When climate crisis meets corruption

Bangladesh stands among the world's most climate-vulnerable nations, not only in statistical rankings but in the lived experience of millions. The country has entered an era in which the scale and frequency of natural disasters can no longer be predicted within familiar seasonal or geographical patterns. In the past year alone, districts such as Feni, Noakhali, Lakshmipur and parts of Cumilla were inundated by severe flooding, a calamity soon repeated in Sylhet regions. For the northern districts, floodwaters have become almost annual occurrences as monsoon flows from upstream regions in India overwhelm local rivers. Floods are not the only effects of climate change. Saline intrusion is happening faster in coastal areas due to rising sea levels which is hurting farming and driving internal displacement.

The seasons themselves no longer behave as they once did. Bangladesh was once defined by six distinct seasons that were culturally and environmentally recognisable. Today, these seasonal transitions have blurred. Winters are comparatively warmer and sometimes so mild that cold wave warnings come as a surprise. The shift from late autumn to early winter passes almost unnoticed. High temperatures persist for longer periods and heatwaves are more frequent, affecting public health, labour productivity and water availability. At the same time, river erosion continues to claim vast stretches of land. Homes, croplands, mosques, schools and marketplaces collapse into rivers as currents intensify. Communities relocate inland only to confront the same fate once again.

There is no real debate about the gravity of climate impacts confronting Bangladesh. The country ranked seventh in the 2020 Global Climate Risk Index, which evaluated impacts from 1999 to 2019, and ninth in the 2023 World Risk Index for disaster risk. Climate finance is directed to Bangladesh for the simple reason that it stands on the frontlines of global warming and carries burden it did not create. Yet at the very moment when the global community meets in Brazil for COP30 to discuss climate justice and future financing commitments, the Transparency International Bangladesh (TIB) has reported that more than US$248 million of Bangladesh's climate funds have been lost to corruption. As far as timing goes, this report could not have come as a more damaging moment. While world leaders gather in Belem to discuss climate finance, this revelation forces a hard look at how well climate funds are protected and how faithfully they reach those who depend on them.

Bangladesh's delegation arrived at the summit with clear priorities including a new global climate finance goal of $300 billion annually by 2035, operationalisation of the Loss and Damage Fund by 2026 and a doubling of adaptation finance. These are legitimate and urgent demands. However, the TIB report provides potent ammunition for critics in donor capitals who argue that financial commitments are wasted, thereby undermining the political consensus necessary to scale up funding. How can developed nations be persuaded to fulfil their $100 billion pledge and move towards trillions as Bangladesh proposes when evidence suggests that even limited existing funds are so easily misappropriated!

The diverted amount represents more than half of the Bangladesh Climate Change Trust Fund. These resources were intended to construct embankments, strengthen coastal livelihoods, improve water systems, build climate resilient infrastructure and support affected communities. Yet, according to the TIB report, project selection often had less to do with climate vulnerability and more with political convenience. Members of the Trustee Board and the Technical Committee exercised discretionary authority in ways that served partisan or personal interests paving the way for corruption within the fund's allocation process.

The TIB report further revealed that over 15 per cent of the Climate Trust Fund's money remains stuck in a financially-distressed bank. Recovery of these funds remains uncertain, which indicates a greater institutional deficiency in preserving public resources. International climate finance partners expect transparency, credible monitoring and independent audits as the bare minimum. When fund misuse becomes the headline, trust from those partners inevitably erodes and future allocations become uncertain. Undoubtedly, this has made the already difficult negotiations at COP30 even more fraught. For the people of Bangladesh, the implication is a double victimisation. They are first victimised by the climate impacts they did little to cause and second by the theft of resources meant for their protection.

In addition to the corruption scandal, there are concerns about how well the climate fund is being utilised in other areas. In many climate change adaptation projects implemented by NGOs, a significant portion of funding are dedicated to what is described as capacity building. In practice, this often means training sessions and workshops. Many donors and aid agencies view this as an essential project component, and NGOs respond accordingly. However, the outcomes have frequently been limited. Participants attend sessions, listen, take meals and return home only to resume their old practices. The intended behavioural transformation rarely materialises. Ironically, such expenditure is often categorised as successfully utilised, even though the practical impact remains negligible. This situation clearly calls for a more mature and realistic approach, one that focuses not only on capacity development but also on constructing physical infrastructure to help people withstand the effects of climate change.

The failure to protect climate funds at home weakens Bangladesh's position in advocating for fair global financing arrangements. The inadequacy of current global commitments is beyond dispute, but the legitimacy of these demands is now eclipsed by domestic governance lapses. To regain credibility, words must give way to action. The Climate Change Trust Fund should be reconstituted with non-partisan and independent expertise. Transparent audit mechanisms must be established, and community level monitoring and civil society oversight must be integrated at the project design stage.

The exposure of corruption ahead of COP30 presents a difficult moment, yet it also offers an opportunity to embed strong anti-corruption conditions into future climate finance frameworks. This proactive step is the only way to build the global trust necessary for these funds to be effective and impactful.

showaib434@gmail.com