The Committee would be interested to hear a range of views on some or all the following questions. They would be keen to hear from stakeholders who can talk about case studies; government leaders and officials; academia; think tanks; civil society working on the ground; government programmes/recipients of UK ICF; and from organisations involved in blended finance. If you have previously submitted relevant evidence to one of the Committee’s recent inquiries, please email [email protected] instead, and your recent submission will be considered for this inquiry.

  • What impacts will the reduction of Official Development Assistance have on the UK’s ability to deliver its ICF commitments?
    • What are the trade-offs associated with decisions to divert aid from ICF to other priorities, such as humanitarian crises?
    • How does the UK’s ICF commitments and delivery compare with other countries in a similar situation?
  • How transparent is the UK Government about its ICF commitments?
    • What processes are in place to oversee the UK’s ICF expenditure and impact?
  • How are the UK’s ICF programmes selected and, are they effective in meeting the long-term needs and priorities of low-income and climate-vulnerable countries?
    • To what extent does the UK ensure that programmes are rooted in local participation, management and, decision making?
    • What difference has ICF from the UK had on your community’s ability to address the problem of climate change? How might such finance be made more effective?
  • How effectively are FCDO, DESNEZ, DSIT and Defra coordinating their efforts to deliver the UK’s ICF commitment and maximise value for money?
    • Is there sufficient cross-departmental monitoring and evaluation being conducted to measure programme impact on low-income and climate-vulnerable countries?
    • How does the UK engage with multilateral banks and climate funds and, how is this shaping cross-departmental ICF strategies?
  • How has the UK’s 2026-2030 ICF commitment been decided? Is it adequate to comply with the obligations of the Paris Climate Agreement and support its objectives?
  • What lessons should the UK Government learn from the delivery of ICF between 2021-22 and 2025-26, including the effectiveness of multi-year commitments?
  • Is the UK using the right and most effective financial instruments to deliver ICF?
    • What opportunities and risks do alternative funding instruments, such as private or blended finance, pose for the UK’s ICF?
  • Is the UK’s use of loans, that represented more than two-thirds of the global ICF commitment in 2022, appropriate and, what is its impact on low-income and climate-vulnerable countries?
    • How can the UK utilise innovative mechanisms, such as debt relief, as alternative routes to fulfilling its ICF commitments?
  • How should the UK’s ICF be spread between, mitigation, adaptation and loss and damage spend to respond to climate change most efficiently?

Please note that contributors are not required to answer all questions and should note that submissions through the evidence portal are made public. Evidence submissions are reported to Parliament and remain on our website and on the public record beyond the life of the inquiry, and cannot be removed after publication. Contributors are also advised not to share evidence submitted to the Committee elsewhere, until published on the Committee’s website.

Full Call


About the UK ICF

UK ICF was launched in 2011 as Official Development Assistance (ODA). It plays a crucial role in fulfilling the UK’s obligations under the Paris Climate Agreement and advancing the Government’s wider ambition to establish the UK as a global leader in international climate action. In 2019, the previous Government announced its commitment to spend £11.6 billion in ICF in the five years to 2025-26. The UK’s 2023 ICF strategy outlined four priority areas for the funding: clean energy; nature for climate and people; adaptation and resilience; and sustainable cities, infrastructure and transport. The Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) and three other Government departments – the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ); Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra); and Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT) – have responsibility for funding and delivering ICF.

While the UK remains committed to achieving its target by March 2026, major cuts to ODA by successive governments and competing demands on UK aid have exacerbated pressures. The Independent Commission for Aid’s (ICAI’s) 2024 rapid review of the UK’s current ICF portfolio highlighted that reaching the target is now dependent on changes to accounting methodology to dilute the ICF target. Specifically, it found that by reclassifying existing ODA as ICF, the UK has “moved the goalpost”, allowing more aid spending to be counted as ICF while not increasing the amounts which reach countries in need. Moreover, as at October 2025, the Climate Action Tracker (CAT), rated the UK’s ICF as “highly insufficient”. CAT has highlighted that the UK needs to “substantially increase” ICF to ensure that it is contributing an equitable share to global climate mitigation efforts.

As the UK prepares to renew its commitment for the 2026-2030 ICF period, the Government faces challenges to ICF delivery in the context of shifting international priorities, funding restraints and changes in the humanitarian and development sector. This inquiry will consider the effectiveness of the UK’s current ICF portfolio in driving systemic change and crucially, how it can maximise value for money and impact by learning lessons and leveraging alternative routes to fulfil its future commitments despite reduced resources.