How not to fill the gap: Blended finance and climate justice
ギャップを埋めない方法：ブレンデッド・ファイナンスと気候正義 (AI 翻訳)
Richard Endörfer, Fausto Corvino
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
本論文は、気候資金ギャップを埋める手段として注目されるブレンデッド・ファイナンス（BF）が、気候正義の中心的な公平性の考慮事項に違反する可能性を指摘する。BFは公共資源を使って投資リスクを軽減するが、利益追求が不可避であり、発展途上国の市民から先進国の民間投資家への不公平な資金流動を生み出す。著者らは、民間資金に頼る前に発展途上国の財政余地を拡大する政策アプローチを提唱している。
English
This paper argues that blended finance (BF), promoted to close the climate finance gap, risks violating core climate justice principles by requiring profitability, which generates unfair financial flows from developing to developed countries. The authors advocate for enhancing developing countries' fiscal space before turning to private finance.
Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.
📝 gxceed 編集解説 — Why this matters
日本のGX文脈において
日本ではトランジション・ファイナンスの議論が進むが、本論文は民間資金活用の前提条件としての公正性を問う。SSBJやESG開示の枠組みにおいても、資金の流れの方向性と正義の観点は今後の政策検討で重要になる可能性がある。
In the global GX context
This paper contributes to the global debate on climate finance architecture, challenging the narrative that blended finance is a neutral tool. It adds a justice perspective to the TCFD/ISSB and transition finance discussions, urging policymakers to consider equity in financial flows.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:Provides a justice-based critique of blended finance, relevant for scholars in climate finance and political economy.
🏛政策担当者:Policymakers should note the fairness concerns raised about using public funds to de-risk private investments in developing countries.
📄 Abstract（原文）
Policymakers worldwide currently share the general consensus that filling the climate finance gap will require attracting private investments. In this article, we discuss a family of instruments aimed at achieving this goal, so-called Blended Finance (BF) instruments. BF uses public resources to improve the risk/reward profile of relevant mitigation and adaptation projects in order to render them vastly more attractive to private investors. Political economy and critical macrofinance scholars have generally taken a critical stance towards BF. We contribute to this debate by arguing that BF also threatens to violate central climate justice-relevant fairness considerations. In particular, we claim that because BF inherently requires supported projects to be profitable, it unfairly generates financial flows from citizens in developing countries to private investors in developed countries. This contradicts central fairness requirements of plausible climate justice approaches, which necessitate that net financial flows move in precisely the opposite direction, from developed to developing countries. We discuss various objections to our argument and finally end by defending a policy approach aimed at increasing the fiscal space of developing countries before turning to private finance, which we consider much more likely to preserve climate justice.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- openalex https://doi.org/10.1177/09632719261456342first seen 2026-07-08 04:59:29
🔔 こうした論文の新着を逃したくない方は キーワードアラート に登録（無料・3キーワードまで）。
gxceed は公開メタデータに基づく研究支援データセットです。要約・翻訳・解説は AI 支援で生成されています。 最終的な解釈・検証は利用者が原典資料に基づいて行うことを前提とします。