The project finance scenario has changed significantly around the world after the 2008 financial crisis and following the subsequent Basel III recommendations. Project finance loans from commercial banks and financial institutions have largely dried up, leaving it mostly to the export credit agencies and the bilateral and multilateral development banks to provide the institutional credit. Unfortunately, those sources are not enough, given the huge needs for construction of new infrastructure and renovation of the old ones across Asia, Africa and Latin America. The need for capital markets, through market listed financial products across asset class, unlocking a large part of domestic and corporate savings, has never been felt as strongly before. This article seeks to analyze the development story of various Asian capital markets and examine financial products, which have succeeded in their short history in receiving investor interest. The article also delves into the challenges to market development, policy imperatives and the issues relating to market liquidity and credit rating, which are the most significant influencers for public market float and investor interest.

This study scrutinizes the allocation of financial aid for climate change adaptation from OECD/DAC donors, focusing on its effectiveness in supporting developing countries. With growing concerns over climate risks, the emphasis on green development as a means of adaptation is increasing. The research explores whether climate adaptation finance is efficiently allocated and what factors influence OECD/DAC donor decisions. It examines bilateral official development assistance in the climate sector from 2010 to 2021, incorporating climate vulnerability and adaptation indices from the ND-GAIN Country Index and the IMF Climate Risk Index. A panel double hurdle model is used to analyze the factors influencing the financial allocations of 41,400 samples across 115 recipient countries from 30 donors, distinguishing between the decision to select a country and the determination of the aid amount. The study unveils four critical findings. Firstly, donors weigh a more comprehensive range of factors when deciding on aid amounts than when selecting recipient countries. Secondly, climate vulnerability is significantly relevant in the allocation stage, but climate aid distribution does not consistently match countries with high vulnerability. Thirdly, discerning the impact of socio-economic vulnerabilities on resource allocation, apart from climate vulnerability, is challenging. Lastly, donor countries’ economic and diplomatic interests play a significant role in climate development cooperation. As a policy implication, OECD/DAC donor countries should consider establishing differentiated allocation mechanisms in climate-oriented development cooperation to achieve the objectives of climate-resilient development.