Introduction

This guide examines how climate finance can support resilient infrastructure amid rising temperatures, shifting weather patterns and more frequent extreme events. It defines climate finance across adaptation, mitigation and resilience, and argues that infrastructure planning should incorporate a climate lens from inception. The guide highlights tensions between adaptation and mitigation priorities, particularly in developing countries where needs are greatest but resources remain constrained.

What is climate finance for resilient infrastructure?

The guide distinguishes adaptive, mitigative and resilient finance. Adaptive finance supports assets such as flood defences and climate-resilient roads. Mitigative finance targets emissions reductions through renewable energy, energy efficiency and carbon capture. Resilient infrastructure finance integrates both objectives.

Nature-based solutions, including mangrove restoration and wetland management, are presented as cost-effective mechanisms that enhance biodiversity while improving resilience.

Financing instruments include green bonds, climate insurance and blended finance. Microfinance banks, development finance institutions (DFIs) and climate funds, such as the Green Climate Fund, help de-risk projects and mobilise private capital.

The case for climate finance for resilient infrastructure

The guide links resilient infrastructure to increasing disaster frequency, economic losses and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). It cites evidence from the Global Commission on Adaptation that US$1.8 trillion invested globally between 2020 and 2030 could generate US$7.1 trillion in net benefits, with benefit–cost ratios between 2:1 and 10:1. The World Economic Forum estimates that every US$1 spent on adaptation may avoid US$2–10 in future costs.

Resilient infrastructure delivers co-benefits including improved public health, job creation, energy security and reduced inequality. It is particularly important for vulnerable communities exposed to floods, heatwaves and sea-level rise. However, a substantial adaptation finance gap persists, requiring stronger public–private collaboration and earlier integration of resilience into financing decisions.

Challenges and barriers of climate resilient infrastructure

Key constraints include insufficient funding for adaptation relative to mitigation, high upfront capital costs and perceived low short-term returns. Data gaps and the absence of standardised resilience methodologies hinder risk assessment and private investment.

Greenwashing risks misallocating capital, while inconsistent global commitments and weak enforcement of climate pledges limit progress. Policy uncertainty and limited investor understanding of long-term resilience benefits further impede scaling.

How to mobilise climate finance for resilient infrastructure

The guide proposes coordinated action across systemic stakeholders. International bodies should develop harmonised standards, promote climate risk assessments and strengthen global coordination.

Multilateral development banks and DFIs are encouraged to expand concessional finance, provide technical assistance and deploy instruments such as resilience bonds and blended finance.

Governments should establish national climate funds, implement fiscal incentives and structure public–private partnerships. Regulatory bodies should mandate climate risk disclosures and conduct compliance audits.

Private investors are urged to integrate climate risk frameworks, including TCFD, and allocate capital to resilience-focused instruments. Infrastructure developers should undertake vulnerability assessments, apply adaptive design and strengthen monitoring.

Case Studies

Illustrative examples include Bangladesh’s Coastal Embankment Improvement Project, which upgraded 249 km of embankments and protected over 400,000 people; Pakistan’s Shams Power solar project; the Africa GreenCo Renewable Energy Guarantee Facility; mangrove restoration in Pakistan; and the Netherlands’ Room for the River programme, which reduced flood risk while restoring ecosystems.

Conclusion

The guide concludes that scaling climate finance for resilient infrastructure is essential to reduce economic losses, protect vulnerable populations and support sustainable growth. While funding gaps, data constraints and policy barriers persist, blended finance, risk-sharing mechanisms and coordinated public–private action can strengthen long-term resilience.