We've been pressing governments - and the UNFCCC's Green Climate Fund - to use public finance mechanisms (PFMs) to support low-carbon investments. Yet not enough work has been done on evaluating the relative efficiency of PFMs.
We've just completed this (quick) report for the UNEP SEF Alliance, working with consultancy Irbaris. There are eight case studies - Germany, France, Canada, Ireland, the UK, China, Chile and Brazil - evaluated against a developed methodology, with "best" practices identified.
The study found that some of the best ways to measure public finance impact is not through private sector leverage but more indirect outcomes such as job creation, net economic benefit and health costs reduction. This helps illustrate the importance of the industry to the general economy beyond its support in building clean energy.
The research also underlines the importance of taking into account context-specific barriers in designing and public finance intervention to support clean energy markets. Any intervention needs to communicate clear conditions-based indicators of success to not only safeguard value for public money but also to prepare the private sector for eventual withdrawal of public support.
We're looking at going on to a second stage, so please give us feedback on this first effort. How should we improve the methodology used? How can our analysis be better? What further case studies should we do?
Let us know what you think; deadline is 3 January 2012.
