Delayed and Underfunded - Loss and Damage Fund Fails Frontline Communities at 9th Board Meeting
- Fill The Fund
- 9 hours ago
- 9 min read
9th FRLD Board Meeting
13th July, 2026, Manila
Fill The Fund Campaign - Civil Society response to the outcome of the Ninth meeting of the Board of the Fund for responding to Loss and Damage (FRLD) MANILA, PHILIPPINES - The ninth meeting of the Board of the Fund for Responding to Loss and Damage (FRLD), held in Manila from 8–10 July 2026, concluded with a largely procedural package that severely delays critical climate finance for vulnerable communities. Unable to resolve key operational elements, the Board deferred the approval of urgent funding requests under the Barbados Implementation Modalities (BIM) start-up phase, as well as the operationalisation of the Fund’s new Country Support System (CSS).
Crucially, a Stage 1 Resource Mobilisation Strategy (RMS 1) was adopted, and the Board decided that the Co-Chairs would present a proposal at the tenth Board Meeting (B10) on the elements and timeline for the FRLD’s first replenishment process, including options for fast-tracking it. RMS 1 aims to position the FRLD strategically, ensure the rapid conversion of pledges into contribution agreements, and encourage new contributions to the Fund.
While this is important to help ensure that the FRLD does not run out of money in 2027, without fundraising targets, clear timelines for the first replenishment, or a long-term RMS in place, it remains unclear how the Fund will reach the scale required to meet the needs of developing countries—already estimated at no less than USD 400 billion a year.
Under the BIM, 176 funding requests from 119 developing countries had been received by the 15 June deadline, with a combined total request of USD 2.8 billion, more than 11 times the USD 250 million initially allocated to the BIM.
Although four funding requests had been prepared for consideration by the Board, from Haiti, Jamaica, Nigeria and Côte d’Ivoire, the Board chose not to discuss or consider them in Manila. This was due, among other things, to a lack of clarity over whether sufficient decisions had been taken to ensure that money could be disbursed in accordance with the trustee and hosting agreement between the FRLD and the World Bank. This provides yet another confirmation that the FRLD’s set-up and World Bank regulations are seriously curtailing the operationalisation of the Fund and its ability to innovate.
Instead, the Board requested the FRLD Secretariat to present an initial start-up package of proposals for consideration at B10 and allocated an additional USD 92 million to the BIM financing phase, with a view to testing and refining the approval process.
While this additional money is welcome, the commitment represents the outer limits of what the FRLD can currently afford, given the shortage of money in the FRLD trust fund. Some initial pledges, made more than three years ago, remain outstanding or have been only partially fulfilled. The USD 342 million now allocated to the BIM will still cover only 12 per cent of the USD 2.8 billion requested, funding at most approximately 22 requests at an average of USD 15 million per request.
Therefore, as a direct result of the lack of funding, communities on the frontlines of the climate crisis in the Global South will continue to be denied the support they urgently need to respond to loss and damage.
In light of the heavy workload the FRLD Secretariat will face in assessing and approving funding requests, the Board decided to move B10 from October to 15–18 December 2026, thereby further delaying urgent support from reaching the ground.
Additional Setbacks in the FRLD B9 Outcome
The Board also failed to make meaningful progress on a number of other critical fronts.
Project preparation and technical support under the CSS, set at only USD 250,000 per country per year within an initially approved allocation of USD 7.5 million, could not be launched. This was due, among other things, to developed countries’ refusal to agree that the Co-Chairs of the Board should sign agreements for approved CSS funding requests, rather than requiring them to undergo the lengthy fiduciary compliance procedures associated with the World Bank, as trustee, signing such agreements. This is yet another problem arising from the World Bank’s hosting of the FRLD.
Developed countries also pushed for a third funding criterion on complementarity and coherence, which many developing-country Board members fear could severely restrict access to the CSS.
The Board also failed to consider and adopt the active observer policy and guidelines on consultative forums, leaving it unclear how observers will be able to engage meaningfully in the work of the FRLD. The importance of this issue was further underscored by the systematic exclusion of observers from discussions, with more than half of the B9 meeting taking place in closed sessions.
In adopting the Board’s 2026 work programme, the Board failed to expedite work to establish small-grants and rapid-access modalities under the FRLD. This will delay the Fund’s ability to respond urgently after climate change-intensified extreme events, such as cyclones, and will mean that communities have to wait even longer to access support directly from the FRLD.
Many of these setbacks are compounded by the ongoing and unresolved challenges surrounding the World Bank’s role as interim host of the FRLD Secretariat and as trustee. This makes clear that civil society was right to warn that such an arrangement would impede the new Fund’s ability to innovate and accelerate the delivery of finance.
Adding to the frustration, the meaningful participation of civil society was severely restricted throughout the week due to multiple closed-door sessions dealing with purportedly “sensitive” issues, many of them related to the World Bank.
Ultimately, the Manila meeting merely agreed on a process for addressing critical gaps in the establishment of the FRLD, pushing a massive agenda to December even as developing countries repeatedly raised urgent concerns about the severe lack of funding—not only for the immediate start-up requests, but also for addressing the broader loss and damage finance gap.
While we remain committed to contributing to the work of the FRLD Board and Secretariat, the Fund must scale up, speed up and ensure that countries and communities on the frontlines can easily access the support they need.
Harjeet Singh, Global Convenor of the Fill The Fund campaign and Founding Director of the Satat Sampada Climate Foundation
“The outcome of the ninth board meeting of the Fund for responding to Loss and Damage (FRLD) is a bitter disappointment for frontline communities. While developing nations are facing the astronomical costs of climate disasters, the Fund is drowning in its own bureaucracy. We are confronting a staggering $2.8 billion demand just in the start-up phase against a paltry $342 million in the bank, yet the Board chose to kick the can down the road, delaying both urgent funding approvals and the critical first replenishment of the FRLD. The painfully slow pace of making this Fund fully operational is a grave injustice to those losing their lives, homes, and livelihoods today."
“Instead of establishing a lifeline that rapidly disburses money, the FRLD remains gridlocked by the procedural hurdles and structural challenges of being hosted and managed by the World Bank. We cannot allow World Bank red tape to strangle the Loss and Damage Fund in its infancy. The Board must urgently break free from these institutional roadblocks and immediately mobilize the hundreds of billions of dollars required in public, grant-based finance from developed countries. Otherwise, this historic Fund will remain nothing more than an empty, broken promise.”
Brandon Wu, Director of Policy & Campaigns, ActionAid USA
“This week’s meeting of the FRLD Board was a deeply frustrating experience. It took place mostly behind closed doors, including for completely non-controversial agenda items. The Board held most of its key discussions without the public having any ability to observe, much less provide input. We expect future meetings to be conducted with far more openness and transparency."
“The Board chose not to approve the first four funding requests for the FRLD at this meeting. This is the most obvious example of how developed countries’ failure to adequately resource the FRLD is constraining a fund that was meant to be the central flagship institution responding to climate impacts across the Global South. Almost three years after it was established, the FRLD has received a miserable $500 million in contributions, compared to $2.8 billion of requests in the pipeline."
“We need immediate new contributions to the FRLD to ensure it can support the full range of requests from developing countries, rather than becoming a dystopian arena where countries and communities are condemned to fight over crumbs.”
Kalea Adrienne Daytec Aquino, Regional Focal Point, FSC Indigenous Foundation
“Much of what we stand to lose cannot be counted in dollars. When a sacred forest is gone, when a language dies with the land that held it, when the knowledge our elders has nowhere left to live: that is non-economic loss and damage, and it is irreversible. Yet, this Fund still has no serious way to recognize it, measure it, or respond to it. For Indigenous Peoples, non economic loss is not a secondary category, but it is the heart of what we are losing. A fund that can only see damage it can price will never see the greater part of our harm.”
“This week the FRLD kept building its machinery, and Indigenous Peoples were left out of the design. As distinct rights-holders with a deep connection to our lands, we came with clear priorities: consent on our own territories, a door our communities can walk through, and recognition of losses that cannot be priced. But none were met. The Active Observer Policy that would give us a seat was deferred once again, leaving us to witness a Fund built without us.”
Liane Schalatek, Associate Director, Heinrich Böll Foundation Washington, DC
“The FRLD ninth meeting in Manila stood out for its lack of transparency, progress and for the Board’s unwillingness to innovate and accelerate finance delivery under what was supposed to be a fast start to its financing."
“The Board held most of its proceedings behind closed doors - struggling to correct FRLD operational constraints under its World Bank hosting agreement, which limit the Fund’s vision and ability to innovate. The Board lacked the courage to pilot new approaches to deliver small scale readiness and technical support grants. It further delayed approving best practice observer policies, which should give affected people and communities the voice and agency to hold the FRLD and its operations to account. The Board also deferred approving the first of the 176 funding requests worth $2.8 billion it received to its December meeting, wrestling with ways to distribute the meager $342 million it can currently deliver and forcing developing countries and their communities to compete against each other for urgently needed support."
“Developed countries must fulfill outstanding and deliver new pledges to adequately resource the FRLD, and fast! Rather than managing scarcity, the Board must take bold actions to deliver funding at scale, with urgency and equity, including by advancing innovative, direct and simplified access modalities such as small community grants and rapid response finance as a priority.”
Cheng Pagulayan, Climate Justice Portfolio Manager, Oxfam Pilipinas:
“The proceedings of the 9th Board meeting are deeply concerning. Most substantive discussions were pushed into ‘executive sessions,’ limiting transparency at a time when openness and accountability are most needed. There is nothing more strategic or consequential than ensuring the meaningful participation of communities and climate-vulnerable sectors, the very people living with the realities of loss and damage and who must have a decisive voice in shaping solutions for climate reparations."
“In just six months since the Fund opened its call for funding requests, developing countries have submitted a staggering 176 proposals to address escalating losses and damages. Together, these requests amount to US$2.8 billion, far exceeding the Fund’s currently available resources. This overwhelming demand sends a clear signal: climate-vulnerable nations are already facing impacts at a scale that outpaces existing financial support. As climate disasters grow more frequent, severe, and costly each year, financing needs are expected to multiply dramatically in the years ahead."
“While Global North countries must urgently honor their pledges by converting them into signed and disbursed commitments, fulfilling the Fund’s mandate will require a much broader and more ambitious resource mobilization effort. The Board must secure new and predictable sources of finance, with the greatest responsibility falling on wealthy nations and major polluters whose historical and ongoing emissions have driven the climate crisis. Those most responsible for the problem must contribute their fair share to addressing its devastating consequences.” Notes to Editors:
Protest held at the Ninth Board meeting of the FRLD outside the Asian Development Bank (ADB).
Recording of the Fill The Fund Press Conference held on 7th July, ahead of the ninth Board Meeting is here.
Learn more about the Fill The Fund Campaign here.
More about the Fund for responding to Loss and Damage (FRLD) here.
About the Barbados Implementation Modalities (BIM) here.
FRLD’s trust fund (details what pledges have been paid in) are here.
Fill The Fund Campaign Hub is convened by Satat Sampada Climate Foundation. Media Contact:
Name: Teo Ormond-Skeaping
Signal/ WhatsApp: +44 7989 448893