Joseph Loree, who lives in the oil-rich Lokichar area of Turkana in northern Kenya, keeps a few goats due to frequent droughts. Governments in the Global South are spending billions of dollars subsidising industries harming the climate, such as the one in Lokichar. Credit:
Maina Waruru/IPS
By Maina Waruru
NAIROBI, Sep 18 2024 – A report examining corporate capture of public finance is accusing industries fueling the climate crisis, including fossil fuel ones, of draining public funds in the Global South, singling them out for squeezing out of governments USD 700 billion in public subsidies each year.
The report, How theFinance Flows: Corporate capture of public finance fuelling the climate crisis in the Global South, released on 17 September says that the climate-destructive sectors are benefiting from money that could go to paying for schooling for all Sub-Saharan African children 3.5 times over, even as Global South renewable energy projects remain starved of cash, receiving 40 times less public finance than the fossil fuels sector.
While urging governments in the developing world to allocate more of their limited resources in ways that “truly serve their people’s needs” through climate solutions for food and energy, the analysis of financial flows by ActionAid reveals that the fossil fuel sector in the region received a staggering annual average of USD 438.6 billion a year in subsidies, between 2016 (when the Paris Agreement was signed) and 2023.
The industrial agriculture sector alone benefited from the government subsidies equivalent to a whopping USD 238 billion a year on average between 2016 and 2021, even as it continued to contribute to the worsening of nature, it reveals.
It further reveals that the industries causing the climate crisis are also draining the lion’s share of public funds, including in “climate-hit countries,” in places like Sub-Saharan Africa, even as initiatives providing climate solutions remain severely underfunded.
The report points to corporate capture of public finance, combined with a lack of international climate finance, as some of the factors holding back climate action in some of the “countries and communities that need it most”.
While also finding that climate finance grants from the Global North for climate-hit countries are still grossly insufficient to support climate action and the necessary transitions in the southern hemisphere, it gives examples of several countries in Africa where policies in place were in conflict with actual reality actions.
These include the fossil fuel-rich African countries of South Africa and Nigeria, which have been found to be heavily subsidizing the discredited sector.
The countries, including Bangladesh in South Asia, Action Aid says were providing fuel subsidies up to between 22 and 33 times the “per capita level of annual public investment in renewable energy” flow, for example.
As a result, in the hemisphere, renewable energy initiatives are receiving 40 times less public finance than the fossils sector, while climate finance grants amount to just a 20th of the Global South’s public finance going to fossils and industrial agriculture.
“While trillions of dollars in climate finance from the Global North to the Global South are necessary to adequately address the climate and development crises, Global South governments must allocate their limited resources in ways that truly serve their people’s needs through climate solutions for food and energy,” it says.
“Meanwhile, the failure of Global North countries to provide adequate climate finance for climate transitions means that Global South countries are locked into harmful development pathways that destroy ecosystems, grab lands and compound the injustice of climate change,” it adds.
Citing the example of Southern Africa’s Zambia, it says that the industrial agriculture sector in the country gobbled up 80 percent of the national agriculture budget in 2023, through subsidies for “climate-harming synthetic fertilizer’s and commercial seeds.”
“Meanwhile, only 6 percent of the Agriculture Ministry’s Agricultural Development and Productivity Programme was spent on supporting farmers to adopt agroecological, nature-friendly farming approaches, that naturally strengthen soil fertility and reduce dependency on agrochemical inputs,” it explains the contradiction.
Zambia’s neighbor Zimbabwe has made public policy statements in support of a shift towards agroecology, a shift evidenced by 34 percent of the country’s agriculture budget this year supporting farmers to adopt practices to move from climate-destructive agrochemicals.
Despite that, Zimbabwe is still using approximately 50 percent of its entire national agriculture budget towards subsidizing industrial agribusiness inputs such as fertilizers and hybrid seeds,” signaling the industry’s continued control over the sector and budget, as well as the potential to free up more public finances for public good’.
Two west African countries, the Gambia and Senegal, and South America’s Brazil were equally found to be engaging in contradictory practices, making public investments in renewable energy, on a scale that is almost comparable to the per capita public subsidy provision for fossil fuels.
In the Gambia, the scale of public investment in renewable energy is more than four-fifths that of public finance provided to fossil fuels; while in Brazil and Senegal, the scale of renewables investment was found to be two-thirds that of fossil fuel subsidies.
“Kenya’s ambition to be a global leader in renewable energy is borne out by the finding that per capita investment in renewables in the country is outspending public subsidy provision to fossil fuels. However, recent protests in Kenya against the government’s reduction of fossil fuel subsidies underline the importance of feminist Just Transition principles,” the investigation found.
“Shifts in public financing must be carefully sequenced to protect the rights of people—especially women—living in poverty. Any reductions in fossil fuel subsidies should target the wealthy corporations first. Only once accessible and democratic alternatives and comprehensive social protections are available to people on low incomes, should progressive policies be shifted,” the analysis concluded.
The report further found that governments in the North continue to disproportionately fuel the climate crisis, and even though the developed world has just a quarter of the world’s population, their annual average fossil fuel subsidies amounted to USD 239.7 billion.
Action Aid laments that renewable energy public investment in the Global South comes to an annual average of USD 10.3 billion each year, noting that even worse, renewable energy investment in the South has been on a downward trend, more than halving from USD 15 billion in 2016 to USD 7 billion in 2021.
It calls on governments to speed up the transition to green, resilient, democratic and people-led climate solutions for food and energy, such as renewable energy and agroecology. “For Global South countries already experiencing the devastating consequences of climate change, the need for global transition is all the more urgent”.
According to Arthur Larok, Secretary General of ActionAid International, the report further helps expose wealthy corporations’ ‘parasitic’ behavior.
“They are draining the life out of the Global South by siphoning public funds and fueling the climate crisis. Sadly, the promises of climate finance by the Global North are as hollow as the empty rhetoric they have been uttering for decades. It is time for this circus to end; we need genuine commitments to ending the climate crisis,” he said.
The report also debunks the “false narrative” that fossil fuel and industrial agriculture expansion in the Global South is necessary to address food insecurity and energy poverty and to provide livelihoods and public revenue, said Teresa Anderson, Global Lead on Climate Justice at ActionAid International and one of the report’s authors.
“It seems that money is the root of all climate upheaval. Climate-destructive industries are bleeding the Global South of the public funds they should be using to deal with the climate crisis. “The lack of public and climate finance for solutions means that in climate-vulnerable countries, renewable energy is receiving 40 times less public finance than the fossil fuel sector,” she added.
The time had come for the poor to stand up to industries that are draining their finances and wrecking the climate.
Public resources, the report recommends, should be directed toward supporting just transition away from climate-destructive fossil fuels and industrial agriculture and in favor of “people-led climate solutions that safeguard people’s rights to food, energy and livelihoods.”
It should also go to scaling up decentralized renewable energy systems to provide energy access, and gender-responsive agricultural extension services that offer training in agro-ecology and adaptation.
It appeals to wealthy countries to provide “trillions of dollars in grant-based climate finance each year to Global South countries on the front lines of the climate crisis,” including by agreeing to an ambitious new climate finance goal at COP29.
Further, it calls for regulation of the banking and finance sectors to end destructive financing, including setting minimum standards for human rights, social and environmental frameworks, and transformation of the international financial institutions that are pushing climate-vulnerable countries into “spiraling debt.”
IPS UN Bureau Report
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?’http’:’https’;if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+’://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js’;fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, ‘script’, ‘twitter-wjs’);
South African Rand Exchange Rate