Experts have issued a stark warning that significant shortcomings in governance and institutional capacity are severely hindering Pakistan’s ability to access the crucial Fund for Responding to Loss and Damage (FRLD), placing the nation at a disadvantage as the COP30 climate summit approaches.
The concerns were raised during a roundtable discussion titled ‘Operationalizing the Loss and Damage Fund: Expectations Ahead of COP30,’ organized by the Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) in Islamabad on Tuesday. The session convened prominent climate and policy specialists to discuss the hurdles preventing Pakistan from securing timely global climate finance.
Ali Tauqeer Shaikh, a Senior Climate Expert and FRLD Board Member, explained that this new financial mechanism is distinct from mitigation and adaptation aid, as it is designed to compensate developing nations for the expenses of building resilience. He confirmed that while direct budget support has been approved in principle, the fund remains non-operational pending the finalization of a risk management framework.
Shaikh noted that procedural and accreditation barriers are currently slowing direct access. Consequently, Pakistan must depend on multilateral institutions until it achieves national accreditation. He stressed that projects seeking funding should demonstrate national ownership, produce measurable outcomes, and align with domestic systems.
Afia Malik, a Senior Energy Economist, highlighted the tangible consequences of climate change, pointing out that extreme weather events have already inflicted substantial costs on Pakistan’s energy infrastructure. She urged power distribution companies to embed climate resilience into their procurement and planning, emphasizing the need for thorough climate risk assessments.
Muhammad Hammad Bashir, a Climate Finance Expert, identified a widespread lack of understanding of international climate finance as a primary obstacle. He underscored the necessity of developing bankable projects to connect global financing with local requirements and proposed a ‘Four As’ framework-Accessibility, Additionality, Adequacy, and Accountability-to ensure transparent fund utilization.
Dr. Saira Qaiser, Director of Policy at the Pakistan Academy of Science, observed that many stakeholders are unaware of how to formulate viable project proposals. She called for clearer communication of funding criteria and protections against exchange rate volatility, alongside promoting climate education for future generations.
Adding another dimension, Talha Tufail from the Institute of Regional Studies suggested that robust attribution studies, which scientifically link emissions to specific climate impacts, would significantly strengthen Pakistan’s case for receiving international climate funds.
Dr. Irfan Yousaf, a Climate Consultant for the World Bank, asserted that Pakistan’s greatest challenge is its overall lack of preparedness, citing deficiencies in education, institutional readiness, and mindset. He advocated for a shift from relying on external assistance to strengthening local capacities and understanding national vulnerabilities.
Echoing this sentiment, Climate Expert Hamid Sarfaraz observed that the entities currently accredited under the FRLD are the same ones that struggled with the Green Climate Fund. He cautioned that over-reliance on agencies like the ADB and World Bank curtails local benefits and called for prioritizing indigenous resilience-building mechanisms.
In his concluding remarks, Khalid Rahman, Chairman of IPS, synthesized the discussion by stating that Pakistan’s successful engagement with the Loss and Damage Fund is contingent on proactive governance reforms and a coherent national strategy. “To secure equitable access and build sustainable climate resilience, Pakistan must move beyond reactive measures and adopt a long-term, coordinated approach,” he stated.