-climate-or-nature-pledges-can-help-fund-resilience
[25] - https://dalberg.com/our-ideas/debt-for-nature-swaps-a-possible-solution-to-a-green-and-just-recovery-from-covid-19/
[26] - https://www.weforum.org/stories/2023/02/how-to-unlock-climate-finance-for-fragile-states/
[27] - https://ggim.un.org/meetings/GGIM-committee/11th-Session/documents/GeospatialForHumanity-Covid19.pdf
[28] - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2215016120303113
[29] - https://afsa.org/unlocking-resilience-using-data-drive-positive-climate-action-conflict-prone-regions
[30] - https://www.undrr.org/news/early-warning-systems-must-address-risks-fragile-and-conflict-affected-contexts
[31] - https://dt-global.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/dt-global-applying-adaptive-management-in-fragile-contexts-case-study.pdf
[32] - https://unfccc.int/files/adaptation/cancun_adaptation_framework/adaptation_committee/application/pdf/pcva_toolkit_oxfam_australia.pdf
[33] - https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/promoting-climate-resilient-peacebuilding-fragile-states.pdf
[34] - https://www.adaptation-fund.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/climate-change-adaptation-in-fragile-settings-02.15.2024.pdf
[35] - https://reporting.unhcr.org/spotlight/climate-action/unhcr-climate-resilience-fund
[36] - https://www.americanprogress.org/article/social-cohesion-the-secret-weapon-in-the-fight-for-equitable-climate-resilience/
[37] - https://www.undp.org/pacific/news/building-resilience-through-community-cohesion
[38] - https://www.elibrary.imf.org/view/journals/066/2022/007/article-A001-en.xml
[39] - https://www.cgdev.org/blog/are-multilateral-development-banks-working-system-fragile-and-conflict-affected-situations
[40] - https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2025/03/13/pakistan-world-bank-approves-102m-to-boost-financial-inclusion-resilience-for-vulnerable-populations
[41] - https://reliefweb.int/report/pakistan/adb-approves-500-million-loan-support-climate-and-disaster-resilience-pakistan
[42] - https://www.adaptation-fund.org/adaptation-fund-small-island-developing-states/
[43] - https://www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute/news/small-island-developing-states-need-innovative-forms-of-finance-to-bridge-the-devastating-adaptation-gap/
[44] - https://www.unep.org/news-and-stories/press-release/world-water-day-water-management-post-conflict-countries-critical
[45] - https://odi.org/en/insights/small-change-conflict-blind-spot/
[46] - https://www.undp.org/blog/how-can-climate-finance-work-better-fragile-and-conflict-affected-regions
[47] - https://weadapt.org/knowledge-base/climate-finance/how-can-climate-finance-work-better-for-fragile-and-conflict-affected-regions/
[48] - https://blogs.worldbank.org/en/dev4peace/closing-the-adaptation-finance-gap-in-fragile-and-conflict-affected-settings
[49] - https://www.elibrary.imf.org/view/journals/066/2023/001/article-A001-en.xml
[50] - https://www.icrc.org/sites/default/files/topic/file_plus_list/discussion_paper_on_climate_finance_0.pdf
[51] - https://www.crisisgroup.org/content/fair-share-of-climate-finance
[52] - https://www.marshmclennan.com/insights/publications/2023/april/triggering-change-parametric-solutions.html
[53] - https://www.weforum.org/stories/2025/01/what-is-parametric-insurance-and-how-is-it-building-climate-resilience/
[54] - https://thedocs.worldbank.org/en/doc/6857abe91ef32973cfab7f689e9f00fe-0340012023/original/CRDC-Product-note-EN.pdf
[55] - https://publications.iadb.org/en/asymmetric-sovereign-risk-implications-climate-change-preparation
[56] - https://financeincommon.org/sites/default/files/2025-03/Climate-Resilient-Debt-Clauses-Primer.pdf
[57] - https://www.gfdrr.org/en/feature-story/what-makes-catastrophe-risk-pools-work

To dive deeper into building effective climate resilience strategies, explore our step-by-step guide on implementing anticipatory response and learn how anticipatory action systems can be developed in fragile contexts. Discover how local leaders can foster climate-resilient communities and understand the financial impact through our real-world case study where anticipatory action saved $2 million. To address the systemic funding challenges, read about innovative climate resilience fund models for fragile states, and see how these approaches are being localized in Pakistan’s integrated anticipatory action and social protection systems. For a broader overview of disaster preparedness, our Early Warning Early Action (EWEA) program highlights the critical role of timely interventions in reducing risk and protecting livelihoods.