Ambition is rising. Risk remains low. The evaluation tests whether GEF can bridge the gap.

The GEF aims to embrace more calculated risks to achieve transformative environmental outcomes, yet most projects remain low to moderate risk with little evidence of a shift toward higher-risk investments. The evaluation examines how risk is understood and managed across the portfolio and Agencies, and whether current practices can support the ambition set out in the GEF Council’s risk appetite statement.

High-risk projects tend to exhibit greater outcome variance, but some deliver exceptional benefits—such as renewable energy ventures that earned the highest possible ratings.

Evaluation overview

• Barriers include weak institutional capacity, inconsistent risk cultures across Agencies, and unclear ownership of risk responsibilities.
• Most projects remain low-risk with satisfactory outcomes, though adaptive risk management improves performance and select high-risk projects deliver strong benefits.
• The report recommends clarifying risk ownership, defining a tolerance band for risk, and establishing mechanisms to manage and communicate risk consistently across Agencies.

Methodology

The evaluation reviews 366 closed and ongoing projects, using portfolio analysis, statistical modeling, and case studies including renewable energy and protected area initiatives.