Send message to Author

Paper short abstract

What mechanisms link UNFCCC presence to bilateral climate aid? Interviews with donor and recipient delegates reveal three: visibility, information, and relationship capital. Recipients emerge as strategic actors, but informal channels systematically disadvantage under-resourced delegations.

Paper long abstract

Quantitative research has established that diplomatic presence at UNFCCC negotiations predicts bilateral climate aid commitments. Yet the mechanisms driving this relationship remain unclear. How does being present at international climate negotiations translate into bilateral climate aid? This paper explores these mechanisms through semi-structured interviews with donor and recipient delegates who have participated in UNFCCC negotiations.

I interview officials from both donor and recipient country delegations, exploring three mechanisms through which recipients shape aid flows: visibility and signalling, where presence demonstrates commitment and capacity; information gathering, where delegates learn to navigate complex funding landscapes; and relationship capital, where repeated interactions build trust and familiarity. The interviews trace how recipients strategically allocate their time between formal negotiations and bilateral engagement to secure climate aid.

Preliminary findings suggest that UNFCCC venues function as "aid marketplaces" where recipients actively pursue bilateral opportunities alongside multilateral negotiations. The mechanisms appear complementary: visibility opens doors, information reduces transaction costs, and sustained relationships convert opportunities into commitments. Rather than passive beneficiaries, developing countries emerge as strategic actors navigating the informal architecture of climate cooperation.

These findings carry important implications for equitable partnerships in climate finance. If funding flows through informal channels that reward diplomatic capacity, countries lacking resources to maintain substantial delegations face systematic disadvantage. Understanding these mechanisms is essential for designing more inclusive cooperation frameworks, whether through delegation support, structured matchmaking, or alternative access channels, that genuinely support Southern voice and agency in climate finance.