Many international issues could be addressed effectively if there was a permanent source of revenue adequate to fund solutions.
Several examples of global funds merit attention. Founded in 2002, the Global Fund to Fight AIDS has helped to slow the HIV epidemic, saving an estimated 60 million lives since 2002. The Green Climate Fund, formed in 2010 under the auspices of the UNFCCC, helps developing countries pay for climate change adaptation and mitigation; sadly, governments have committed only $10 billion so far, an amount falling far short of the need. The Conflict, Stability and Security Fund, initiated by the British Government in 2015, is a pool of over £1 billion per year devoted to addressing international conflict and instability. The Resilience Fund of the Global Initiative against Transnational Organized Crime, supported by Norway and other governments, funds civil society actors to identify, empower and protect communities in regions most affected by criminal governance. The Global Fund for Coral Reefs, founded in 2020, aims to mobilize $500 million in grants and investment for coral reef conservation and investment.
These are laudable examples, but to date relatively few comparable funds have been created at scale to address the myriad challenges discussed above.
There is value in having governmental or government-adjacent funding systems. Although some government-managed financing has historically been ineffective, the use of blockchain technology can enable transparency and accountability, encouraging efficiency. At the same time, governmental institutions are key because once a new innovation is identified, it can be quickly scaled to continuously benefit the whole system, with people’s consent.
The Expert Working Group on Global Public Investment convened a multi-stakeholder process looking at these public financing questions and offered recommendations for how funds are raised, managed and spent. They asserted that all countries must contribute, benefit, and participate in decision-making, to enable more effective, inclusive, and accountable funding for global challenges.
Could a Global Commons Fund be a solution? Such a fund could have a system of conditional cash transfers, like the successful Bolsa Floresta program in Brazil which incentivizes locally-led forest protection in the Amazon forest. Funds could be structured to pay out increased dividends in low income countries as recognition of carbon debt, a measure of historic emissions. A council of celebrity humanitarians could help with credibility and fundraising.
A Commons Fund could be financed in several ways. It could operate with an endowment with interest and investment returns paying out to beneficiaries in perpetuity, similar to the proposed TFFF model. Some have proposed a patent commons with a system of licensing nature-inspired inventions to pay for conservation. Other sources could include a tax on carbon or routine financial transaction fees.
Consider the transformational potential of a fund that continuously supports innovation in refugee resettlement, international conflict prevention, or ecosystem restoration, with new proposals reviewed each year and embracing new technologies. Innovations in these sectors, and many others, are long overdue.
A permanent, self-sustaining fund to address transnational issues and protect the global commons is essential for global ecological integrity and future geopolitical harmony. While there are some grantmakers focused on parts of this vision, the authors of this paper are not aware of any funder that is operating at scale and explicitly focused on this mission. The needs are clear.
| Relevant for donors, a 2024 report from the G20 highlights challenges in the current climate finance architecture, noting that funds like the Green Climate Fund, the Climate Investment Funds, and the Global Environment Facility commit $4–5 billion annually but disburse only $1.4 billion per year. The report recommends streamlining accreditation processes, harmonizing procedures, and supporting country-driven strategies to enhance efficiency. While not focused on the global commons, several recent analyses, including Participatory Grantmaking by the Ford Foundation and Letting the Movement Decide by the FRIDA Fund, showcase how digital tools and community decision-making can reshape philanthropic practices toward more democratic and inclusive models. |