Financing resilience, governing vulnerability: Adaptation finance as a form of political infrastructure
- 1Division of Environment and Sustainability, The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Kowloon, Hong Kong
Abstract
Climate adaptation finance is commonly framed as a problem of insufficiency: too little money, too slowly deployed, and directed towards too many needs. This Essay argues that such framings obscure a more consequential question: who governs adaptation through finance. Rather than treating finance as a neutral flow of capital, it conceptualises adaptation finance as a form of political infrastructure, defined as the institutional arrangements, intermediaries, metrics, and decision rules that structure authority, prioritise certain vulnerabilities, and shape whose futures are rendered investable. Drawing on practices such as the Green Climate Fund’s readiness processes, creditworthiness-based urban resilience programs, and standardised risk metrics in sovereign and project appraisal, the Essay shows how adaptation priorities are increasingly mediated through financial criteria. These shifts are quietly reconfiguring power across scales. Financial rationalities originating in the Global North increasingly define what counts as credible adaptation in the Global South, often privileging risk reduction for capital over resilience for vulnerable communities. Shifting attention from funding gaps to governance infrastructures advances a distinct analytical intervention: adaptation finance is not simply underprovided, but structured by particular institutional logics. Recognising finance as governance reveals adaptation as a contested site of political authority, accountability, and justice, with implications for the legitimacy and equity of climate action.
Related
- Plants and low oxygen: from sensing and signalling to ecological adaptation and crop resilience.
- Endogenous SMN Heterogeneity Defines Dynamic States of Motor Neuron Vulnerability and Resilience
- Integrating remote sensing outputs into vulnerability assessments and climate mitigation policies for enhancing climate resilience and adaptability in Northeast India
- Pre-symptomatic proteomic and metabolomic profiling identifies compensated ER-redox-metabolic adaptation and early nuclear vulnerability in neuronal ERO1L toxicity
- Heterotrimeric Gβ subunit orchestrates flavonoid metabolism governing drought-tolerance in groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.)
BibTeX
@article{delina2026financing,
title = {{Financing resilience, governing vulnerability: Adaptation finance as a form of political infrastructure}},
author = {Laurence L. Delina},
journal = {PLOS Climate},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.1371/journal.pclm.0001090},
url = {https://journals.plos.org/climate/article?id=10.1371/journal.pclm.0001090},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Financing resilience, governing vulnerability: Adaptation finance as a form of political infrastructure
AU - Laurence L. Delina
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/07
JO - PLOS Climate
DO - 10.1371/journal.pclm.0001090
UR - https://journals.plos.org/climate/article?id=10.1371/journal.pclm.0001090
AB - Climate adaptation finance is commonly framed as a problem of insufficiency: too little money, too slowly deployed, and directed towards too many needs. This Essay argues that such framings obscure a more consequential question: who governs adaptation through finance. Rather than treating finance as a neutral flow of capital, it conceptualises adaptation finance as a form of political infrastructure, defined as the institutional arrangements, intermediaries, metrics, and decision rules that structure authority, prioritise certain vulnerabilities, and shape whose futures are rendered investable. Drawing on practices such as the Green Climate Fund’s readiness processes, creditworthiness-based urban resilience programs, and standardised risk metrics in sovereign and project appraisal, the Essay shows how adaptation priorities are increasingly mediated through financial criteria. These shifts are quietly reconfiguring power across scales. Financial rationalities originating in the Global North increasingly define what counts as credible adaptation in the Global South, often privileging risk reduction for capital over resilience for vulnerable communities. Shifting attention from funding gaps to governance infrastructures advances a distinct analytical intervention: adaptation finance is not simply underprovided, but structured by particular institutional logics. Recognising finance as governance reveals adaptation as a contested site of political authority, accountability, and justice, with implications for the legitimacy and equity of climate action.
SN - 2767-3200
ER -