The report warns, risks blocking urgently needed action in countries already struggling with debt. Photo illustration AI
Global efforts to tackle air pollution are being undermined by an over-reliance on loans rather than grants, a new report from Clean Air Fund reveals.
Despite the devastating health and economic impacts of toxic air, 92% of all international funding for air quality projects is being provided as loans.
This approach, the report warns, risks blocking urgently needed action in countries already struggling with debt.
In stark contrast, 63% of total Official Development Assistance (ODA) in 2022 was delivered as grants.
The report, The State of Global Air Quality Funding 2024, calls this imbalance “unusual” and damaging.
“This funding model creates significant financial burdens for recipient countries,” the report states.
“It also discourages uptake of assistance meant to protect public health and the environment.”
The findings draw attention to a critical problem in the way international development funders are supporting efforts to fight air pollution.
With eight million premature deaths linked to polluted air every year, the report argues that clean air must become a higher priority—and that funding terms must shift in favour of grants, especially for poorer nations.
Burdening the Vulnerable
According to the Clean Air Fund, countries most affected by air pollution are often those with the least fiscal space.
Many are low- and middle-income nations already grappling with high debt levels and limited healthcare systems.
For these governments, taking on new loans—even for essential health and environmental projects—can be financially risky or simply impossible.
“Air pollution is a health emergency,” the report says.
“But the current funding structure treats it as a low-priority issue and puts too much financial pressure on those who can least afford it.”
The report highlights that only 6% of air quality funding between 2018 and 2022 came in the form of grants.
That’s far below what is needed to support vulnerable countries in addressing a crisis that disproportionately affects them.
Philanthropic and Development Funders Must Act
The Clean Air Fund calls on philanthropists and development agencies to correct this imbalance by increasing the share of grants and concessional finance in air quality funding portfolios.
In doing so, they could unlock greater and more equitable progress in reducing pollution.
The report recommends that funders:
- Expand grant-based support for air quality initiatives.
- Offer more concessional terms to ease the debt burden on recipient countries.
- Integrate air quality goals into broader health and climate strategies.
- Prioritise funding for the most polluted and underserved regions.
- By shifting away from a loan-heavy model, the report argues, donors can ensure that their investments lead to real change, especially in low-income regions where the impact would be most profound.
Missing the Opportunity
While total funding for clean air efforts reached $4.7 billion in 2022, returning to pre-pandemic levels, this represents only 1% of all international development funding.
And even within that limited funding pool, very little is reaching the countries that need it most.
The report reveals that countries like Chad and Somalia received just $2 per person in air quality funding between 2018 and 2022, compared to $73 per person in countries like Serbia and Costa Rica.
And much of that support was in the form of loans.
“Air pollution is both a driver and a result of inequality,” the report states.
“But the way we fund clean air projects is making the problem worse, not better.”
The Grant Gap in Perspective
The contrast between air quality funding and broader ODA figures is especially striking.
In 2022, nearly two-thirds of all ODA was delivered as grants—funding that doesn’t need to be repaid and can be directed to urgent priorities.
In the case of air quality, however, 92% of funding came as loans, and only a fraction of those were concessional.
This leaves poorer countries with tough choices: either take on more debt or leave air pollution unaddressed.
The Clean Air Fund argues that this model is not only inefficient but also unjust.
By favouring loan-based assistance, donors are effectively penalising countries for their inability to pay, even as those countries face the heaviest health burdens from air pollution.
A Call to Philanthropy
While the report focuses on international development finance, it also points to the limited role that philanthropy has played so far.
It calls on philanthropic funders to step up, using their flexibility to provide grant-based support for clean air projects in low-resource settings.
“Philanthropy can help correct this imbalance,” the report suggests.
“By offering risk-tolerant, strategic funding, foundations can support innovations, build capacity, and drive policy change.”
Clean Air Fund’s separate report, Philanthropic Foundation Funding for Clean Air, details how relatively small investments from foundations could deliver high impact, especially in data systems, advocacy, and community mobilisation—areas often neglected by larger public institutions.
A Matter of Equity
The report concludes with a call for international funders—both public and private—to view clean air as a matter of health equity and justice.
“We need to increase total funding, yes. But more importantly, we need to fund differently,” the report says. “Grants, not loans, are what will enable the poorest and most polluted countries to act.”
Without a significant shift in funding models, the world will continue to lose lives and productivity to a crisis that is both solvable and preventable.
