By Andressa Lima (UFPA)
Brazil holds a strategic position in the global debate on addressing the climate crisis. With the majority of the Amazon rainforest within its territory, the country is a key player, both in terms of mitigation opportunities through forest conservation and in facing structural challenges related to land use, inequality, and sustainable development. In this context, the Amazon Fund emerges as one of the most robust and symbolic climate finance initiatives ever implemented at the national level, serving as a reference for other developing countries.
Created in 2008, the Amazon Fund aims to attract non-reimbursable donations for investments in actions to prevent, monitor, and combat deforestation, as well as promote the conservation and sustainable use of Amazon forests. It is managed by the Brazilian Development Bank (BNDES), with resources mainly from the Norwegian government and, to a lesser extent, from Germany. The fund’s governance has been marked over the years by broad social participation, involving representatives from civil society, state and federal governments.
Despite its track record of effectiveness and transparency, the Amazon Fund was paralyzed between 2019 and 2023 due to political conflicts and changes in the federal government’s orientation, which questioned its governance structure and led to the suspension of disbursements by its main donors, Norway and Germany. This resulted in the freezing of approximately R$ 2.9 billion in already available resources. The impact of this paralysis is visible in the sharp drop in disbursements during this period, as illustrated in Graph 1. With the change in government in 2023 and Brazil’s renewed engagement in climate diplomacy, the fund was reactivated with broad international support, restoring its participatory governance and resuming strategic projects. Donor response was immediate, with renewed commitments and recognition of the fund as an effective and transparent climate mechanism rooted in social and territorial participation.
Graph 1: Evolution of Approved Funding by the Amazon Fund (2010–2025)
Source: Author’s elaboration based on data from the Climate Finance Tracker of CFC-GS (2025).
Graph 1 clearly illustrates the evolution of approved funding by the Amazon Fund between 2010 and 2025. A consistent cycle of funding can be seen throughout the 2010s, abruptly interrupted starting in 2019, reflecting the fund’s institutional paralysis. The graph highlights the impact of this interruption, evidenced by the absence of new approved resources over four consecutive years. Recovery began in 2023 and became particularly strong in 2024, when approved amounts reached the highest level in the historical series. This upward trend signals not only the operational resumption of the fund but also the reestablishment of Brazil’s leadership in international climate finance negotiations.
According to the latest data from the Climate Finance Tracker of CFC-GS, the Amazon Fund has already supported 118 distinct projects in Brazil, totaling approximately US$ 903.5 million in approved resources. Of these, about US$ 629.9 million have been effectively disbursed, corresponding to an execution rate of approximately 70%. This performance stands out positively compared to other international climate finance mechanisms, which often face difficulties in transforming pledged resources into concrete territorial investments. This execution pattern is also reflected in the main funded projects, as shown in Graph 2.
Graph 2: Top 10 Amazon Fund Projects by Approved and Disbursed Amounts
Source: Author’s elaboration based on data from the Climate Finance Tracker of CFC-GS (2025).
Graph 2 presents the ten largest projects supported by the Amazon Fund, ranked by total approved amount. Most of these projects already show significant disbursements, reflecting a strong financial execution rate. However, four projects stand out for not yet having recorded disbursements: “Restaurar Amazônia MR1,” “Restaurar Amazônia MR2,” “Restaurar Amazônia MR3,” and “Planos AMAS – Segurança e Soberania na Amazônia,” all approved in 2024 with implementation deadlines extending until 2030.
The absence of disbursements in these cases is associated with the time required for the initial project phase, which involves technical planning, team hiring, agreement signing, and fulfillment of operational conditions established by BNDES. Therefore, this delay does not indicate inefficiency but rather the early stage of project implementation. The comparative visualization between approved and disbursed amounts also highlights the robustness of initiatives such as PROFISC1 – Health System Consolidation Program and the Green Municipalities Program, whose disbursements are already approaching their approved totals, indicating institutional efficiency and execution maturity.
The data also demonstrate the thematic and territorial breadth of supported actions: projects range from forest conservation and sustainable management to environmental education, socio-biodiversity value chains, and institutional strengthening. Another important feature is that all financing was conducted through non-reimbursable donations (grants), reinforcing the international recognition that conserving tropical forests is a global public good and should therefore be supported by international climate solidarity mechanisms. The consistency of these investments over time demonstrates Brazil’s ability to efficiently implement external resources aimed at the climate agenda, especially when transparent governance and active social participation are in place. Thus, the Amazon Fund not only demonstrates the viability of effective climate policy in the Global South but also provides a foundation for designing similar mechanisms in countries with comparable environmental and social realities.
From an impact perspective, projects supported by the Amazon Fund offer valuable lessons for the design of effective climate policies. First, they show that it is possible to collaboratively and horizontally engage a wide diversity of actors—such as riverine communities, artisanal fishers, and extractive producers—with public agencies and financial institutions. Second, they attest that Brazil has the institutional capacity to transparently and efficiently execute international resources with measurable results. Third, they reveal that successful territorial experiences, supported by participatory governance mechanisms, can be replicated in other regions of the country and across the Pan-Amazon.
However, the landscape also demands reflection. Despite the progress made, climate finance in Brazil remains heavily concentrated in the Amazon and in mitigation actions, placing adaptation efforts in the background—a crucial issue in a country with high water, urban, and social vulnerability. In addition, subnational governments (states and municipalities) have played a limited role in leading projects, which restricts the reach and depth of mechanisms like the Amazon Fund, especially in territories outside the Amazon. Expanding the thematic and federative diversity of initiatives is essential to make climate finance more equitable and comprehensive. These findings reinforce the importance of initiatives that systematize and expand knowledge on the use of climate resources in Brazil.
In this regard, the Amazon Fund not only consolidates its position as one of the most effective climate finance mechanisms in the Global South but also points to pathways for strengthening a climate agenda based on territorial justice, equity, and international solidarity. In this effort, the Center for Climate Finance for the Global South (CFC-GS) plays a strategic role by producing qualified evidence, monitoring financial execution, and supporting transparency in international resource flows. By tracking and systematizing the progress of the Amazon Fund, CFC-GS helps ensure that international climate finance is increasingly aligned with the real needs of territories and with solutions grounded in local realities and community leadership.
