Climate financing: institutional effectiveness of the national fund on climate change

Abstract

There is broad scientific consensus about the climate emergency. Governments have intensified mitigation and adaptation actions by conducting climate finance through national climate funds. In 2009, the National Fund on Climate Change (FNMC) was established in Brazil. Analyzes on climate finance have intensified after 2020, and there are few empirical studies on these funds. This article contributes to this gap by analyzing the institutional effectiveness of the FNMC through desk research in the period from 2009 to 2020, considering 21 indicators distributed in five dimensions. This study identifies the main challenges to the FNMC’s institutional effectiveness, recognizing its importance in helping Brazil meet its commitment to international climate goals by reducing greenhouse gases (GHG), strengthening research, and increasing investments in climate change projects. The results reveal great fragility in the FNMC’s institutional effectiveness. None of the five dimensions analyzed had all indicators satisfied, and resource mobilization and sustainability were identified as the main challenges to the FNMC’s institutional effectiveness.

Keywords:
national climate funds; Brazil; climate governance; fiduciary funds; local government

Resumo

Atualmente há amplo consenso científico sobre a emergência climática. As organizações públicas têm intensificado ações de mitigação e adaptação, conduzindo financiamentos climáticos por meio de fundos nacionais do clima. Em 2009, foi instituído no Brasil o Fundo Nacional sobre Mudança do Clima (FNMC). As análises sobre financiamento climático se intensificaram a partir de 2020, mas ainda há poucos estudos empíricos documentando as experiências sobre esses fundos. Este artigo contribui para essa lacuna, analisando a eficácia institucional do FNMC mediante pesquisa documental, no período de 2009 a 2020, considerando 21 indicadores distribuídos em cinco dimensões. Identificar quais são os principais desafios para a eficácia institucional do FNMC é importante, pois a sua capacidade e continuidade colaboram com as metas internacionais assumidas pelo Brasil para redução de Gases de Efeito Estufa (GEE) e fortalecem os estudos e investimentos em projetos sobre mudança do clima. Os resultados revelam grande fragilidade na eficácia institucional do FNMC, visto que, nenhuma dimensão tem atendimento satisfatório em todos os seus indicadores, sendo a mobilização de recursos e sustentabilidade o principal desafio para o FNMC.

Palavras-chave:
fundos nacionais do clima; Brasil; governança climática; fundos fiduciários; governo local

Resumen

Actualmente existe un amplio consenso científico sobre la emergencia climática. Las organizaciones públicas han intensificado las acciones de mitigación y adaptación llevando a cabo la financiación climática a través de fondos nacionales del clima. En 2009, fue instituido en el Brasil el Fondo Nacional sobre el Cambio Climático (FNMC). La investigación sobre financiación climática se ha intensificado desde 2020, pero todavía hay pocos estudios empíricos sobre estos fondos. Este artículo contribuye a este vacío analizando la eficacia institucional del FNMC a través de la investigación documental, en el período de 2009 a 2020, considerando 21 indicadores distribuidos en cinco dimensiones. Identificar los principales desafíos a la eficacia institucional del FNMC es importante, ya que su capacidad y continuidad colaboran con las metas internacionales asumidas por Brasil para la reducción de Gases de Efecto Invernadero (GEI) y fortalecen los estudios e inversiones en proyectos de cambio climático. Los resultados revelan una gran fragilidad en la eficacia institucional del FNMC, ya que ninguna dimensión tiene una asistencia satisfactoria en todos sus indicadores, constituyendo la movilización de recursos y la sostenibilidad los principales desafíos para el FNMC.

Palabras clave:
fondos nacionales para el clima; Brasil; gobernanza climática; fondos fiduciarios; gobierno local

1. INTRODUCTION

More than 11,000 scientists have unequivocally and explicitly stated that the world is facing a climate emergency (Ripple, Wolf, Newsome, Barnard, & Moomaw, 2020). The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2022) has stated that there has been a surge in Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions as of 2019, and has underscored the pressing need for climate action to avert sudden and irreversible changes to the environment that would affect all life forms. Since 2009, following the Copenhagen Agreement, the climate finance administration is no longer confined to a small group of major funds associated with the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). This has led to a new landscape wherein numerous public, private, bilateral, and multilateral sources help countries enhance their climate change efforts (Flynn, 2011).

Regarding national climate finance, grants, and concessional loans serve as the primary financial instruments for developing countries, but governments have aimed to expand these instruments by establishing National Climate Funds (NCFs) and national and multilateral development banks (Rai, Kaur, Greene, Wang, & Steele, 2015). NCFs assist countries in “managing climate finance and achieving their sustainable development goals” (Flynn, 2011, p. 45). Law No. 12,114 of 2009 (Lei nº 12.114, de 9 de dezembro de 2009), established the National Fund on Climate Change (FNMC) in Brazil, to provide resources to support projects or studies, and to provide financing for climate change mitigation and adaptation measures. The FNMC operates in two modes, either as refundable or non-refundable. It falls under the purview of the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change (MMA) and comprises a management committee, headed by an executive secretary responsible for overseeing financial matters. The FNMC’s operational strategy, guided by institutional responsibilities, is set out in the Annual Resource Application Plan (PAAR), which is prepared by the MMA, and approved by the management committee. Graph 1shows that effective payments from the Federal Government budget towards FNMC-related expenses totaled R$ 1,687,363,531.97 between 2010 and 2020. Notably, over 92% of these payments were allocated to the National Bank for Economic and Social Development (BNDES) for project financing. However, as of December 31, 2020, the BNDES had disbursed only about BRL 580 million in loans, leaving a substantial balance, exceeding BRL 1.2 billion (MMA, 2021), of FNMC resources available for new contracts.

Graph 1
Total effective FNMC payments per presidential term - 2009 to 2020

The FNMC serves as a catalyst for investing in projects targeting climate change actions. Both its continuity and effectiveness reinforce Brazil’s commitment to international goals for GHG reductions, while also bolstering and expanding research and investments in projects addressing climate change-related issues. This article explores the primary challenges facing the institutional effectiveness of the FNMC, with a focus on analyzing five dimensions, as proposed by Sheriffdeen, Nurrochmat, Perdinan, and Di Gregorio (2020): Legal and regulatory structure: it should be robust, transparent, and function effectively, ensuring accountability and clarity; Resource mobilization and sustainability: it should be able to mobilize funds in a timely, predictable, innovative, and sustainable manner; Governance and resource allocation: it should exhibit appropriate and efficient management, that is inclusive with fair decision-making processes, and support the country’s climate change policies and actions. Monitoring and evaluation: it should be effective in generating valuable insights to understand the efficacy of implemented measures. Accountability and transparency: it should publicly and transparently disclose relevant information, to evaluate whether stakeholders have fulfilled their responsibilities to ensure legitimacy.

2. MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sheriffdeen et al. (2020), devised a comprehensive methodology encompassing indicators for evaluating the institutional effectiveness of national climate finance mechanisms. The authors employ the term “institutional effectiveness” to refer to institutional capacity for attracting and managing climate finance appropriately, and to monitor and evaluate impacts. Through an extensive literature review on climate finance frameworks and principles, Sheriffdeen et al. (2020), identified 21 indicators, which they categorized into five dimensions:

Legal and regulatory structure

1. Clarity of laws and regulations governing the fund.

2. Laws and regulations are not contradictory or overlapping with other institutions.

3. The laws allow for the maximum and efficient mobilization of funds.

4. The laws allow efficient/timely disbursements and allocations.

5. Laws and regulations have increased/improved the transparency and accountability of the fund.

Resource mobilization and sustainability

6. The sources of resources are known and guaranteed over the long-term financing cycle.

7. The fund comes from all possible sources.

8. Innovation in fundraising.

9. The resources and their sources are increasing incrementally and progressively.

Governance and resource allocation

10. Equitable and fair representation of stakeholders.

11. Independence from the interest/pressure of donors.

12. Adequate capacity and skill to manage the climate fund.

13. Easily accessible to the most vulnerable.

14. Supports and aligns with national climate change priorities.

Monitoring and evaluation

15. Project monitoring and evaluation are participatory.

16. The practice of monitoring and evaluation is timely.

17. Monitoring and evaluation are carried out at all levels

Accountability and transparency

18. Timely and public disclosure of all earnings and expenses.

19. Transparent allocation and disbursement procedures.

20. Existence of a complaint and feedback system.

21. Public access to information for independent evaluation.

The objective of this study is to examine the institutional effectiveness of the FNMC from 2009 to 2020, by employing these five dimensions, as proposed by Sheriffdeen et al. (2020). This is an exploratory study, and it adopted documentary research as the technical data collection method. All documents were selected based on a preliminary analysis conducted by Poupart et al. (2008), and accounted for contextual relevance, the authors, authenticity, reliability, the nature of the text, key concepts, and the logical structure (refer to Appendix, Box A). In total, 80 documents were chosen, including 33 mandatory annual publications, 32 minutes from management committee meetings, 10 laws and regulations, and 5 inspection reports. Qualitative content analysis was applied to process the data derived from the documents, wherein we examined 21 indicators categorized into three levels (refer to Appendix, Box B). These parameters assessed the degree of compliance with the indicators. Level (1) indicated satisfactory compliance, level (2) indicated partial compliance, and level (3) indicated non-compliance or minimal compliance. The documents were meticulously analyzed and excerpted, adhering to the key concepts and logical structure as outlined in the appendix (refer to Chart A). The excerpts were then mapped to the corresponding indicators, accounting for their contextual relevance, and evaluated based on the established parameters at levels (1), (2), or (3).

3. RESULTS

The results are presented below, focusing first on the dimensions that exhibited the highest level of compliance with their respective indicators.

Accountability and transparency demonstrated satisfactory adherence to requirements concerning the timely and public disclosure of financial results, transparent execution procedures, and the establishment of a continuous complaints and feedback system. Since the FNMC operates within the framework of the Brazilian federal government’s budget, it adheres to the transparency rules set by public administration organizations. The reports are mandated by legislation, including meeting minutes, project lists supported by non-reimbursable resources, and public calls and notices, all of which are published on the FNMC website. For operations involving reimbursable resources (loans), relevant information can be obtained via the “transparency” section of the BNDES website. In the event that certain information is not available there, one can obtain further information via the Integrated Ombudsman and Information Access Platform (Fala.BR). Furthermore, FNMC accountability and transparency are bolstered by compliance with inspections that are conducted by both internal and external public auditors. The public access to information dimension for independent assessment was only partially addressed given the limited availability of certain data for public consultation. This hinders independent evaluations of the fund’s effectiveness and efficiency. For instance, there is a lack of information from the BNDES regarding individual contracts and the quantities of reduced GHG emissions via the supported projects.

Governance and resource allocation were effectively addressed in terms of independence from donor interests or pressures, and in terms of accessibility for vulnerable populations, along with alignment with national priorities on climate change. This was achieved via transparent approval processes for programs and projects, which allowed us to identify resource allocations to vulnerable areas. Activity planning and execution were both conducted in accordance with climate change policies. However, there were partial adherences in this dimension, e.g., the equitable and fair representation of stakeholders and an adequate capacity for managing the climate fund. The involvement of other key actors in the approval of programs and projects is still needed, and we recognized limitations in the operational capacity of executing fund activities. Despite reports frequently highlighting a shortage of human resources and the absence of more regular and specialized staff, the FNMC management did show efforts towards fulfilling its responsibilities adequately. Notably, consultants have been engaged over the years to improve the FNMC’s management procedures.

The legal and regulatory structure demonstrated satisfactory adherence to various aspects, including clarity of laws and regulations. This clarity has contributed to enhanced transparency and accountability at the fund. Normative texts are easily interpretable in terms of their content and applications. Furthermore, they stipulate how to prepare and publish reports on fund planning and activities, and how to engage in inspections conducted by auditors. There were, however, some areas for improvement within this dimension. First, there were cases of contradictory laws and regulations, which can pose a challenge when trying to ensure consistent implementations. Furthermore, some laws allow for maximum and efficient fund mobilizations and facilitate timely disbursements and allocations. Yet, conflicts do arise when analyzing normative texts. For instance, certain parts of the law have been undergoing precautionary measures for more than eight years. This can lead to uncertainties. Moreover, there was instability with respect to regulating the organizational structure of the MMA, along with unreasonable changes to management committee the composition. There was also increased representation of the private sector, at the expense of organized civil society, which can lead to discord. Further improvements are still required for resource allocations. This might include participation from other public banks and/or exploring new financing models. Additionally, the in-place allocation and disbursement procedures need to be improved, since they are often hampered by Annual Budget approval delays under the current model.

Monitoring and evaluations showed partial adherence in terms of timely participation conducted at all levels. For non-reimbursable modes of financing, project monitoring was superficial, meaning that accounts were not promptly analyzed comprehensively, and the system/plan for monitoring and evaluating projects was inadequate. Until 2020, there was no established methodology for measuring the impacts of supported projects. Furthermore, while data and reports were prepared and available for monitoring and evaluation, they were incomplete or outdated. Regarding the resources disbursed by the BNDES, the bank has a monitoring and evaluation system in place, which includes systematic evaluations, impact analyses, and consolidated information to enhance effectiveness (BNDES, 2020). However, specific public information on projects related to the FNMC could not be found.

Resource mobilization and sustainability were partially adhered to, e.g., there were identifications and guarantees for funding sources, and the fund endeavored to use all possible sources, and to promote fundraising innovation. However, long-term funding source stability remains uncertain, since resources are derived solely from national public sources. Although there have been efforts to explore new fundraising opportunities, these have not materialized. This dimension failed to meet the requirements for additional and consistent growth in resources and funding sources.

4. DISCUSSION OF THE RESULTS

The accountability & transparency dimension is the most crucial for the FNMC, since the State is responsible for monitoring public objectives and ensuring convenient and transparent implementation (Giddens, 2009). Transparency in climate finance necessitates publicly accessible, comprehensive, accurate, and timely information, while accountability requires an easily accessible mechanism for addressing grievances, ensuring procedural rights, and strengthening oversight (Schalatek & Bird, 2016). Although certain disclosure information is still lacking in, the FNMC does release most information on earnings and expenses, planning, selection criteria, data on the selected parties, and allocations and disbursements in a timely fashion. Moreover, the FNMC maintains an efficient and well-structured open communication channel, and operates under the supervision of both internal and external auditors. This transparency and oversight are particularly significant since they allow the public to observe whether all involved stakeholders are fulfilling their responsibilities, thereby enhancing the legitimacy of the FNMC.

Regarding the governance and resource allocation dimension, establishing a robust framework not only promotes effective climate governance and enhances project legitimacy, but also attracts innovative financing tools based on trust and public acceptance, which are vital for sustainable investment (Dong & Olsen, 2015). While the FNMC faces challenges concerning the MMA management team and the representativeness of the management committee, it is worth noting that most resources are disbursed by the BNDES, which has a corporate policy for monitoring and conducting evaluations. Additionally, the BNDES has developed a macro-process system to promote effectiveness, which benefits from nearly 70 years of operational experience (BNDES, 2020). Effective collaboration with financial agents improves fund management, and ensures the organized and efficient collection and allocation of resources (Flynn, 2011). Furthermore, non-reimbursable resources have helped target support for the most vulnerable regions in Brazil, corroborating Mathy and Blanchard’s (2015) observation that international climate funds often struggle to adequately address specific needs related to climate change actions. Another positive aspect within this dimension is the strategic eligibility and project prioritization criteria that are in alignment with the FNMC’s guidelines and priority areas, the Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), and the National Policy on Climate Change (PNMC). By integrating climate policies with other public policies, one can see how effective responses to climate change can be achieved (Giddens, 2009). Proper and efficient management, together with equitable and fair decision-making processes, are both crucial in FNMC’s quest towards effectively supporting and enhancing Brazilian climate change policies and actions.

The legal and regulatory structure dimension, however, needs to be improved. This is crucial for ensuring the continuity of climate change policies, independent of political parties or concerns or conflicts (Giddens, 2009). Stakeholder participation is also essential for effective climate governance (Dong & Olsen, 2015). While the laws and regulations of the FNMC are clear and transparent, conflicts within its norms persist, e.g., the pending revocation of certain sections. Additionally, legislation needs to be improved, since this situation can weaken the FNMC’s functionality.

The monitoring and evaluation dimension was highly deficient, since none of its indicators showed satisfactory compliance. Reports and verification play a crucial role in instilling confidence in outcomes, shedding light on implementation issues, and offering solutions to enhance fund operations (Flynn, 2011). The FNMC still lacks comprehensive information about its results. Although data and reports on project statuses are prepared and available for monitoring and evaluations, they are either incomplete or outdated. This dearth of information on results hampers improvement efforts and undermines reliability.

Resource mobilization and sustainability are the most significant challenges that the FNMC faces. Despite the FNMC’s provision for seeking out diverse funding sources, as outlined in Article 3 of Law No. 12,114 of 2009 (Lei nº 12.114, de 9 de dezembro de 2009), they have relied solely on funds from the Federal Government. This presents a problem, since the budget often faces limitations, and there may be certain difficulties in directly raising funds from national entities (Rai et al., 2015). Furthermore, the budget can be vulnerable to reductions resulting from government negotiations for competing demands (Irawan, Heikens, & Petrini, 2012). The FNMC encounters significant challenges with this dimension, including a limited capacity for mobilizing funds and a lack of predictability and sustainability with respect to financial resources.

5. FINAL CONSIDERATIONS

This exploratory study investigates the institutional effectiveness of the FNMC by examining 80 documents and considering 21 indicators categorized into five dimensions, as proposed by Sheriffdeen et al. (2020). Our findings revealed that none of the dimensions showed satisfactory performance across all indicators. The primary challenge lies with mobilizing resources, and with the sustainability dimension, primarily because of scarcity and unpredictable resources, primarily resulting from pending government budget plans and instability with respect to the source of funds.

It is important to note that this study focused on evaluating policy during the formulation stage and the institutional-legal dimension. A comprehensive evaluation would mean assessing implementation and impacts. The study has certain limitations, including the fact that predefined dimensions were used, which may restrict the inclusion of relevant new content, and the fact temporal variations influenced by political mandates were not considered, these potentially introducing disruptions and changes in the FNMC’s governance. While this article does not provide a definitive assessment of the institutional effectiveness of the FNMC, it offers policymakers an overview of existing gaps and areas that may require attention. This could facilitate integrated adjustments and corrections. Enhancing the institutional effectiveness of the FNMC can lead to increased responsibility and reliability, which, in turn, can attracts more stakeholders to engage in climate finance initiatives. This, in turn, strengthens the country’s potential for achieving the desired outcomes in response to climate change.

REFERÊNCIAS

• Banco Nacional de Desenvolvimento Econômico e Social. (2020). Relatório de Efetividade 2019 Rio de Janeiro, RJ: Autor.
• Decreto nº 7.343, de 26 de outubro de 2010 (2010). Regulamenta a Lei no 12.114, de 9 de dezembro de 2009, que cria o Fundo Nacional sobre Mudança do Clima - FNMC, e dá outras providências. Brasília, DF. Recuperado dehttp://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2007-2010/2010/decreto/d7343.htm
  » http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2007-2010/2010/decreto/d7343.htm
• Decreto nº 8.975, de 24 de janeiro de 2017 (2017). Aprova a Estrutura Regimental e o Quadro Demonstrativo dos Cargos em Comissão e das Funções de Confiança do Ministério do Meio Ambiente, remaneja cargos em comissão e substitui cargos em comissão do Grupo-Direção e Assessoramento Superiores - DAS por Funções Comissionadas do Poder Executivo - FCPE. Brasília, DF. Recuperado dehttp://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2015-2018/2017/decreto/D8975.htm
  » http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2015-2018/2017/decreto/D8975.htm
• Decreto nº 9.578, de 22 de novembro de 2018 (2018). Consolida atos normativos editados pelo Poder Executivo federal que dispõem sobre o Fundo Nacional sobre Mudança do Clima, de que trata a Lei nº 12.114, de 9 de dezembro de 2009, e a Política Nacional sobre Mudança do Clima, de que trata a Lei nº 12.187, de 29 de dezembro de 2009. Brasília, DF. Recuperado dehttp://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2015-2018/2018/decreto/d9578.htm
  » http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2015-2018/2018/decreto/d9578.htm
• Decreto nº 9.672, de 2 de janeiro de 2019 (2019). Aprova a Estrutura Regimental e o Quadro Demonstrativo dos Cargos em Comissão e das Funções de Confiança do Ministério do Meio Ambiente, remaneja cargos em comissão e funções de confiança e substitui cargos em comissão do Grupo-Direção e Assessoramento Superiores - DAS por Funções Comissionadas do Poder Executivo - FCPE. Brasília, DF. Recuperado de http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2019-2022/2019/decreto/D9672.htm
  » http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2019-2022/2019/decreto/D9672.htm
• Decreto nº 10.143, de 28 de novembro de 2019 (2019). Altera o Decreto nº 9.578, de 22 de novembro de 2018, que dispõe sobre o Fundo Nacional sobre Mudança do Clima e a Política Nacional sobre Mudança do Clima. Brasília, DF. Recuperado de https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2019-2022/2019/decreto/d10143.htm
  » https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2019-2022/2019/decreto/d10143.htm
• Decreto nº 10.455, de 11 de agosto de 2020 (2020). Aprova a Estrutura Regimental e o Quadro Demonstrativo dos Cargos em Comissão e das Funções de Confiança do Ministério do Meio Ambiente e remaneja e transforma cargos em comissão e funções de confiança. Brasília, DF. Recuperado dehttps://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2019-2022/2020/decreto/d10455.htm
  » https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2019-2022/2020/decreto/d10455.htm
• Dong, Y., & Olsen, K. H. (2015). Stakeholder participation in CDM and new climate mitigation mechanisms: China CDM case study. Climate Policy, 17(2), 171-188. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2015.1070257
  » https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2015.1070257
• Flynn, C. (2011). Blending climate finance through National Climate Funds: a guidebook for the design and establishment of national funds to achieve climate change priorities New York, NY: UNDP. Recuperado dehttps://www.undp.org/publications/blending-climate-finance-through-national-climate-funds
  » https://www.undp.org/publications/blending-climate-finance-through-national-climate-funds
• Giddens, A. (2009). A política da mudança climática Rio de Janeiro, RJ: Zahar.
• Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (2022). Mudanças climáticas 2022: mitigação das mudanças climáticas Recuperado dehttps://www.ipcc.ch/report/sixth-assessment-report-working-group-3/
  » https://www.ipcc.ch/report/sixth-assessment-report-working-group-3/
• Irawan, S., Heikens, A., & Petrini, K. (2012). National climate funds: learning from the experience of Asia-Pacific countries New York, NY: UNDP . Recuperado dehttps://www.asia-pacific.undp.org/content/rbap/en/home/library/climate-and-disaster-resilience/APRC-EE-2012-NCF-DiscussionPaper-Asia-Pacific.html
  » https://www.asia-pacific.undp.org/content/rbap/en/home/library/climate-and-disaster-resilience/APRC-EE-2012-NCF-DiscussionPaper-Asia-Pacific.html
• Lei nº 9.478, de 6 de agosto de 1997 (1997). Dispõe sobre a política energética nacional, as atividades relativas ao monopólio do petróleo, institui o Conselho Nacional de Política Energética e a Agência Nacional do Petróleo e dá outras providências. Brasília, DF. Recuperado dehttps://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/leis/l9478.htm
  » https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/leis/l9478.htm
• Lei nº 12.114, de 9 de dezembro de 2009 (2009). Cria o Fundo Nacional sobre Mudança do Clima, altera os arts. 6o e 50 da Lei no 9.478, de 6 de agosto de 1997, e dá outras providências. Brasília, DF. Recuperado dehttps://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2007-2010/2009/lei/l12114.htm
  » https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2007-2010/2009/lei/l12114.htm
• Lei nº 12.187, de 29 de dezembro de 2009 (2009). Institui a Política Nacional sobre Mudança do Clima - PNMC e dá outras providências. Brasília, DF. Recuperado dehttps://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2007-2010/2009/lei/l12187.htm
  » https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2007-2010/2009/lei/l12187.htm
• Lei nº 13.800, de 4 de janeiro de 2019 (2019). Autoriza a administração pública a firmar instrumentos de parceria e termos de execução de programas, projetos e demais finalidades de interesse público com organizações gestoras de fundos patrimoniais; altera as Leis nº s 9.249 e 9.250, de 26 de dezembro de 1995, 9.532, de 10 de dezembro de 1997, e 12.114 de 9 de dezembro de 2009; e dá outras providências. Brasília, DF. Recuperado dehttps://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_Ato2019-2022/2019/Lei/L13800.htm
  » https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_Ato2019-2022/2019/Lei/L13800.htm
• Mathy, S., & Blanchard, O. (2015). Proposal for a poverty-adaptation-mitigation window within the Green Climate Fund. Climate Policy, 16(6), 752-767. Recuperado dehttps://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2015.1050348
  » https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2015.1050348
• Ministério do Meio Ambiente. (2021). Transparência e prestação de contas Brasília, DF: Autor. Recuperado dehttps://www.gov.br/mma/pt-br/acesso-a-informacao/transparencia-e-prestacao-de-contas
  » https://www.gov.br/mma/pt-br/acesso-a-informacao/transparencia-e-prestacao-de-contas
• Poupart, J., Deslauriers, J. P., Groulx, L. H., Laperriere, A., Mayer, R., & Pires A. (2008). A pesquisa qualitativa: enfoques epistemológicos e metodológicos Petrópolis, RJ: Vozes.
• Rai, N., Kaur, N., Greene, S., Wang, B., & Steele, P. (2015). Topic guide: a guide to national governance of climate finance London, UK: Evidence on Demand. Recuperado dehttps://www.gov.uk/research-for-development-outputs/topic-guide-a-guide-to-national-governance-of-climate-finance
  » https://www.gov.uk/research-for-development-outputs/topic-guide-a-guide-to-national-governance-of-climate-finance
• Ripple, W. J., Wolf, C., Newsome, T. M., Barnard, P., & Moomaw, W. R. (2020). World Scientists’ Warning of a Climate Emergency. BioScience, 70(1), 8-12. Recuperado dehttps://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biz088
  » https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biz088
• Schalatek, L., & Bird, N. (2016). The principles and criteria of public climate finance - a normative framework London, UK: ODI. Recuperado dehttps://odi.org/en/publications/the-principles-and-criteria-of-public-climate-finance-a-normative-framework/
  » https://odi.org/en/publications/the-principles-and-criteria-of-public-climate-finance-a-normative-framework/
• Sheriffdeen, M., Nurrochma, T. D. R., Perdinan, P., & Di Gregorio, M. (2020). Indicators to evaluate the Institutional Effectiveness of National Climate Financing Mechanisms. Forest and Society, 4(2), 358-378. Recuperado dehttps://doi.org/10.24259/fs.v4i2.10309
  » https://doi.org/10.24259/fs.v4i2.10309
• Sistema Integrado de Planejamento e Orçamento. (2022). Portal Recuperado dehttps://www.siop.planejamento.gov.br/
  » https://www.siop.planejamento.gov.br/

• [Translated version] Note: All quotes in English translated by this article’s translator.

Editor-in-chief:

• 12
  Alketa Peci (Fundação Getulio Vargas, Rio de Janeiro / RJ - Brazil) https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0488-1744

Associate editor:

• 13
  Gabriela Spanghero Lotta (Fundação Getulio Vargas, São Paulo / SP - Brazil) https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2801-1628

Reviewers:

• 14
  Carlos R. S. Milani (Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro / RJ - Brazil) https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8204-6827
• 15
  Ítalo Nogueira Soares (Fundação Getulio Vargas, São Paulo / SP - Brazil) https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7938-5844

• Peer review report: the peer review report is available at this URL. https://bibliotecadigital.fgv.br/ojs/index.php/rap/article/view/88614/83349

APPENDIX

Box A
Documents selected for analysis according to Poupart et al. (2008)

Box A
continuation

Box B
Level of service indicators that comprise the institutional effectiveness dimensions at the FNMC

Box B
continuation

Data availability

Data citations

Ministério do Meio Ambiente. (2021). Transparência e prestação de contas Brasília, DF: Autor. Recuperado dehttps://www.gov.br/mma/pt-br/acesso-a-informacao/transparencia-e-prestacao-de-contas

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  17 July 2023
• Date of issue
  May-Jun 2023

History

• Received
  13 Oct 2022
• Accepted
  02 May 2023