“No future”: Climate projects face existential threat after Trump’s aid shutdown

The Trump administration’s attack on USAID puts at risk close to $500 million a year in grant-based climate funding for developing countries

A new programme to boost the climate resilience of drought-hit farmers in Iraq. Electricity installations that would give millions across Southern Africa access to clean energy. The conservation of critical ecosystems in Honduras to help local communities improve their livelihoods at home instead of needing to migrate to countries like the United States.

These and hundreds more climate programmes funded by the US government risk disappearing as an administration led by President Donald Trump and tech billionaire Elon Musk threatens to shutter the state aid agency, USAID, and slash overseas development assistance.

“I think this is the end of US [government] climate funding,” predicted Karen Mathiasen, a project director with the Center for Global Development, a Washington-based think-tank. In an interview with Climate Home, she described as “shocking” the speed and brazenness with which the government is attempting to dismantle its foreign aid arm.

Which countries have not ratified the Paris climate agreement?

Aid organisations and contractors have been grappling with an unprecedented crisis since, on his first day in office, Trump ordered a 90-day funding freeze during which a programme-by-programme review would be carried out.

As the world’s largest bilateral development assistance agency, USAID is a major provider of grant-based finance for climate action in the Global South. Its climate programmes – amounting to close to half a billion dollars in 2024 – help countries cut greenhouse gas emissions and protect their citizens from the escalating effects of global warming.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio – who is now in charge of USAID’s work – said last week that only projects that make “America safer, stronger or more prosperous” will survive the cull, without explaining which criteria would be used for the assessment.

‘Devastating’ consequences

The sudden move has thrown the development world into disarray, with organisations forced to halt their operations overnight and furlough or lay off staff without being able to obtain clear information or guidance from US officials.

A USAID project in Honduras strengthens the sustainability of coffee farming. Credit: USAID/Honduras Transforming Market

Speaking to Climate Home, aid workers involved in USAID-funded climate projects in the Global South painted a picture of bewilderment and confusion.

“We are no longer able to transfer funds to our local partners – and it will be really hard for them to manage costs,” explained one senior official at a global humanitarian group, underscoring the “devastating” consequences of the funding freeze for frontline organisations.

Working in conflict-afflicted regions, the aid group supports projects to build climate resilience that struggle to attract any financing outside of development money, said the official, adding “that has all gone away now”.

“For many programmes a 90-day pause is as good as a cancellation because you lose all momentum, you lose community connection, you lose the trust you built up with communities which is vital to success,” they warned, speaking anonymously due to the sensitivity of the situation.

Separately, in Malawi, Climate Home has learned that all USAID-funded projects have been halted, with staff members being told to remain at home, just as the country was hit by deadly floods last week.

Climate aid powerhouse

Climate Home analysed USAID’s portfolio of climate projects before its website went offline late last week, soon after Trump-ally Musk, the world’s richest man, labelled the agency as “a criminal organisation”, without providing evidence – and called for its closure.

We spent the weekend feeding USAID into the wood chipper.

Could gone to some great parties.

Did that instead. https://t.co/0V35nacICW

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) February 3, 2025

One of USAID’s single largest climate projects supports the large-scale roll-out of clean energy facilities across Southern Africa. With total budgeted funding of $84.5 million up to 2028, the programme aims to set up 3 million new electricity connections and avoid 14 million tonnes of planet-heating emissions – equivalent to the annual carbon footprint of Ivory Coast.

Other large US-backed renewable energy projects target Central Asia, Eastern Europe, Ecuador, Colombia and Bangladesh. The vast majority of these are implemented by profit-making American corporations that would be financially hit by any funding cuts.

Climate adaptation also features prominently in USAID’s portfolio. In the last year alone, the agency committed $22 million to boost the ability of farming communities in Iraq to deal with climate-related drought and $18.5 million to help the adoption of climate resilience measures in Palestine. Similar initiatives have been in place in dozens more countries across the Pacific, South Asia, sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America.

Many other USAID projects include climate-related activities – even if they are not explicitly labelled as such – especially in very fragile and conflict-affected regions.

Adaptation set to suffer

It is impossible to predict what will happen to USAID and its thousands of programmes in what is a fast-changing situation – although many staff are due to be placed on administrative leave at the end of this week amid rumours it will be be folded into the State Department. Any fundamental reforms of the agency, and especially its touted abolition, would legally need to be approved by the Republican-controlled Congress.

But, as far as climate action is concerned, some experts believe the writing is already on the wall.

Shell dodges paying compensation for sham carbon credits in China

Along with the wider funding freeze, on his January 20 inauguration day Trump explicitly ordered federal agencies to explain how they would “revoke or rescind” policies implemented to support his predecessor Joe Biden’s international climate finance plan.

“I see no future [for climate projects],” the humanitarian official said, adding that it remains to be seen whether some resilience-building activities could be woven into humanitarian assistance, which is more likely to be continued. “But anything that talks significantly, or even marginally, about climate change doesn’t have a future.”

CGD’s Mathiasen, who offered a similar view, said adaptation finance stands to suffer the most severe consequences from the aid pullback. “It will further create further challenges to an agenda that’s already horrendously underfunded, while needs are real and growing,” she added.

The outlook might be less gloomy for renewable energy projects which offer higher returns and could more easily tap other financing sources. For instance, in sub-Saharan Africa, development banks have committed more than $50 billion to an ambitious “Mission 300” initiative aiming to provide 300 million energy-poor people with electricity by 2030.

African governments opt for gas-run cars over EVs to drive down transport emissions

“It is hard to tell yet [what will happen],” said Saliem Fakir, executive director of the Africa Climate Foundation, “but generally large power projects rely on multiple funders – and we also have significant flows of funds from the Gulf States.”

Other major global powers, like China, might be looking to fill the gap as developing nations conclude they can no longer rely on US funding. “The US reputation will suffer as the US will be seen as an unreliable partner and a non-rational actor,” said Mathiasen. “For that reason, this is extraordinarily short-sighted”.

Climate finance goals harder to reach?

Faten Aggad, executive director of the African Future Policies Hub, told Climate Home that an “unprecedented” shift in international aid flows should prompt recipient countries to reevaluate their policies.

“It is a reminder that ODA [overseas development assistance] is not an economic development strategy,” she said. “Countries will need to work on structural solutions to fund their needs, and that includes looking beyond direct financial transfers from development partners.”

But, in the near-term, it will be difficult to quickly find alternative sources of finance for projects dependent on US grants, Aggad warned.

A US retreat from aid funding could also significantly affect the ability of developed countries to fulfill their promise of channelling at least $300 billion a year in climate finance to developing nations by 2035 – an agreement struck just over two months ago at COP29.

In 2022, US contributions accounted for 12% of developed countries’ climate finance through bilateral channels and multilateral climate funds under the previous $100-billion annual goal, according to analysis by US-based think-tank the Natural Resources Defense Council.

In comments made last week, Ani Dasgupta, president and CEO of the World Resources Institute, said “it is still too early to tell what US cuts will mean for reaching the $300-billion and $1.3-trillion [climate finance] goals by 2035 – but they may impact the pace of the scale-up.”

(Reporting by Matteo Civillini; additional reporting by Vivian Chime; editing by Megan Rowling)

Note: This article have been indexed to our site. We do not claim legitimacy, ownership or copyright of any of the content above. To see the article at original source Click Here

Related Posts
UNCERTAINTIES: Judges may take office if elections are postponed thumbnail

UNCERTAINTIES: Judges may take office if elections are postponed

A disputa está marcada para outubro, mas a falta de perspectiva de quando a crise se encerrará preocupa políticos e magistrados A possibilidade de adiar as eleições deste ano por causa da pandemia de Covid-19 no país pode levar juízes ao comando das prefeituras do país. A disputa está marcada para outubro, mas a falta…
Read More
Asset Bubbles & Forward Returns thumbnail

Asset Bubbles & Forward Returns

Commentary  Asset bubbles have been prevalent throughout history. Whether it was the “Tulip bubble” in the 1600s, the South Sea bubble of the 1700s or the Dot.com bubble of 2000, they resulted from excessive investor speculation. Of course, the other side of the inflation was the long unwinding of those bubbles as valuations mean reverted…
Read More
Response to Climate Change Policy Why Toyota's "Lowest" Rating Ask the Co-Founder of a Rating British Research Institute | Latest Weekly Toyo Keizai | Toyo Keizai Online thumbnail

Response to Climate Change Policy Why Toyota's “Lowest” Rating Ask the Co-Founder of a Rating British Research Institute | Latest Weekly Toyo Keizai | Toyo Keizai Online

「パリ協定」に対する立ち位置で低い評価を下されたトヨタ(写真:Toru Hanai/Bloomberg) 脱炭素社会に向けて、2050年までにCO2(二酸化炭素)を排出実質ゼロにする――。昨年10月、菅義偉首相(当時)が国会の所信表明演説で示した政府の方針に自動車業界が揺れている。 「一部の政治家からは『すべてを電気自動車にすればいいんだ』とか、『製造業は時代遅れだ』という声を聞くこともありますが、私は、それは違うと思います」 『週刊東洋経済』10月4日発売号の特集は「EV産業革命」です。書影をクリックするとアマゾンのサイトにジャンプします。紙版はこちら、電子版はこちら 9月に行われた日本自動車工業会(自工会)の記者会見で、会長を務めるトヨタ自動車の豊田章男社長はこう訴えた。日系自動車メーカーはいち早くハイブリッド車(HV)など電動車を普及させた結果、他国よりも抜きん出たCO2の排出量を削減した。そうした実績や国の事情に沿ったエネルギー政策をとるべきといったことが、豊田社長による発言の背景にある。 一方、政府へのロビー活動という点では、日本の自動車業界にとって不都合な分析もある。気候変動問題に関するイギリスの独立系シンクタンク、インフルエンスマップは、トヨタと自工会は2015年に採択された「パリ協定」を“最も守っていない組織”として低評価の格付けを行った。パリ協定は世界の平均気温上昇を2度未満に抑えることを掲げ、日本を含む約200カ国が合意した国際協定だ。 インフルエンスマップはなぜ、トヨタに厳しい評価を下すのか。世界各国で巻き起こるカーボンニュートラルの奔流に、日本の自動車メーカーはどう対応しているのか。インフルエンスマップ共同創設者のディラン・タナー氏に聞いた。 企業が政策にどんな影響を与えているかを調査 ――インフルエンスマップの格付けデータは、アメリカのニューヨーク・タイムズやイギリスのフィナンシャル・タイムズなど有力メディアにも引用され、政策当局や企業幹部らに影響を与えています。何をしている組織なのでしょうか。 まず、われわれは、企業や国による脱炭素化の取り組みそのものを評価する組織ではない。 気候・エネルギー政策に関して企業や業界団体が取っているポジションを評価する、ロビー活動の情報プラットフォームを運営している。企業が気候変動に対処するために必要な政策にどのような影響を与えているかを明確にすることが目的だ。投資家やその他ステークホルダーからの要望の高まりを受け、2015年末にパリ協定が結ばれる前に立ち上げた。
Read More
Maryland is pardoning 175,000 marijuana convictions. It's part of a trend thumbnail

Maryland is pardoning 175,000 marijuana convictions. It’s part of a trend

Gov. Wes Moore, center, holds an executive order authorizing pardons for at least 175,000 criminal convictions related to marijuana. Legalization, Moore said, “doesn't erase the fact that Black Marylanders were three times more likely to be arrested for cannabis than white Marylanders before legalization." Screenshot by NPR hide caption toggle caption Screenshot by NPR Maryland
Read More
Index Of News
Total
0
Share