Skip to main content

Green Climate Fund's Integrity Policies and Investigations

The Green Climate Fund's Integrity Policies & Investigations

gcf-integrity-policy

Transparency International (TI) and some of its regional Chapters have been following and monitoring the Green Climate Fund (GCF)'s activities and development since 2012. The global anti-corruption watchdog does not only monitor the GCF but also engages with the Fund through its activities, programs, and relevant units and personnel. 

Mainly, TI focuses its role on the GCF's integrity, notably on anti-corruption policies, fiduciary standards, procurement, and other integrity-related matters. TI-Korea Chapter supports the TI movement's project on climate governance integrity by participating in the GCF's Board member meetings, among other relevant activities.

This article aims to present the Fund's report on its integrity activities published by the Independent Integrity Unit (IIU) of this funding institution dedicated to tackling the climate change issues.

IIU's Investigative Activities
The IIU, the responsible GCF's Unit for integrity and corruption matters, has been investigating various types of integrity cases received or reported to the Unit. The Unit published its 2019 report, last year, the findings of its investigations.

In 2016, the investigation had opened 1 (one) case but had increased four times in 2017, six times in 2018, and four times in 2019. Then the report presented closed cases reported to appropriate bodies only two integrity cases. 

Due to privacy and security reasons for the reporters of cases, IIU could not publish specific descriptions and explanations regarding the integrity cases. However, it is safe to say that some cases submitted were not substantiated or were not eligible. 

See the table...
Figure 1
iiu-investigations-report-2019

Investigations:


Types of Reports
In the investigation on integrity performed by the IIU (and internal audit prior to the establishment of IIU), includes three major types: project-related reports, staff misconduct, and non-integrity violations.

Then each of the types of the report is categorized into various integrity issues. Such integrity issues being investigated include collusion, fraud, corruption, conflict of interest, abuse of power, harassment, sexual harassment. 

Figure 1 shown above were presented or reported at the GCF's website only as integrity issues items and percentages, but no explanations and clarifications are given. 

For the Project-Related reports, the issue of 'fraud' (45%) presents the most significant problem and then followed by 'corruption' (33%), then 'collusion' (22%).

For the Staff Misconduct type, 'abuse' (includes abuse of office, power, and resources--31%) shows the highest percentage among other integrity issues. The 'abuse' is followed by 'harassment' (23%) as second, 'conflict of interest' (20%), 'SEAH' (sexual harassment, 11%), and then 'collusion' (6%), 'fraud' (6%), and 'retaliation against whistleblowers' (3%). There were 35 reports for this type. 

Last, there were 15 reports for the Non-Integrity Violations type. Again, there are no descriptions nor explanations for this type of report. 

Please, see IIU's website here.

Thanks for reading.

=====================

Prepared by: Abraham Sumalinog
Climate Governance Integrity Director

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

30th Green Climate Fund Meeting Notes

 30th Green Climate Fund Meeting Notes 30 th Green Climate Fund Board Meeting 4-7 September 2021 (Virtual meeting)   The GCF's Board Members were expected to approve 13 Funding Proposals equivalent to USD1.2 billion and accredit 4 Accredited Entities (actually for re-accreditation), and also address various policy gaps and governance issues.   1 st Day (4 October 2021) The first day was slow which was spent on discussing procedural matters The co-chair from Mexico (Jose) opened the meeting by welcoming the new Board members and their alternates Discussion on the Technical Sessions held a week before B30 on the Simplified Approval Process (SAP), and Climate Rationale was done without considering the evaluations made by the IEU. The co-chair responded by saying that the independent evaluation of SAP and Climate Rationale are already part of the proposed agenda. Due to some objections from a couple of Board members, the co-chairs agreed to add another agenda item rel
Post a Comment
Read more

Climate and COP Negotiations Lobbying Crisis

 Climate and COP Lobbying Crisis The climate crisis is a pressing concern that must be addressed rapidly and effectively with concrete action. How?  Climate crisis issues can be resolved by reducing emissions and increasing renewable energy sources, transitioning to a Circular Economy, investing in green infrastructure, and adopting holistic strategies that address the underlying causes of climate change. These measures are essential if we are to avoid catastrophic environmental consequences. Furthermore, they create an opportunity for innovation and economic growth by developing and implementing new low-carbon technologies and sustainable business models. It is also essential to build resilience and adaptive capacity in our communities. This means investing in infrastructure that helps people cope with the impacts of climate change, such as sea-level rise, extreme weather events, and flooding, among other methods. It also involves developing innovative approaches to reduce emissions a
Post a Comment
Read more

COP26: Article 6 Outcomes

 COP26: Article 6 Outcomes Image Source: eu.boell.org This article is a brief version of the article published by twn.org on the results of negotiations among Parties on issues related to the contentious Article 6 of the Paris Agreement (2015) Article 6 Outcomes on Market/Non-market Approaches Article 6 is PA’s ‘cooperative approaches’ among Parties involving the use of market and non-market mechanisms of their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC)’s implementation Establishment of the ‘Glasgow Committee on Non-market Approaches’ – a win for DCs -        This formal institutional mechanism can advance the non-market approaches (NMAs), which was initially resisted by developed countries -        Considered a victory under the Paris Agreement’s Article 6.8 No Decision for a Mandatory Contribution – a loss for DCs -        The market-based approach under PA’s Article 6.2 is a loss to the developing countries as there was no decision reached for a mandatory contribution t
Post a Comment
Read more