A year ago, the UN's climate change conference in Nairobi was described by openDemocracy as ‘rhetoric-heavy but action-light'. But developing countries were much happierwith the outcome.
Why? Because the decision was taken to set up a fund to help them adapt to the impacts of climate change. In Bali, however, squabbles about the management of the new Adaptation Fund are taking up valuable air time.
The Fund will raise money from a 2% levy on proceeds from the Clean Development Mechanism. It's hard to tell how much this will be, though high estimates approach a billion dollars.
There are two options on the table for who should run the fund. On the one hand, the Global Environment Facility. On the other, some unspecified organisation.
The UNFCCC, EU and most other rich countries are strong backers of the GEF. Developing countries are not so sure. They complain about that its bureaucracy makes it difficult to attract money and also want more control over how the new fund will be run.
An offer to give them a majority on the Fund's new governing body has only partially allayed concerns. Neither is the NGO movement any fan of GEF or its chief executive, Monique Barbut.
Yesterday, NGOs gave the European Union third place in its ‘fossil of the day' awards for its support for GEF.
This award, given for ‘undermining the United Nations negotiations to save the world from dangerous climate change', left the EU delegation spitting with fury.
At the NGO press conference, however, Kate Raworth was keen not to get drawn into the squabble out how the fund was managed, saying she wasn't really following the issue closely.
[quote]I am here to keep my eyes on the big prize, but let's not end up with the perfect structure and nothing in it.[/quote]