Understanding the Contribution of the Green Climate Fund (GCF) in Mangrove Forest Conservation: A Case Study on Sundarbans Mangrove Forest, Bangladesh

Abstract

The Green Climate Fund (GCF) is mandated to undertake evidence-based and impactful climate change mitigation/adaptation projects in vulnerable countries. However, project effectiveness has often been questioned by some experts and countries. This study investigates recent trends and characteristics of GCF funding practices with the focus on project cost-effectiveness. Data were collected from GCF’s single-country project documents from 2016 to 2023. Given the potential contribution mangrove forest-rich tropical countries like Bangladesh can make to CO₂ emission reduction through forest conservation, this research attempts to highlight forest/mangrove-related projects. These data were then analyzed by sectors, project themes, financing types, and cost-effectiveness in terms of local economic benefits and CO₂ emission reduction. This investigation revealed that among a total of USD 7.5 billion GCF investment or 187 single-country projects for 89 countries, the investment in forests and land use was found to be one of the most cost effective among other sectors for both adaptation and mitigation although only six dedicated mangrove forest projects were undertaken. Despite the 50-50 rule for funding mitigation and adaptation efforts, GCF projects were focused more on mitigation, especially the energy sector. For Bangladesh, the third largest GCF investment destination in Asia after Mongolia and India, the conservation of the Sundarbans mangrove forest, the largest in the world, received only scant attention whereas vegetation reduction has raised serious concerns in the area. Two GCF projects that are relevant to Bangladesh’s mangrove-dependent communities emphasized livelihood developments for non-mangrove-dependent communities.

1. Introduction

The Green Climate Fund (GCF), a financial mechanism for the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), is mandated to meet specific needs of developing countries. Although good outcomes have been much anticipated, its projects have met various challenges [1,2,3,4,5,6,7]. For example, in terms of mitigation through tree planting, only 56% of GCF allocations were effectively disbursed so far [8], whereas the Paris Agreement made an annual afforestation target for about 24 million hectares of land from 2019 to 2030 [9]. In fact, there have been many missed opportunities from developing countries’ perspectives as the global climate finance mechanism has not shown much commitment to enhancing afforestation or forest conservation [10]. In climate-vulnerable developing nations of the Asia-Pacific region with large areas of mangrove forests, such as Bangladesh, Indonesia, Myanmar, and Malaysia, mangrove forest conservation has been one of the most important areas to contribute to global climate change mitigation and biodiversity conservation; on the contrary, 64% of the global mangrove depletion occurred from 1996 to 2020 [11].

Having Asia’s fourth largest mangrove area [12], Bangladesh has gained the world’s attention in terms of its carbon sequestration contribution through the conservation of the world’s largest mangrove forest. The Sundarbans mangrove forest in Bangladesh covers 602,000 hectares [13,14], about ten times as large as the City of Chicago, the US. Sundarbans wetland, which encompasses Bangladesh and India, was listed as a Ramsar site in 1992 [15] and a World Heritage site in 1997 along with several other protected area designations [16]. According to the 2009–2010 government carbon census, Bangladesh’s Sundarbans alone captured 105.6 megatons of carbon, whereas all other eight protected areas captured 8.17 megatons of carbon [17,18].

The Bangladesh Sundarbans forest is strictly protected from any developments, but some studies have shown that agriculture, aquaculture, and coastal development had expanded from neighbouring areas into the forest [19,20,21]. There are reported cases of human–wildlife conflicts and solid waste discharge due largely to tourism. Salinity increases, cyclones, and sea level rise further threaten the health of the mangroves [22]. The salinity has caused woody vegetation loss in the whole Sundarbans wetland area [23]. Cyclones have displaced villagers with loss and damage of assets and some lives [24,25]. There is also the widespread prevalence of White Spot Disease in coastal areas, especially near the forest, devastating shrimp aquaculture [26].

Bangladesh established a policy framework for climate finance, “Bangladesh Climate Fiscal Framework 2020” [27], and the Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) under the Paris Agreement [28]. Despite these efforts, it is not yet clear the extent to which these efforts have led to expected results. Hence, this research aims to investigate the contribution of GCF funding for the conservation of the Sundarbans compared to the overall contribution of GCF portfolio efforts in selected result areas.

In the following discussion, this study briefly discusses how the GCF funding mechanism works for fund management and allocation. Then, we discuss the results of our cost-effectiveness analysis of mangrove conservation-related GCF projects that were and are undertaken in Bangladesh’s Sundarbans.

2. Framework of the Green Climate Fund

The decisions for approving GCF single-country and multiple-country projects are made by a 24-member board in the GCF headquarters that is located in Songdu, the Republic of Korea [29]. The members are selected from 194 member states [30]. Half of them come from developing countries, including the Least Developed Countries (LDC), Small Island Developing States (SIDS), and Africa [31]. The first board meeting was held in 2012.

Figure 1 shows the simplified single-country project approval process [32]. In the first step, a recipient country or Direct Access Entity (DAE), which has direct access to the GCF secretariat, drafts a concept note using a specified template. The note is sent to the GCF Secretariat through the Nationally Designated Authority (NDA) [33]. Then, a funding proposal is developed with GCF’s technical assistance. After completing the proposal by following GCF’s funding proposal template, it is sent to the Secretariat through the NDA [34]. When investment criteria and policies are matched, the GCF Secretariat forwards it to the GCF Board to discuss in its meetings. The board members review the proposals in reference to the country’s National Plan on Adaptation (NAPA), Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC), Sustainable Development Goals (SDG), and GCF rules. It approves the proposal if everything is satisfactory [35,36].

The GCF receives funding to implement projects, especially from developed countries, such as the US, Japan, France, Germany, and Sweden [37]. As of December 2023, 34 countries had contributed to the fund. This number fluctuates as all member countries do not have defined financing obligations [38]. The US, for example, halted climate finance contribution in 2014 [39]. From 2016 to December 2023, the EU countries provided USD 9986.8 million, and the US contributed USD 3000 million [40]. Similarly, Japan provided USD 1500 million. The Republic of Korea, the only developing country donor, provided USD 200 million.

Figure 2 shows the flow of screening the single-country mangrove projects. As of December 2023, GCF invested in 243 projects, of which 187 were single-country projects. The rest were undertaken as multiple country projects. Data from multiple country projects were excluded in this study, as there was no such mangrove-focused development projects from 2016 to 2023. Among these single-country projects, 36 were categorized as forests and land use, only six of them focused on mangroves in India, Vietnam, Cuba, Senegal, Gambia, and Guinea Bissau [41].

3. Methodology

3.1. Study Area

In comparison to other Asian countries, Bangladesh received the third highest amount of GCF investment after Mongolia and India in grant, loan, equity or other forms of funding (Figure 3). India received USD 514.7 million, and Mongolia received USD 408.5 million under the above-mentioned modes of GCF investment. The ratio for grant and loan stands at 1:0.25, 1:0.08, 1:1.5, 1:1.6, and 1:1.3 in favour of Pakistan, Indonesia, Bangladesh, Mongolia, and India, respectively. Bangladesh and Mongolia were the least developed countries (LDC) that received more loans than grants.

The Sundarbans mangrove forest is situated in the south-western coast of Bangladesh (Figure 4). Ganges-Padma River systems run through the Sundarbans, branching into many channels. It is located between latitude 21°27′30″ and 22°30′00″ north and longitude 89°02′00″ and 90°00′00″ east. It covers a total land area of 601,672 ha, including 414,259 ha (70%) of mangrove reserve forest and 187,413 ha of open water bodies (30%) [42].

Local people in adjacent villages harvest non-timber forest products (NTFP). In 2014, for example, NTFP harvest in the Sundarbans focused on fish/dry fish and thatching material collection [43]. More recently, local people have emphasized processed items like dry fish and honey. A few other studies showed the importance of fisheries and honey collection for those living near the Sundarbans [44,45]. Recent natural disasters affected these businesses as road infrastructure was severely damaged, severing market access. This was one of the reasons local people began shifting more towards processing [46]. The Bangladesh Forest Department collects entrance fees from forest-dependent communities when they harvest fish, crabs, and thatching materials [47,48].

The Sundarbans mangrove forest is home to 334 flora species, including 165 algae and 13 orchid species. It is dominated by halophytic trees, such as, sundri (Heritiera fomes), gewa (Excoecaria agallocha), goran (Ceriops decandra), baen (Avicennia officinalis), and keora (Sonneratia apetala) [42]. In terms of fauna, there are 339 birds, 237 fish, 58 reptiles, 41 mammal, and 10 amphibian species that have been identified so far [49]. This biodiversity has met increasing human pressure with about 3.5 million people currently being dependent on forest ecosystem services in one way or another [50].

Other than the GCF, to conserve the mangroves, the Bangladesh government has received support from various donors [51]. The Global Environment Facility [52], for example, invested USD 12.2 million from 1998 to 2005 in Sundarbans conservation with the emphasis on livelihood development. Along with its numerical goals of a 30% increase in average household income, this project attempted to improve biodiversity, institutional capacity at the Bangladesh Forest Department, and ecotourism management. The World Bank credited USD 175 million from 2019 to 2024 to make mangrove plantation of 79,000 ha in newly formed islands and degraded mangrove areas of the Sundarbans under Sustainable Forest and Livelihoods (SUFAL) project [53]. It intended to enhance institutional capacity in handling livelihood improvement among residents, including those who depend on mangrove forests for livelihoods [54]. From available information sources, it is not yet clear what impact this project has made in improving Sundarbans area residents or biodiversity enhancement there.

3.2. Materials and Data Source

We collected information about GCF single-country investments. The GCF data contain investment mode, project duration, beneficiaries, emission reduction targets, project approval times, and specific result areas. These sources are recognized as credible and trustworthy for research activities [55]. This set of data allowed us to investigate allocation and funding trends as well as fund allocation modalities, such as loans, grants, guarantees, equities, and result-based payments [56].

The GCF investment was divided into eight result areas: (1) health, food, and water security; (2) livelihood of peoples and communities; (3) energy generation and access; (4) transport; (5) infrastructure and built environment; (6) ecosystem and ecosystem services; (7) buildings, cities, and appliances; and (8) forest and land use [57]. From the project document of each project, the result area was identified. Then, the total amount of investment in different result areas was calculated and shown in the bar graph.

We calculated the cost effectiveness of GCF investment on a monetary basis. Each project document shows the amount of carbon reduction and the number of beneficiaries. Regarding mitigation projects, we attempted to find the investment cost to reduce per metric ton carbon dioxide equivalent (MtCO₂eq) emissions. Co-finance from the host country, either in-kind or in-cash, was not considered. The aim was to find cost effectiveness of GCF single-country projects. Identifying the cost of carbon dioxide equivalent does not involve complex economic models [58]. Therefore, we adopted the procedure followed by the World Bank [59]:

$$\mathrm{Cost}\mathrm{effectiveness}\mathrm{of}\mathrm{mitigation}\mathrm{project}={\displaystyle \frac{\sum \mathrm{Mitigation}\mathrm{project}\mathrm{cost}\left(\mathrm{U}\mathrm{S}\mathrm{D}\right)}{\sum \mathrm{Emission}\mathrm{reduction}\left({\mathrm{M}\mathrm{t}\mathrm{C}\mathrm{O}}_2\mathrm{e}\mathrm{q}\right)}}$$

(1)

Similarly, each adaptation project includes the number of US dollars spent to benefit per person. As cross-cutting projects include both adaptation and mitigation, they were calculated in both areas. Following the first formula, we calculated investment costs to benefit per beneficiary in US dollars:

$$\mathrm{Cost}\mathrm{effectiveness}\mathrm{of}\mathrm{adaptation}\mathrm{project}={\displaystyle \frac{\sum \mathrm{Adaptation}\mathrm{project}\mathrm{cost}\left(\mathrm{U}\mathrm{S}\mathrm{D}\right)}{\sum \mathrm{Beneficiary}\mathrm{number}}}$$

(2)

We then examined a trend and characteristics of GCF investment in Bangladesh. We compared the amount and mode of investment to get a comparative scenario. We calculated the overall investment in single-country projects in Bangladesh. From the project document, we identified two projects that aimed to develop coastal livelihoods, including Sundarbans-dependent people.

4. Results and Discussion

4.1. GCF Allocation Profile and Funding Trend

GCF disbursed USD 7.5 billion for 187 single-country projects in 89 countries, of which the private sector allocation amounted to USD 2.6 billion for 54 projects. These included adaptation, mitigation, and cross-cutting themes. An overall investment in mitigation (USD 3 billion) was higher than that in adaptation (USD 2.5 billion) (Figure 5). Cross-cutting projects amounted to USD 2 billion. Despite the 50-50 rule for a mitigation-adaptation project theme balance, the actual higher emphasis on mitigation was attributable to GCF’s infrastructure development focus, such as light rail transit construction in Costa Rica [60]. Developed countries tend to focus on mitigation efforts in terms of budget allocation [61].

Considering the mode of investment, we found a significant emphasis on grants (51%) rather than loans (34%). An earlier study found GCF’s investment trends with somewhat more balanced focus on grants (44%) and loans (44%) [35]. The loans tend to be given to income-generating projects, such as renewable energy generation [62]. Loans are divided into high-concessional and low-concessional forms with up to 0.75% interest rates and an annual service fee of up to 0.5% [63]. The Paris Agreement (Article 9 [4]) highlighted the importance of grant-based support for vulnerable Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and Small Island Developing States (SIDS) [64]. The UN Environment (2019) showed that mangrove forest area change was highest (26%) among all types of forest lands under grants [65].

As mentioned above, GCF single-country projects fall under eight result areas. From 2016 to 2023, the GCF tended to emphasize energy generation/access (25%), forest/land use (24%), and infrastructure (15%). Here, the forest/land use category includes agriculture, livestock, and plantation activities. Similarly, the construction activities are divided into building, infrastructure, and health result areas.

In terms of investment amount by sector, the GCF contributed about USD 1901 million to the energy sector and USD 1854 million to the forest/land use sector (Figure 6). The forest/land sector spending included USD 134.8 million for mangroves and USD 554.4 million for agriculture, livestock, aquaculture, and others. The mangrove forest investment was distributed for six mangrove projects in India, Vietnam, Cuba, Senegal, Gambia, and Guinea Bissau. Despite being home to the world’s largest mangrove forest, Bangladesh was not included.

4.2. Cost Effectiveness of GCF Forest Projects

Our cost–benefit analysis attempted to understand how much GCF investment in US dollars contributed positively to per MtCO₂eq emission reduction and how many persons benefited (

Table 1. Local benefit and emission reduction cost for US dollars invested under GCF projects.

Result Areas	Adaptation Projects: Investment Cost to Benefit Per Person (USD)	Mitigation Projects: Investment Cost to Reduce Per MtCO2eq Emission (USD)
Health, food, and water security	3.87	10.67
The livelihood of people and community	6.68	8.87
Energy generation and access	18.96	1.70
Transport	-	26.41
Infrastructure and built environment	18.25	26
Ecosystem and ecosystem services	6.61	3.75
Buildings, cities, and appliances	461.93	24.74
Forest and land use	3.61	4.34

). We found that the forest and land use sector result area demonstrated the lowest investment cost to benefit per local person. However, each forest/land project needed USD 4.34 to reduce per MtCO₂eq of emission. Similarly, ecosystems/ecosystem services are cost-efficient options for both per capita benefit and per MtCO₂eq emission.

On the contrary, the energy generation sector showed a lower cost for emission reduction (USD 1.70 per MtCO₂eq reduction), but a higher cost to benefit people (USD 18.96 per person). The investment in buildings, cities, appliances, and transport proved expensive for reducing emissions (USD 24–26) and benefiting people (USD 461.93). Compared to all areas of results, we found that the forest and land use result area provided the highest climate mitigation and adaptation benefits on investment per dollar spent for emission reduction and benefits to local people.

Our investigation also found that the GCF funded 36 forest-related projects from 2016 to 2023 with an estimated beneficiary of 81.6 million people. Among these, there were six mangrove projects that meant to improve the livelihoods of 43.2 million local people or 53% of all forest beneficiaries. For example, one of these projects, “Enhancing climate resilience of India’s coastal communities (FP 084)”, attempted to develop local livelihood options through the conservation of mangroves and seagrass. This resulted in positive impacts by restoring mangrove and wetland ecosystems, covering 1733.91 hectares through community engagement since 2019 [66]. This effort covered Odisha and Maharashtra states, but India’s Sundarbans was not included.

The carbon removal in mangrove projects was estimated at 5.6 million tons. This amount was insignificant in comparison with other tropical forest projects (

Table 2. Project benefits of mangrove and other forests.

Area	Number of Projects	Emission Reduction (Total MtCO2eq)	Benefits to Locals (in Millions)
Mangrove	6	5.6	43.2
Other tropical forests	30	433	38.4
Total	36	438.6	81.6

). These mangrove-related projects focused on adaptation; therefore, cost per MtCO₂eq emission was not calculated.

4.3. GCF Project Trend and Characteristics in Bangladesh

We examined the trends and characteristics of Bangladesh’s GCF projects (

Table 3. GCF projects in Bangladesh according to theme, financing type, and target sector.

Project (ID) (Year)	Amount (Million USD)	Grant (Million USD)	Loan (Million USD)	Theme	Financing Sector
Promoting private sector investment through large scale adoption of energy saving technologies and equipment for textile and ready-made garment (RMG) sectors of Bangladesh (FP 150) (2020–2032)	256.5	6.5	250	Mitigation	Private
Extended community climate change project-drought (ECCCP-Drought) (SAP 026) (2023–2027)	25	25		Adaptation	Public
Resilient homestead and livelihood support to the vulnerable coastal people of Bangladesh (RHL) (FP 206) (2023–2028)	42	42		Adaptation	Public
Extended community climate change project-flood (ECCCP-Flood) (SAP 008) (2019–2024)	9.7	9.7		Adaptation	Public
Enhancing adaptive capacities of coastal communities, especially women, to cope with climate change-induced salinity (FP 069) (2018–2026)	25	25		Adaptation	Public
Climate resilient infrastructure mainstreaming (CRIM) (FP 004) (2018–2024)	40	40		Adaptation	Public
Global clean cooking program-Bangladesh (FP 070) (2019–2023)	20	20		Cross-cutting	Public
Total	418.2	168.2	250

). We found seven single-country projects for Bangladesh with a total amount of USD 418.2 million from March 2018 to October 2023. Of these projects, USD 250 million was granted as loans and USD 168.2 million as grants. In terms of themes, five were adaptation, one for mitigation, and another for cross-cutting. An unusual aspect of Bangladesh projects was the focus on the private sector, which received USD 256.5 million (61%) for energy saving efforts in textile and the ready-made garment (RMG) sector whereas the GCF tends to approve single-country projects to the public sector (84%).

Involving the private sector was partly due to Bangladesh’s rising external debt in the public sector. Even though its outstanding external public and publicly guaranteed debt amounted at USD 79 billion in December 2023, it was still 17% of Bangladesh’s GDP, not so significant compared to other developing countries [67]. This said, a shift to the private sector might have been motivated behind this background as well as increasingly liberalizing and growing private sector capacity, especially the garment sector, the second largest in the world after China.

One of the most recent and important mangrove-related projects is “Resilient homestead and livelihood support to the vulnerable coastal people of Bangladesh (FP 206) [68]”. It was approved in July 2023 and is expected to be completed in August 2028, with the projected value of USD 50 million (of which, USD 42.2 million is a GCF loan) with 1.1 million beneficiaries in 7 districts, including the Sundarbans mangrove forest area and Sundarbans-dependent people. This is managed by the Palli Karma-Sahayak Foundation (PKSF), a national public sector direct access entity (DAE), which was established by the Bangladesh government in 1989 for poverty alleviation and other related purposes [69,70]. The PKSF received the first disbursement in September 2023.

This on-going GCF project was branched into several initiatives. All were to be implemented with the facilitation of project implementation entities that were selected by the PKSF. In January 2024, the PKSF approved 14 partner organizations. These initiatives would focus on various activities, such as benefiting vulnerable people/communities, improving their health/well-being/food-water security, and enhancing infrastructure/built environment. In particular, the fund was to be spent for building 3000 climate-resilient houses, establishing 50 crab hatcheries, hiring 2250 crab collectors (half of whom will be women) in juvenile crab rearing, and supporting 90,000 tertiary-level crab farmers (50% women) in producing export-quality crabs. In terms of food security, it would also enhance traditional farming practices and introduce saline-tolerant vegetables within homestead areas. It also involved the construction of scattered houses for sheep and goats. Capacity building was emphasized in terms of improving effective training manuals on adaptation technologies and crab value chain. Although the area is exposed to natural calamities, this project increased the adaptive capacity of beneficiaries through livelihood development trainings and improved finance management. In this project, the GCF grant included USD 45 per person allocation for livelihood support.

Another project, “Enhancing adaptive capacities of coastal communities, especially women, to cope with climate change induced salinity (FP 069)”, was approved in March 2018. It is to be completed by the end of June 2026 with the projected value of USD 33 million (of which, about USD 25 million is GCF loan) and about 720,000 beneficiaries (about 245,516 direct and 473,713 indirect) in Satkhira and Khulna districts [71]. It aimed to provide year-round safe drinking water to overcome the impact of salinity intrusion and social vulnerabilities, such as welfare and safety for women and girls. This project area includes two Sundarbans districts, mostly with the focus on coastal agricultural communities.

According to the 2024 progress report, this project had reached 100% of its beneficiaries despite COVID-19 pandemic interruptions. The report claims to have fully established rainwater harvesting systems for domestic purposes. More than 1000 female livelihood groups or about 25,425 beneficiaries received multiple adaptation option training, which resulted into more than 84% of income generation (or USD 41,803) in 2023. In terms of capacity building, the project so far has resulted in the creation of 39 social audit committees in 39 unions (smallest administrative unit in Bangladesh). These actions were undertaken by such NGOs as the Bangladesh Rural Advancement Committee, Dusthya Shasthya Kendra, and the Centre for Natural Resources Studies, showcasing Bangladesh’s enhanced localized aid organization capacity. A grant of USD 45.88 per person was distributed.

Another project, “Climate Resilient Sustainable Coastal Forestry in Bangladesh”, has been planned. The Forest Department prepared this draft, in which it explained its intention of increasing the overall mangrove forest coverage, reducing mangrove degradation, improving social conditions of coastal communities, and enhancing ecosystem services for storm impact alleviation [72]. In terms of project benefits, it is expected to reduce 80 MtCO₂eq and benefit 10 million local people by 2050 with the GCF investment of USD 60 million. This is a cross-cutting project that would invest USD 0.75 for per MtCO₂eq reduction, and USD 6 for per person benefit. It is necessary to simplify the investment process that involves ecosystem-based adaptation (EbA) through mangrove forests and associated wetlands development.

Zou and Ockenden (2016) identified effective tracking and monitoring of climate finance through outcomes [73]. The mangrove forests played a pivotal role by providing both mitigation and adaptation benefits through ecosystem services [74]. Therefore, investment in mangrove forests, such as the Sundarbans can ensure transparency through tracking the carbon capture. In a similar vein, investment in measures for salinity control, mangrove plantation, and the conservation of endangered species and migratory birds can leave long-term outcomes through monitoring the GCF finance flow. In contrast, the GCF tended to invest in the construction of artificial sea walls instead of mangrove conservation when biodiversity and livelihood benefits are proven essential [7].

5. Conclusions

This study examined trends and characteristics of GCF projects with a focus on their cost effectiveness. Among 89 GCF single-country projects, one-third conserved forests, of which only six focused on mangrove forests. The GCF investment mainly focused on the energy sector. The forest/land use sector received USD 1854 million, of which USD 134.8 million was spent for mangroves. So far, no project specifically focuses on the Sundarbans mangrove forest, even though it is the largest in the world with several international conservation designations, including World Heritage and Ramsar. This trend has not given good incentives for Bangladesh and other mangrove/forest-rich countries to further scale up carbon emission reduction efforts through mangrove conservation.

Our cost-effectiveness analysis showed that the forest and land use sector and ecosystem/ecosystem services were relatively more cost effective than other sectors for both per capita benefit and per MtCO₂eq emission. In contrast, the energy generation sector showed a lower cost for emission reduction but a higher per capita cost. The investment in infrastructure (e.g., buildings, transport) proved to be more expensive for both reducing emissions and benefiting people. We showed that 36 forest-related GCF-funded projects already benefited 81.6 million people, of which six mangrove-related projects improved the livelihoods of 43.2 million local people or 53% of all forest beneficiaries.

We also showed that GCF-funded projects in Bangladesh were undertaken effectively. As one example, the project, “Enhancing adaptive capacities of coastal communities, especially women to cope with climate change induced salinity,” quickly reached 100% of its target beneficiaries despite COVID-19 pandemic interruptions. It resulted in more than 1000 female livelihood groups or about 25,424 beneficiaries and the income generation of USD 41,803 in five years.

Despite these cost-effective outcomes from forest/land use-related projects, recent GCF projects tend to place more emphasis on the energy sector and livelihood developments. More recently, one project was approved in December 2023 to boost mangrove protection in Dominica and Mozambique, but the process towards the implementation appears to have stagnated, even though GCF CFO/COO Hong Paterson did acknowledge the importance of mangrove conservation and restoration in his statement about this project approval. Thus, the fundamental question remains as to how international donor loans and grants can be more effectively allocated and spent in forest/mangrove-rich developing countries in the future. We need more detailed analyses about the decision-making process at the GCF and other international donor organizations in addition to the examination of capacity-building in developing countries.