Resilient Futures Call

The Resilient Futures Call closed to applications on 4 September. In Asia, 374 came in.

Of those, 324 said the idea had never had funding from anyone before, a figure that works out to 87 per cent of the pool. When we launched the call, we said we would rather back a first attempt than a polished version of something that already exists. This is roughly the pool we hoped for.

Most applicants were organisations (273), with 70 individuals, 24 collectives and seven networks making up the rest. Asked what stage they were at, 233 described themselves as established organisations trying something new, 59 as organisations less than a year old, and 82 as individuals developing a new pilot or initiative.

Of the total, 304 applications came from the six priority countries: Bangladesh (98), Indonesia (83), Nepal (52), the Philippines (36), Sri Lanka (24) and Thailand (11). The remaining 70 came from outside those six countries: from elsewhere in Asia, including Timor-Leste, and from groups registered outside the region.

By theme, 181 applications fell under “plugging network and evidence gaps”, 95 under “accountability of public institutions”, and 78 under “sustaining actors through cycles”. Just over half named young people under 30 or women as the primary beneficiaries of the proposed work. The median amount requested was USD 20,000, the top of the range.

The wider point

A number like 374 is easy to read as a compliment to the call. We read it as a description of the region. There are far more people working on the politics of climate in Asia than there is money willing to support that work. Much of it goes unfunded because funders have no category for it yet. All 374 applicants confirmed the work is non-partisan. Eight told us they hold a party affiliation.

The applications also say something about who is doing that work. Of the 59 organisations less than a year old, 56 had never received funding for their idea. Of the 82 individuals, 68 hadn't either. We asked applicants how they identify, with the option to choose more than one answer: 164 said women, 139 under 30, 56 people with disabilities, 39 LGBTQ+, 26 migrants or exiles, 18 non-binary and 15 third gender. These are groups that rarely appear in the rooms where climate decisions get made, and a good share of the proposals were about getting into those rooms.

The proposals also point to where climate policy in the region tends to fail. In most of the applications we read, the evidence was already in hand. What was missing was a person with the standing to carry it through a budget cycle or an election, and the means to remain in the process long enough to matter. Most of the 374 applications were, in effect, proposals to fill that role. Only 50 of them had ever received funding for the idea.

Backing work at this stage means being wrong a good deal of the time. The alternative is to wait for it to prove itself first, which is how a region ends up with plenty of good policy and nobody to defend it.

Climate action in Asia will be decided in legislatures and budget rooms. Vibe funds the work that gets it there and keeps it there. We fund early. This round was the first attempt. More to come.