A great deal of confusion has resulted from the fact that it has hitherto not been possible for the GCF Board to agree on definitions for some of the key nouns referred to in the GCF Governing Instrument in the context of who can access GCF funding. This Concept Note by Benito Müller proposes the following definitions in terms of the GCF accreditation categories: • Implementing Entity (IE): an entity accredited by the GCF to access GCF funding. • Project Implementing Entity: an IE accredited for project management. • Funding Entity: an IE accredited to award grants and/or allocate funding. • Intermediary: an IE accredited for on-lending and/or blending.

National and international finance is increasingly becoming available in developing countries to address climate change for both mitigation and adaptation. However, existing (domestic) arrangements for climate finance are often dispersed and fragmentary, and lack clear goals and strategies, therefore allowing for neither efficiency nor accountability. This ecbi Policy Brief by Anju Sharma, Benito Müller, and Pratim Roy examines the governance arrangements for climate finance in India, and proposes the creation of an Indian National Climate Fund to pool climate finance from different national and international sources, to channel it to the State and local levels. The Fund should seek to 'consolidate without centralisation', and to devolve decision-making on the use of climate finance to local governments. In addition to defining a common vision and principles for climate finance, such a National Funding Entity should aim for coherence with national development goals strategies, and integration across sectors; distributive justice, to ensure that climate finance reaches those who need it most, and that their needs are prioritised; and a balance between different thematic areas (such as mitigation, adaptation, capacity building etc.). It should also review progress continuously, and make mid-course corrections where necessary.

What is the future of adaptation financing under a new global climate agreement and beyond the UNFCCC? What role will an actor such as the Kyoto Protocol Adaptation Fund, which strengthened country ownership by pioneering direct access, play as a result of ongoing efforts to rationalize the global climate finance architecture with the full operationalization of the Green Climate Fund (GCF) as a new major player? These are some of the questions that were put to the participants of a discussion meeting convened by the Heinrich Bo?ll Foundation North America and the European Capacity Building Initiative (ecbi) on 7 December 2014 (during UN Climate Conference in Lima/Peru). The conversation was kicked off with this short presentation by Benito Mu?ller on the future of the Adaptation Fund. With Parties aiming to set the parameters for a post-2020 global climate agreement during the COP 20 in Lima, half-way through the negotiations, this was an opportune time to discuss how the role and function of existing adaptation funding instruments might be shifting in the future with a special focus of the conversation on the Kyoto Protocol Adaptation Fund.

This is a meeting report of the ecbi Oxford Seminar which took place in August 2014. A three-day Fellowship Colloquium in Merton College, Oxford, preceded the Seminar.