Women play a front line role in managing energy, waste, and water resources and are uniquely positioned to contribute in the fight against climate change. Yet new research funded by the Nordic Development Fund shows women are rarely considered in the disbursal of multi-million dollar global climate funds.
Date: 26 March 2014
- In a changing climate finance landscape, how can we help women gain better access to finance and national institutions deliver it in a more effective, efficient and inclusive way?
- How can the Green Climate Fund and other sources of climate financing reach more women and help harness their potential to be agents of change for effective mitigation initiatives?
Karen Palmer: Good morning – or evening, depending on your time zone – and welcome to our live chat on women and climate finance.
We have a truly global discussion today.
I’m Karen Palmer, a communications specialist for the Asian Development Bank at its headquarters in Manila.
Joining me here is Linda Adams, a social development specialist in the Southeast Asia department.
We are grateful to have the help of Natalie Harms, who has been seconded to ADB by the Mercator Fellowship on International Affairs, and whose fellowship focuses on exploring ways to tap the potential of women as agents of change in climate change mitigation action, policy and finance.
In Viet Nam, ADB country specialist Lauren Sorkin is starting her day a little early to join us from Ha Noi.
And Liane Schalatek is extending her day to join us from Washington, where she is the Associate Director of the Heinrich Böll Foundation North America. Her work focuses on international climate finance and we are delighted to have her with us today.
The focus of today’s discussion is women and climate finance.
Over the past few years, many in the climate community have come to realize that climate change is not gender neutral – it affects women and men differently, often impacting socially vulnerable groups more severely.
Women play a front line role in managing energy, waste, and water resources and are uniquely positioned to contribute in the fight against climate change.
Yet few would say that women have easy access to multi-million dollar global climate funds.
In today’s discussion we’d like to look at how women and national institutions can gain better access to effective, efficient, and inclusive finance.
Please feel free to send us your ideas, your initiatives, and your questions.
Perhaps I can start by asking Linda to explain the project she’s working on in Cambodia, Lao PDR and Viet Nam, which aims to break down some of the barriers.
Liane Schalatek: Hello everybody. Thanks for joining the live chat. I hope we'll have an interesting exchange -- I am excited.
Linda Adams: We see two components in breaking down access to climate funds: They have demand and supply elements. The demand side being supporting women’s “access” to knowledge, and low carbon technology – both on the ground and skill levels of national women’s machineries. The supply side response being creating awareness and enabling partnerships with the national and sub-national ministries in charge of managing climate change responses and funds.
Linda Adams: The project has been providing capacity development and technical support to the Ministry of Agricultural, Forestry and Fisheries and Ministry of Women’s Affairs in Cambodia; the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment and Lao Women’s Union in Lao PDR; and Department of Natural Resources and Environment and Quang Binh Women’s Union in Viet Nam. The outcome of these processes is to ensure gender specific goals and targets are incorporated in climate change action plans and screening criteria for climate finance projects, and create dialogue on gender equitable benefit distribution. Finally, we are developing pilot projects which support women’s groups to access low carbon technologies and to develop climate finance projects.
Guest: I have some experience on this topic in Nepal. The only climate finance I saw women really getting their hands on were carbon credits from biogas conversion and community forest custodianship - sourced from private companies. It seems most of the larger funds only get channeled through MFIs or governments?
Liane Schalatek: It is true that most multilateral climate funds are biased in their set-up towards large-scale mitigation projects -- those are not generally the ones involving women as change agents. Thus, we need to change the structure of existing funds to facilitate climate investments that are more community and beneficiary focused. Changing these structures involves the way they measure results such as effectiveness, a better understanding of efficiency beyond a narrow cost-efficiency focus and providing multiple access channels, including possible direct access opportunities for women’s and community groups. This could be accomplished for example by demanding that every large-scale project or program includes some small grants component reserved for these groups.
Dagmar - SNV Viet Nam: Good morning all, I wanted to ask you to define "climate funds" or "climate finance" from ADB's point of view. How far does this definition reach and how is this reflected in your programs - maybe not only the current on referred to above but also in other programs.
Natalie Harms: 'Climate finance' can be difficult to define - the common understanding is that climate finance is additional to Official Development Assistance (ODA). ADB and other Multilateral Development Banks channel both climate funds, such as the Climate Investment Funds (CIF) and can also channel funds from their donors and other multilateral sources for climate change projects in the context of their development assistance in their partner countries.
Sonomi: Hi all - I just wonder why the global climate funds are reluctant to channel funds directly to women in need of funding in coping with climate change impacts, channeling money via financial intermediaries. What's blocking them in allocating some of the funds to such purposes?
Liane Schalatek: Some of the current "reluctance" in climate funds to fund women's activities directly is related to scale: most funds focus on economies-of-scale in order to lower transaction costs. National climate and development plans often prioritize large energy infrastructure over more people-centered interventions. Funding structures like small grants facilities or programmes are one solution.
Liane Schalatek: It is also important to work with domestic financial intermediaries to address inherent biases that often hinder women to gain access to funding. For example, male loan officers discriminating against women or the fact that women often don't have collateral (because of a lack of formal ownership rights) to receive smaller loans for investing at the household, small business or community-level in clean energy solutions. Extending such small loans under gender-responsive near-concessional terms (lower interest rates, longer maturity, adjusted proof of collateral) is a way forward.
Coco - ClimateWire: Hi everyone, this question is for Liane Schalatek. We often hear that women lack access to climate funds. Could you kindly share some information to back up this claim? And why does this happen? Thanks.
Liane Schalatek: To Coco's question: It is correct that most climate funds were set up pretty much "gender-blind" and have only in the last few years begun to even consider gender relevant to climate finance. Only when women are recognized as important contributors to address climate change (ie, change agents) and actively sought out as relevant stakeholders are climate funds structures changing to allow more women's groups to benefit from climate finance.
Liane Schalatek: And additionally to Coco’s question: currently, most climate funds work in interaction with governments not stakeholder groups directly. Most of them primarily via UN agencies or MDBs. Direct access to funds' resources is a new access mode which the Adaptation Fund already employs, but only as direct access for governments. There are almost no structures that allow women's group direct access to funding -- they need to go via governments or through international implementing agencies (such as UN agencies or MDBs).
Jeannette Gurung: Hi Liana, Linda and Lauren, i am not able to stay online, but wanted to pose this question/point so excuse me for jumping in now: An important aspect of financing for gender within climate finance is to assure that new resources are allocated to provide benefits to women engaged in climate change mitigation and adaptation projects, to assure that we go beyond the use of existing resources already allocated for development assistance (similar to the additionally rule used in the carbon market). What new resources has the RETA project brought to support women's empowerment /gender equality, particularly in Cambodia and Laos, beyond the use of existing ADB project resources, and How has the project planned for sustainability for the women's groups that are to benefit from this project?
Linda Adams: The regional TA pilots approaches and mechanisms to support national and sub-national government ministries and departments, policy makers and climate finance decision makers to encourage better allocation of staff resources and budgetary allocations. This process of “country readiness” positions newly skilled government actors to ably respond to climate finance funds (such as the Green Climate Fund) which demand more social accountability in the use of such funds.
Linda Adams: Through adoption of gender dimensions in national and sub-national climate change strategies and action plans, and incorporation in project screening processes, the project will ensure sustainability of approach long after the project closes.
Lauren Sorkin: In response to the question from our guest about getting more from climate finance - it's true that showing women as beneficiaries is both a co-benefit and a way to ensure sustainability of interventions, in particular at the community level. So, demanding more from climate finance can be a positive for women and for ensuring long-term project impacts.
Dagmar - SNV Viet Nam: In this case "Another case of funders wanting "more bang for their buck"? " you are automatically assuming that this is not the case when women are involved. Our experience has taught us that this doesn't have to be the case. Women can deliver products and business as good as others, and in some cases even better (like in some of our WASH programs).
Natalie Harms: Unfortunately, a "more bang for the buck" approach often overlooks that there is huge emission reduction potential from household energy use, non-commercial agriculture etc. This mitigation potential is lost if we focus only on large centralised "big polluter" technologies and ignore a more people-focused approach that engages communities and women.
Lainie: Another way that I see the project ensuring sustainability is through the involvement of civil society organizations. They have been on the ground for quite some time and will be able to help with the project's sustainability.
Sari Wooster: The investment plans of the Clean Technology Fund (Climate Investment Funds) paid very little attention to gender issues and also did not specifically include the participation of civil society in their preparation (a key channel for outreach to women). Is there any indication that the Green Climate Fund will be any better?
Liane Schalatek: To Sari's question: We are hopeful that the Green Climate Fund (GCF) can do better -- actually it must do better -- than existing funds, including the CTF which is pretty much gender-blind. The GCF operational policies are currently set. In contrast to funds like the CTF, the GCF has the mandate for a "gender-sensitive approach" to mitigation and adaptation financing from its beginning. Thus, those of us involved in trying to shape the GCF policies are pushing to have gender considerations integrated in all of the GCF operational policies, for example on results management or investment criteria and by ensuring that gender equality is a consideration for project and program approval.
Natalie Harms: The Green Climate Fund shows promise, because it is the first climate fund that is mandated to take a gender-responsive approach from the outset. The GCF puts climate action in the context of sustainable development and 'transformational change' which is a huge improvement compared to previous funds. Also, there is very strong civil society pressure on operationalizing a gender-sensitive approach - there is reason to be hopeful, but only time will tell
Sari Wooster: Opportunities for women's access to climate finance seem to have been greater through REDD+ and also adaptation programs that have mitigation outcomes is there potential to expand and improve these channels for women's access?
Lauren Sorkin: To Sari's question: you highlight the principle reason for the ADB regional technical assistance to focus on building skills of policy makers - both men and women - to integrate existing women's machineries, like the Women's Union here in Vietnam in climate change mitigation policy and green growth. REDD+ and adaptation programs have more directly included women as agents of change. To build on this success, we focus on national and provincial level activities where women can be included in mitigation climate financing architecture as well as the action plans that are leveraging climate finance.
Nisha: Do we need to go beyond the existing climate finance mechanisms & work with private sectors and impact investors?
Natalie Harms: Regarding the private sector - yes, the private sector is an important source of climate finance. One of the biggest challenges is creating an enabling environment that incentivizes the private sector to invest in the 'right' technologies and projects.
Liane Schalatek: To Nisha: It is indeed important to work with the private sector, and the new Green Climate Fund will have a focused Private Sector Facility. In order to benefit women, it is crucial to focus on the segments of the private sector where women as entrepreneurs and customers are most dominantly involved in, namely primarily domestic micro, small & medium enterprises. At the moment, those segments of the private sector are often underserved by climate finance -- including provision through public climate funds.
Lauren Sorkin: On impact investing - these investors want to see projects that deliver benefits to women and quick results. What is important is to provide practical tools for measuring gender co-benefits while demonstrating lasting on the ground improvements in environment and livelihoods.
Sari Wooster: ADB study has shown that gender considerations are rare in climate finance for mitigation yet ADB has been a leader in the field of mitigation financing in the region (e.g. Clean Energy Financing Partnership, Climate Change Fund, Carbon funds). Where is the problem? Is it with ADB's processes or do the nature of large scale RE/EE projects provide little opportunity of integration of gender concerns?
Linda Adams: Part of the problem is technical silos which exist in many institutions, thus limiting ability to respond appropriately. Up until recently, another dimension of the problem has been the structure of the climate finance funds themselves - encouraging more large scale technology responses. hey have not been particularly appropriate to the everyday mitigation work of women, which often involves smaller scale low-carbon technology responses.
Lauren Sorkin: In response to Sari and Linda - careful project design is needed to capture the gender co-benefits of larger ADB projects. Often pressure to disburse funding and respond to our member countries priorities/infrastructure needs does not give adequate time to mainstream gender. In Viet Nam, the Ho Chi Minh City Metro Rail Project, which is receiving Clean Technology Fund (CTF) support, does successfully mainstream gender in its design. The team delayed processing of the loan for over half a year to ensure that gender and other social benefits were carefully considered as part of the CTF component.
Ratna: good morning all, Actually who could access those funds? government? community? or stakeholders
Liane Schalatek: To Ratna: right now most dedicated climate funds prioritize interaction with the governments, except for some private sector outreach efforts. That means communities and stakeholders receive funding usually only as a "trickle down" through funding provided to the recipient countries' governments. Direct access opportunities for communities and stakeholder groups such as women are rare. But we hope to change that. More funds are experimenting with direct access modalities. One way also could be to work with non-profit organizations to serve as "intermediaries" to help community and local groups deal with the fiduciary requirements that is often a stipulation of accessing funding.
Natalie Harms: Dear Ratna - the Green Climate Fund is planned to be accessible directly to developing countries seeking funding for climate projects. Multilateral Development Banks can play an intermediary role in this process to assist host countries in preparing proposals etc. So the Fund will be directly accessible to government agencies - these can demand more effective and equitable climate action and channel funds to the community level and to women. In the short to medium term, government agencies, bilateral cooperation agencies, MDBs etc. will assist especially LDCs to channel funding from large global funds down to the local level.
Guest: Has ADB considered scholarships and internships to take promising female community level climate advocates and assist them in reaching positions of actual decision-making influence with regards to climate finance?
Linda Adams: In response to the need for promising female community level advocates: One way the RETA is addressing the need at the level of both community and women's machineries is to develop knowledge and skills capacity so they can functionally participate at the national, subnational, and sector 'negotiating tables.'
Linda Adams: The RETA does this by capacity development training on what is climate change, what climate finance funds exist, how to develop a climate financed project, and guidance on micro-enterprise development using low carbon technologies. What we're seeing is younger colleagues in these women's machineries are engaging. They're keen to develop these skills.
Linda Adams: In response to the question about internships, at the community level, the RETA is specifically targeting women entrepreneurs with functional project development skills and also climate change and finance knowledge skills. The RETA partnership approach will support all three stakeholders - women's machineries, community representatives, and 'climate change' ministries - to engage in dialogue and strategy improvements .
Ratna: If those funds are through government, sometimes there will be gap information flow from gov to community. But, if community will access independently, they have less knowledge since most of them who have affected by CC are the poor.
Imrana: Isn't one of the reasons women's groups are unable to access direct funding because they are not seen as "accountable" financially and their governance procedures may fall short of what are perceived as international standards? Yet many women's environmental;/CC CSOs have a strong record of good governance and accountability, albeit with smaller amounts of donor funds. Some even more so than governments, who, by the way, continue to access climate and other donor funds even when they are NOT accountable, so there is a huge double standard at play as well. Higher standards are expected of CSOs and women's CC groups than that of governments.
Lauren Sorkin: In response to Imrana - you mention an unfortunate disconnect in perceptions of policy makers and the reality of women's groups ability to manage finance. Here in Viet Nam, the Women's Union has proven themselves as an excellent manager of funds. In fact, in our pilot city of Dong Hoi, the Women's Union successfully managed a revolving fund responsible for making loans to improve local sanitation. It's a model we are working to scale up through the regional technical assistance. And, it's based on women's established, well-documented track record!Dagmar - SNV Vietnam: Dear Natalie, how are you going to make sure that within the GCF the benefits do "trickle down" to the people (women) in the field? Is this only through (more careful) project design? And is the fund supporting the development of such project design or is this dependent on the applicants (the Government). As knowledge levels on gender and social inclusion are still limited, such support for project developers might be useful? (did the Metro Rail project get support in including gender issues?)
Liane Schalatek: To Dagmar: In the GCF, it will be important that a country's funding priorities communicated to the GCF will be developed through an internal coordination process that includes comprehensive and meaningful stakeholder participation. The GCF is currently trying to develop guidelines for such multi-stakeholder engagement. There is also a lot of talk about readiness and preparatory support for countries that want to access GCF funding. The inclusion of women -- women's machineries, gender experts, grassroots women - in such readiness activities is an important opportunity to also expand the understanding of what "country ownership" really means.
Lauren Sorkin: In response to Dagmar, yes the Ho Chi Minh City Metro Rail project received support from gender specialists to integrate gender.
Lean/Devex: Once these initiatives geared to impact women at the local level are implemented, what could (or should) be the indicators - in terms of monitoring and evaluation - to make sure that these climate funds are spent effectively and efficiently, while making sure these projects meet development objectives sustainably?
Natalie Harms: On M&E - yes, it is essential that gender is not only mainstreamed into project design from the outset, but that we ensure implementation. Monitoring, reporting and verification (MRV) is essential to any climate action. We need to improve the accountability of climate projects to verify gender-responsive impacts. The indicators will vary depending on the nature of the measure - some important indicators may be women's participation, the amount of time saved by using more efficient technologies, improvements in women's livelihood (income, health etc.). It's difficult to give a general answer, but MRV is essential to ensuring accountability.
Dagmar - SNV Vietnam: Thanks Liane for the information, hopefully the outcomes of the RETA will also contribute to this.
Liane Schalatek: To Lean/Devex: the question of indicators and M&E is important for ensuring that gender-sensitivity is not just a nice term but describes the way in which projects and programs get implemented. It is of course important to have indicators that are focusing on beneficiaries -- who are they? -- and look intra household, not just stop at the household level. Intra-household power dynamics must be accounted for in such indicators, for example by sex-disaggregation. Equally important is to go beyond quantitative indicators to look at PROCESSES, namely the involvement of women as crucial stakeholders throughout the project and program cycle. For example: experience of many projects shows that the outcomes are better if stakeholders -- especially women -- are involved in participatory monitoring. They know the local context and the community needs the best...
Inung: I do not clear with "trickle down" used here but i would rather use "start up" for gender activity
Natalie Harms: Dear Mas Inung, yes - we need to improve both the supply side (trickle down) and the demand side (start up). Governments and civil society can generate pressure on development cooperation agencies and climate funds by actively demanding support to climate action that generates co-benefits and really contributes to sustainable development from the bottom up.
Natalie Harms: Inung - regarding supply and demand - Projects like ADB's regional technical assistance program (RETA) and GIZ's work on climate finance readiness can support developing countries and local actors to develop their capacity to demand gender-responsive measures and their readiness to access climate funds and technical support to promote sustainable development.
Coco - ClimateWire: Okay, let’s say we get gender sensitive climate policies. How can we ensure the policies will be well implemented on the ground? For example, women’s contribution to community forestry is widely recognized and women’s leading role is often required in the policies, but in the reality, many women still do not have access to community-controlled forest resources because women there are traditionally not allowed to be decision makers. How do we avoid the same thing harming women’s access to climate finance?
Linda Adams: In response to Coco's question on moving beyond policy to ensuring implementation: in Cambodia, Lao PDR and Viet Nam we have been developing a partnership across government institutions accountable for steering climate change responses and funds and those mandated to ensure gender mainstreaming. We believe these institutional partnerships will ensure long-term implementation responses. Similarly, we have been equipping women's groups on the ground with the necessary skills to participate in subnational and sector level dialogues and voicing demand and accountability.
Karen Palmer: What is meant by "gender sensitive" or "gender responsive?" How do the funds define this? What should they be using as a definition?
Liane Schalatek: To Karen's question: Most funds have no clear definition of whether they want to be gender-sensitive, gender-responsive, or mainstream gender throughout. Usually gender-sensitivity implies an awareness of the gender-differentiated impacts and contributions men and women can make to climate change actions. However, what we want is clear language that mandates climate funds to act on that awareness, namely to be gender-responsive. Mainstreaming is certainly one way of doing this, but needs to be complemented with a strong women's empowerment focus -- including through provision of dedicated finance for that purpose.
Lauren Sorkin: A question for our chat members -- do you have examples of either top down or bottom up gender and climate projects to share? What methods are you using for monitoring and evaluation?
Guest: Responding to Lauren: For a project in Nepal the community mobilization and M&E part is entirely subcontracted to local NGOs. Although they are free to propose their own M&E methodology, we have asked that they report on impacts to women's work burden (we are hoping the adaptation technology will contribute to less time collecting fuel wood, less time preparing fields), women's budgets (we are hoping the technology will lead to less outlay on fertilzer and higher crop yeilds)and women's organization (involvement in the project will foster female farmers comparing techniques and results where before they were more isolated).
Lainie: To Lauren- although I don't have specific gender or climate projects to share, there are excellent models of bottom up monitoring here in the Philippines where 260 local civil society organizations are keeping tabs on the Conditional Cash Transfer project through a formal structure supported by the Department of Social Welfare and Development. What makes it work is that it's very local groups who know what is happening on the ground who are keeping an eye on the project. This model could be easily adapted to gender projects.
Nika: Hi, I would just ask about these funds. Particularly how much do they account as of now? Any estimates or figures to know how much the climate fund is? And how about the recently struck Philippines with Typhoon Haiyan? How limited is the Filipino women's access to these funds? Thank you.
Liane Schalatek: To Nika: Currently the global climate finance architecture is prioritizing spending on mitigation over spending on adaptation (roughly 70% to 30% for public dedicated climate finance, even worse if private funding is coming in play with roughly 95% going to mitigation and only 5% to adaptation). The most vulnerable countries (Small Island Developing States, Least Developed Countries) receive still relatively little, but the share of adaptation financing is increasing slowly (needs to be faster, of course). In the Green Climate Fund, the Board at its recent meeting has confirmed that it will spend half of its money on adaptation, and is aiming to reserve half of the adaptation financing for the most vulnerable countries. Obviously, it would be great if allocation frameworks could also target vulnerable groups WITHIN countries, not just among vulnerable country groups.
Sonomi: Going back to the question of the gender language, although I use "gender-sensitive" or "responsive" or "inclusive" design as an entry point and to obtain support from the non gender supporters, we also need a more targeted approach for "women's empowerment". Funds that are earmarked for women's use to deal with climate change - I think we need to clearly push this forward, not just "gender-sensitive" design of infrastructure, and technology.
Inung: Thanks Natalie, for M&E in our project (PAKLIM GIZ)we still use participation as main and practicable indicator but for sure it is too simple and not always associated with equal access. is there any advance experience?
Natalie Harms: Dear Mas Inung - I agree, participation is important, but not sufficient. Climate measures need to move away from a 'do no harm' and an 'invite some women to participate' approach to a more ambitious approach that identifies women as stakeholders and agents of change and also monitors the impact of co-benefits, including the significant improvement of gender equality.
Coco - ClimateWire: Thanks Linda. Could you also please tell us a bit more about the situation in Cambodia, Lao PDR and Viet Nam? How serious is the problem (women lack access to climate finance) there? Hope to learn your on-the-ground experience.
Lauren Sorkin: In response to Coco's question: In Viet Nam, the references to women in climate strategy and projects are most often associated with reducing vulnerability and community based adaptation. Therefore, most of the funding follows, providing training in disaster preparedness or adaptation planning. These are reactive rather than proactive ways women access climate finance. However, as Dagmar from SNV Viet Nam also mentioned earlier, we have proof that women can successfully manage projects - like upgrading water and sanitation systems - that contribute to climate change mitigation. So, it's important that we revisit climate policy and project design tools to be proactive in helping women access more mitigation related finance.
Ratna: Dear Natalie, we in Indonesia, have assisted some communities to analyzed their priority need to face CC by integrating gender sensitivity. Nevertheless it is still difficult to implement those actions/program through climate funds. Related to RETA, does it mean that RETA is possibly guide us / community to acceSs GCF? Or in this case who will be targets of RETA?
Linda Adams: In response to Ratna's query, one of the outcomes of the RETA isto provide lessons learned and share mechanisms, tools, and institutional approaches to support implementation. We are currently finalizing a policy brief with specific recommendations and training modules on gender and climate finance for publication.
Coco - ClimateWire: A follow-up question after Nika's question: do we have an idea how many percentage of climate fund actually flows to women-led climate activities? Thanks
Liane Schalatek: To Coco: unfortunately we don't have any clear accounting of how much money flows to women-led climate action. Main reason is that there has so far been no mandate in individual funds to try and do a gender audit of climate financing spent. Globally, the OECD could probably give an approximation (although there might be some double-counting) of how much OECD development funding is tagged as both either mitigation or adaptation relevant official development assistance (through the Rio Markers) and contributing to gender-equality (through the OECD gender marker); but unfortunately not even that has been attempted yet. It would be great for the Green Climate Fund to begin its disbursement with a clear commitment to track how much of its funding and how effectively it contributes to gender-equal climate action. We are pushing on this.
Natalie Harms: Dear Coco - good question. There is no easy answer. One huge challenge is the lack of accountability. There are no gender auditing mechanisms in place for climate funds that take a systematic approach at reviewing all climate projects. There are no reliable data regarding how many climate projects are actually gender responsive and how many mitigation projects out there impact women positively. In a forth-coming ADB policy brief we review some of the climate finance mechanisms and conclude that we urgently need a more systematic and ambitious approach to counting robust gender responsive climate measures. There have been audits e.g. of the CIF, but these do not amount to much more than counting how many projects merely reference gender in some way... which does not tell us how much money actually flows toward empowering women as agents of change... there is still much work to be done here!
Nika: I see. Thank you for your insights, Lainie and Liane.
Nisha: We also have work in Nepal, can you share which organization you belong to and the projects in nepal. Thanks
Imrana: Thanks for providing an excellent example of the genre Lauren! Thanks for hosting this excellent live chat during Gender Month at ADB. Great contribution Linda, Lauren, Natalie & Liane. Thank you!!
Linda Adams: Thank you for everyone's active participation and sharing common challenges. It's great to see the critical mass on the ground and the upstream policy changes that are to come!
Natalie Harms: I wish we had more time to discuss this issue with all of you - we are sorry if we weren't able to answer all of your questions. The level of participation in the chat shows that there is increasing demand in implementing gender-responsive climate action and making climate funds more accessible to tap women's potential for effective and inclusive mitigation. Thank you everyone, keep fighting for better climate change action!
Liane Schalatek: Dear all -- thanks so much for all of your great questions. If you are interested on some of our work on integrating gender into the Green Climate Fund's ongoing operationalization, you'll find some information at: http://www.boell.org/web/140.html. Thanks to the organizers for allowing me to be a part of this chat -- I just hope we could do that again in person over a nice cup of tea or coffee next time ;-)
Lauren Sorkin: Thanks again to everyone for your contributions today. Let's keep in touch and keep working together to increase women's access to climate finance.
Karen Palmer: I want to thank everyone for joining us today - especially participants joining from early morning time zones! A transcript of this conversation will be posted to ADB's website within the day.