In a political environment where many lawmakers have an aversion to foreign aid, are hostile to climate change funding and find the combination positively toxic, the Obama administration yesterday offered up a restrained $769 million budget request.

The money for international climate change programs through the Treasury, State Department and U.S. Agency for International Development is close to what Congress ultimately decided to provide for 2012.

Activists yesterday said that while they hope to see the United States ramp up well before 2020 spending to help developing countries create low-carbon economies and build resilience to weather-related disasters, they are relieved those programs didn't take a hit.

"It's good news because it's not bad news and it does show a continuing commitment from the administration," said Andrew Deutz, the Nature Conservancy's director of international government relations. "Given the political and fiscal realities, only getting slightly cut or being basically flat for climate change is nothing to cry over at this point."

The bulk of the request, $469.5 million, would go to core bilateral programs run through the State Department and USAID in what is now being called the Global Climate Change Initiative. Administration officials did not say exactly what programs the money would fund, but rather laid out a broad set of priorities ranging from helping countries reduce their greenhouse gas emissions to aiding glacier-dependent countries in water needs to promoting energy-efficient buildings abroad.

About $144 million of that money would be directed toward helping countries adapt to climate change threats, $86.5 million would go toward clean energy development, and $118.5 million would be used to help avoid deforestation in tropical countries.

The remaining $120 million would be distributed through the State Department, with roughly $46 million going toward adaptation, $62 million for clean energy, and $12 million for sustainable landscapes, according to a budget briefing call attended by several nonprofit and government officials.

'Continued commitment' to climate finance

The administration requested $129 million for the Global Environment Facility, which is the designated executing agency for the disbursement of several climate change funds for poor countries. That's a slight increase over last year. Meanwhile, the Clean Technology Fund overseen by the World Bank was allocated $185 million, about what Congress allotted it for 2012.

David Waskow, international climate change policy director for Oxfam International, said he believes the administration looked to what Congress, after a lengthy budget battle, ultimately agreed to allocate for international climate finance as a guide for how much to ask in 2012.

"They have, in various ways, stressed their continued commitment to climate finance," Waskow said of the administration. But, he said, "They're going to have to stand firm based on the numbers they put forward."

Michael Wolosin, director of research and policy for Climate Advisers, called the request "disappointing." He said the administration will have to rely on other agencies like the Millennium Challenge Corporation and the Overseas Private Investment Corporation as well as seeking climate co-benefits in existing food and water security programs in order to "avoid failure on its Copenhagen commitments."

As part of the 2009 climate summit in the Danish capital, the Obama administration and other governments agreed to provide $30 billion in urgent money to vulnerable countries through 2012. That so-called "fast-start" money has now largely been fulfilled.

They also agreed to mobilize $100 billion annually in public and private money by 2020. And while several people said they were relieved to see that the money for global climate programs didn't take a big dip now that the fast-start window has closed, they also said they fear the administration is not mobilizing enough for the future.

"We're not going to see a drop off the cliff as some people feared might occur," said Jake Schmidt, international climate change policy director for the Natural Resources Defense Council. But, he said, "I think it raises the challenge of how we're going to raise even more going forward."