Presentation short abstract

This article examines the discourses that sought to render multilateral finance for Loss and Damage (L&D) governable. We demonstrate how a neoliberal problematization structures the new Fund for responding to L&D, mobilizing technologies of agency that are to empower recipients and activate donors.

Presentation long abstract

In 2023, the Conference of the Parties (COP28) to the UNFCCC in Dubai celebrated the successful operationalization of new funding arrangements (FA), including a fund to address Loss and Damage from climate change (L&D). As the financial means of the Fund are still “tiny like a mosquito”, there are concerns about the inadequacy of the Fund for responding to Loss and Damage (FRLD). Our paper asks: Which discourse coalitions have competed in the operationalization of the Fund and FA, and with which implications for the Fund’s governing logic? We use Hajer’s (1995) argumentative discourse analysis to explore how finance for L&D is rendered governable through each discourse. The dataset includes party submissions to the negotiations on the fund, transcripts of three transitional committee meetings, and interviews with negotiators. The heuristic for coding was inspired by Dean’s (2010) analytics of government framework. We have identified four discourse coalitions: (1) optimizing, (2) additional voluntary support, (3) scaling finance to needs, and (4) historical responsibility. Our paper reveals a mismatch between the Fund’s biopolitical mandate and its operationalization. We unmask a neoliberal problematization with neoliberal technologies of agency at play: The Fund is to empower recipients and donors, mainly by optimizing existing financial mechanisms. We conclude that the FRLD has been emptied of its radical potential for climate justice. It has instead been domesticated as part of the Paris Cli-Mentality (Steig and Oels 2025).