Change Initiative and YPSA warn that climate-vulnerable countries are paying twice for the crisis, as debt repayments exceed climate finance received by 55 countries covered by a new index.
Civil society organisation representatives pose for a group photograph at a joint press conference titled “Breaking the Climate Debt Trap: Financing Nature-Smart Energy Sovereignty” on the second day of COP31 at the Antalya Expo Centre in Türkiye on 10 November 2026. Photo: Courtesy
“>
Civil society organisation representatives pose for a group photograph at a joint press conference titled “Breaking the Climate Debt Trap: Financing Nature-Smart Energy Sovereignty” on the second day of COP31 at the Antalya Expo Centre in Türkiye on 10 November 2026. Photo: Courtesy
Civil society organisations (CSOs) have urged developed countries to provide more grant-based climate finance instead of loans to Bangladesh and other vulnerable nations, warning that borrowing to tackle climate change is adding to their debt burdens.
At a joint press conference titled “Breaking the Climate Debt Trap: Financing Nature-Smart Energy Sovereignty” on the second day of COP31 at the Antalya Expo Centre in Türkiye yesterday (10 November), speakers also called for greater transparency and accountability in climate finance.
Organised by Change Initiative and Young Power in Social Action (YPSA), the event presented findings showing that climate-vulnerable countries are paying twice for the climate crisis: first through the loss of lives, homes and livelihoods, and then through repayments of loans taken to address its impacts.
M Zakir Hossain Khan, co-founder and chief executive of Change Initiative, said 55 countries covered by the Climate Debt Risk Index spent $47.17 billion on debt servicing in 2023 alone. This was higher than the $33.74 billion in climate finance recorded for these countries over the entire 2002-2023 period.
Eight countries, including Bangladesh, Cabo Verde, Cambodia, Myanmar, Pakistan, the Philippines, Senegal and Sri Lanka, account for 74.3% of the climate loans recorded in the index. Each received more climate finance in loans than in grants, according to the findings.
The speakers also highlighted the gap between climate finance commitments and actual disbursements. Although climate finance from developed countries increased from $115.9 billion in 2022 to $136.7 billion in 2024, only $2.3 billion of the additional $20.8 billion went towards adaptation.
Moreover, 66.1%, or $32.43 billion, of recorded adaptation commitments had no corresponding payment records, the press conference was told.
In Bangladesh, 90.4% of renewable energy investment since 2000 came in the form of loans, said Mofazzal Hossain, research coordinator at Change Initiative.
He said the country received $2.54 billion in climate finance for its energy sector, of which $880 million went to coal and gas power plants, including Matarbari and Bheramara.
Under the existing financing model, renewable energy-related debt could reach $105 per person by 2040, compared with the country’s current climate debt of around $80 per person across all sectors, he said.
To address the problem, Change Initiative proposed a Renewable Energy Sovereignty Facility, a national financing mechanism based on grants, guarantees and capped public loans.
The proposed facility could finance $7.69 billion in renewable energy investment between 2026 and 2030 while reducing new public borrowing from $4.6 billion to $800 million. It could also bring renewable energy debt down to $24 per person by 2040, a 77% reduction, according to the organisation.
Khan urged COP31 participants to agree on an initial amount and annual targets for adaptation grants from 2027. He also called for climate finance reports to clearly distinguish between loans and grants and exclude fossil fuel projects from climate finance accounting.
“LDCs must not become victims twice over: first through climate vulnerability, and second through an unjust debt burden,” he said, calling for climate finance to be delivered as grants to protect ecosystems and human lives.
Mofazzal said the problem was not a lack of money but the way it was channelled.
“Development banks lend to the Bangladesh government, the government lends to state agencies, and state agencies lend to households and investors. This debt cycle traps everyone. Renewable energy should not add to public debt,” he said.
Brice Böhmer, climate lead at the Transparency International Secretariat, stressed the need for transparency and accountability in climate finance.
He warned that a lack of transparency could create opportunities for corruption, adding that public participation and community oversight were essential to ensure funds reached those most in need.
Mohammad Shahjahan, director of the KM4D Division at YPSA and lead of the Bangladesh chapter of Climate Action Network South Asia, called on developed countries to provide new, additional, predictable and grant-based climate finance rather than repackage development assistance and loans as climate commitments.
Roaa, chief executive and founder of United Beyond Borders, said young people in developing countries needed more grant-based financing for community-level projects, while developed countries should be held accountable for their historical emissions.
In his closing remarks, Mohammad Arifur Rahman, chief executive of YPSA, urged journalists to investigate how climate finance mechanisms were adding to national debt burdens.
He said media scrutiny was important to ensure that climate finance reached the most affected countries as unconditional grants.
Responding to a question on private sector participation in the Global South, Khan said private investment was important for technology and manufacturing, but adaptation finance should not be left to private markets or profit-driven approaches.
About The Author
