Bangladesh’s climate finance priorities at SB62: A push for grants, equity and direct access

As over 5,000 delegates gather in Bonn for the 62nd session of the Subsidiary Bodies (SB62), Bangladesh is taking a strong stance on climate finance, advocating for grant-based funding, increased adaptation support, and fair access for vulnerable nations. The Climate Watch spoke with Professor A.K.M. Saiful Islam, one of Bangladesh’s official negotiators at SB62 and a climate scientist from the Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology (BUET), who has contributed to multiple IPCC reports. In this exclusive interview, he outlines Bangladesh’s priorities and expectations from the talks.

What are Bangladesh’s key priorities regarding climate finance at SB62?

At SB62, our delegation is focused on six main areas: climate finance, adaptation, access to funding, operationalizing loss and damage finance, institutional strengthening, and a just transition. Our top priority is to double adaptation funding by 2025 and beyond, ensuring that this support comes as grants—not loans—to prevent future debt burdens for vulnerable countries like Bangladesh.

We’re also advocating for a balanced allocation of finance, with a 50:50 split between mitigation and adaptation, and insisting that these funds be new and additional—not repurposed from existing commitments. Access is another key issue; we are calling for simplified and faster delivery mechanisms through Direct Access Entities (DAEs).

Equally important is ensuring that the Loss and Damage Fund becomes fully operational with clear, predictable, and timely disbursement modalities. Finally, we want the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) to include loss and damage as a core component, with equitable and transparent allocation criteria for the most vulnerable countries.

How is Bangladesh advocating for grant-based finance over loans?

We are strongly pushing for grant-based finance for adaptation and loss and damage, while allowing limited space for concessional loans in mitigation if necessary. Bangladesh, alongside partners in the G77, Least Developed Countries (LDCs), and Climate Vulnerable Forum (CVF), is united in this stance.

Specifically, we are demanding that 100% of adaptation finance be delivered as non-repayable grants, to avoid further debt for climate-affected nations. We’re also pushing for substantial replenishment of multilateral adaptation funds such as the Green Climate Fund (GCF) and Adaptation Fund starting in 2025.

We are framing this as a matter of justice, not charity. Adaptation and loss and damage finance are not business investments—they are a compensatory obligation to address the consequences of emissions produced primarily by others.

Is Bangladesh pushing for improvements in the quality of climate finance, such as transparency and predictability?

Yes, very much so. Bangladesh has made significant progress under the Enhanced Transparency Framework (ETF) of the Paris Agreement. We’ve developed national Monitoring, Reporting, and Verification (MRV) systems that integrate climate finance tracking with data on greenhouse gas emissions, mitigation, and adaptation.

Civil society groups, such as Transparency International Bangladesh (TIB), have also advised our team to press for greater transparency and accountability in how climate finance—especially grants—is governed and delivered.

At COP29, we emphasized the need for public finance to be the core of the NCQG, and that at least 20% of it should be routed through trusted UNFCCC financial mechanisms like the GCF and Adaptation Fund. Moreover, building institutional capacity for direct access is critical so that national entities can manage and implement climate finance effectively.

What is Bangladesh’s position on scaling up adaptation finance, and how is it addressing the needs of climate-vulnerable communities?

Our demand is clear: scale up adaptation finance significantly, and ensure at least 50% of total climate finance is allocated to adaptation. Crucially, this must come in the form of new and additional public funds, not recycled pledges.

Bangladesh continues to promote community-led adaptation, highlighting climate-resilient agriculture, saline-tolerant crops, cyclone shelters, urban flood protection, and other grassroots interventions. These directly support the most climate-vulnerable, especially low-income households.

We are also urging that adaptation efforts be systemically integrated with national priorities—through National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) and Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs)—and backed by long-term, predictable finance pipelines, rather than short-term project-based funding.

With over 35 million people in Bangladesh facing high climate risk from floods, cyclones, and salinity intrusion, we need massive, grant-based adaptation finance. This is not just to reduce risk but to prevent loss and damage costs from escalating in the future.

By linking adaptation with loss and damage finance, we aim to compensate communities already suffering irreversible harm, while preparing others for growing climate risks.

How is Bangladesh participating in the NCQG (post-2025 finance goal) discussions, and what outcomes does it expect from SB62?

Bangladesh is actively engaged in shaping the New Collective Quantified Goal, advocating for a framework that is ambitious, equitable, and fully grant-based for adaptation and loss and damage. Mitigation finance could include concessional loans if absolutely necessary, but grants must be the core.

We’re pushing for vulnerability-based allocation, ensuring that countries most affected by climate change—not those with the largest GDPs—receive priority support. A dedicated sub-goal for loss and damage should be established, with firm grant commitments.

We are also negotiating for direct access mechanisms, so that national institutions can bypass donor intermediaries and receive funds more efficiently. Strengthening transparency frameworks is equally essential to track pledges and ensure they’re delivered.

Bangladesh supports enhancing the role of the Standing Committee on Finance (SCF) to monitor NCQG implementation and proposes the establishment of regular review cycles to reassess goals and funding pathways as needs evolve.

What specific expectations does Bangladesh have from SB62 on loss and damage?

We want SB62 to pave the way for rapid disbursement and full operationalization of the Loss and Damage Fund, which was approved at COP28. This includes defining operational modalities and setting clear timelines and substantial pledges, to be finalized by COP30.

Bangladesh is representing LDCs, CVF, and G77+China as a moral voice for fairness and urgency. We are pushing for SB62 to lay the foundation for a transparent, grant-based, and accountable finance system—one that reflects the disproportionate climate burden faced by vulnerable nations.

Final thoughts?

The outcomes of SB62 are critical for setting the direction toward COP30. For Bangladesh, success means ensuring that climate finance is fair, fast, and focused on the needs of the most vulnerable—not just in principle, but in practice. We need grant-based, predictable, and locally accessible finance that builds real resilience, without burdening communities already on the frontlines of climate change.