Indian Leadership in Climate Diplomacy – An Assessment Of India’s Multilateral Initiatives (ISA, CDRI and GBA)

For India, the path to climate leadership runs through the twin goals of development and equity, bridging domestic ambition with global responsibility.

Introduction

India stands at a pivotal moment in global climate governance, facing the dual challenge of ensuring inclusive development for 1.4 billion people while fulfilling ambitious climate targets. This dual responsibility has positioned the country as both a vital stakeholder and an emerging leader in shaping international climate diplomacy.^[1] While India is the world’s third-largest emitter in absolute terms^[2], its per capita emissions remain far below the global average, lending weight to its long-standing call for ‘equity and climate justice’ on the world stage.

Domestically, India has matched its commitments with action. It has pledged to reduce the emissions intensity of GDP by 45% from 2005 levels by 2030 and to achieve net-zero emissions by 2070. Notably, the country has already exceeded its Nationally Determined Contribution (“NDC”) of sourcing 50% of its installed electricity capacity from non-fossil fuels well before the 2030 deadline.^[3] This delivery record enhances India’s international credibility and supports its growing role as a solutions provider, particularly for the Global South.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has aptly summed the Indian stance as below^[4]:

“Beyond mere adherence to international agreements, India’s pursuit of sustainable development reflects the complex interplay between environmental conservation, social equity, economic prosperity and climate change. Its national goals in this regard require a holistic understanding of sustainable development that balances immediate needs with long-term sustainability, ensuring that present actions do not compromise the well-being of future generations. It acknowledges that solutions to today’s challenges must not only address pressing issues but also lay the groundwork for a resilient and equitable future.”

Even the central regulator of the country’s monetary system, the Reserve Bank of India, is committed to supporting green initiatives and is working steadfastly to realise the vision of building a financial system that can not only withstand future climate shocks, but also actively contribute to India’s journey towards a sustainable and resilient future.^[5]

This article explores how India is capitalising on this momentum in climate diplomacy through its flagship multilateral initiatives, including the International Solar Alliance, the Coalition for Disaster Resilient Infrastructure, and the Global Biofuels Alliance, among others. These platforms demonstrate India’s strategic shift towards promoting fair cooperation, technology sharing, and South-South partnerships, which are increasingly vital for driving collective global climate action.

The International Solar Alliance (ISA): Charting a New Era in Global Climate Diplomacy

Introduction and Genesis

The creation of the ISA represents a watershed in global climate governance, reflecting both the urgency of energy transition and the promise of South-South cooperation. Initiated by Prime Minister Narendra Modi and launched in collaboration with then-President Francois Hollande of France on 30 November 2015 at COP21 in Paris, the ISA emerged from the strategic need to implement the Paris Agreement.^[6] It also holds the distinction of being the first treaty-based intergovernmental organisation headquartered in India, located in Gurugram, Haryana.

The ISA’s founding vision was based on the shared reality of solar-rich nations located between the Tropics of Cancer and Capricorn; countries blessed with plentiful sunlight but burdened with energy poverty and high investment risks. India referred to these nations as “Suryaputra” or “Sons of the Sun,” emphasising their collective potential. The primary objective was clear: to increase demand for solar technologies and financing across developing economies, thereby lowering costs, reducing policy uncertainties, and attracting the private capital necessary for a clean energy transition.

Strategic Mandate and Importance

The ISA’s mission is embodied in its ‘Towards 1000’ strategy, which aims to mobilise over USD 1 trillion in solar investments by 2030 and to support the deployment of 1,000 GW of new solar generation capacity.^[7] Its strategic relevance can be assessed through three critical dimensions:

1. Climate Mitigation and Energy Access (SDGs 7 & 13): By prioritising solar deployment, the ISA directly promotes Sustainable Development Goals 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy) and 13 (Climate Action). For developing nations, solar energy offers a dual benefit: (i) supporting industrialisation while avoiding carbon lock-in, and (ii) providing decentralised, clean power to nearly one billion people who still lack reliable electricity.
2. Market Aggregation and De-risking: At its core, the ISA is an innovative force in the economy. By consolidating demand for solar technology and facilitating collective procurement, it achieves economies of scale that lower the Levelized Cost of Electricity (“LCOE”). More importantly, it acts as a de-risking platform, making volatile political and financial markets more appealing for foreign direct investment. This role is crucial for driving solar infrastructure development in regions that have traditionally been overlooked by global capital.
3. South-South Cooperation: Unlike traditional aid frameworks between the more developed and the less developed or developing economies, the ISA embodies a horizontal model of partnership. Its initiatives, such as the STAR-C programme^[8] for capacity building, foster knowledge exchange, technology transfer, and collaborative innovation across the Global South. This positions the ISA not merely as a donor-recipient model, but as a platform for shared problem-solving.

Challenges and Constraints

Despite its ambitious mandate, the ISA confronts significant constraints that temper its transformative potential.

1. Financial Mobilisation: The ISA’s USD 1 trillion target remains formidable. Actual capital inflows, especially to Least Developed Countries (“LDCs”) and Small Island Developing States (“SIDS”), have been slow. Conventional policy harmonisation is inadequate to bridge the financing gap. Without effective risk-mitigation mechanisms, private investors remain hesitant to commit to projects in fragile markets.
2. Geopolitical Limitations: Although the ISA enhances India’s global stature, its influence is limited by structural realities. India does not dominate low-cost solar manufacturing, which is primarily led by China, and cannot yet match the scale of concessional finance provided by Western institutions. These restrictions currently hinder its ability to turn diplomatic capital into tangible economic benefits.
3. Policy and Regulatory Barriers: Within member states, bureaucratic inertia, inconsistent grid infrastructure, and retroactive policy changes weaken investor confidence. Such governance challenges risk delaying project implementation despite ISA’s efforts at aggregation and standardisation.
4. Challenges in Cross-Border Grid Connectivity: The ISA’s primary focus on off-grid solar projects has raised concerns about its ability to handle the much more complex task of developing cross-border grid links.^[9]

Potential, Impact, and Future Role

The ISA’s long-term potential lies in its ability to promote systemic change. Initiatives such as One Sun, One World, One Grid (“OSOWOG”), first proposed by the Prime Minister of India at the inaugural assembly of the ISA,^[10] although technically complex, exemplify this goal; imagining a globally connected solar grid where the sun’s energy is harnessed continuously across different time zones.

By anchoring its mandate in solar energy, the most abundant renewable resource across its member states, the ISA is uniquely positioned to advance decarbonisation while simultaneously promoting inclusive development. Its impact will ultimately be measured not merely in gigawatts installed but in avoided emissions, improved energy security, and the creation of sustainable livelihoods. In this sense, the ISA’s promise extends well beyond infrastructure. It is a vehicle for reshaping the global energy order.

Recommendations for Enhanced Effectiveness

To realise its full potential, the ISA needs to refine its institutional and financial architecture. Three scholarly recommendations are especially noteworthy:

1. Establish a Risk-Guarantee Fund: The ISA should set up an internationally supported Solar Risk-Guarantee Mechanism, collaborating with Multilateral Development Banks (“MDBs”) and donor countries. By offering first-loss guarantees, this fund could bridge the trust gap between cautious financiers and high-risk markets, particularly in LDCs and SIDS.
2. Promote Local Manufacturing and Technology Transfer: To reduce reliance on limited sources within the global supply chain, the ISA should actively support the development of regional solar manufacturing hubs in Africa, Latin America, and Asia. This would diversify production, foster local industrial ecosystems, and enable member states to collaborate effectively in adding value to the solar economy.
3. Integrate Storage and Grid Solutions: The intermittency of solar power remains a core challenge. The ISA should lead the development of a Global Storage Facility and invest in advanced battery technologies to transform solar energy from intermittent to a reliable base-load source. It is also worth noting that the Minister for New and Renewable Energy (MNRE), Government of India, has recently stated that the country is developing some of the world’s most advanced high-efficiency cells, such as TOPCon or Tunnel Oxide Passivated Contact. Additionally, research institutes are advancing Perovskite technology, refining it for practical use, which is all part of the broader vision for a fully integrated Swadeshi infrastructure.^[11]

As the urgency of climate action intensifies, the ISA offers a pragmatic yet ambitious pathway, one where the sun becomes not only a source of light but a cornerstone of global climate justice.

The Coalition for Disaster Resilient Infrastructure (CDRI): Towards Global Risk Governance

Introduction and Genesis

Following the ISA in 2015, the establishment of the CDRI in 2019 marks a significant milestone in India’s progressive climate diplomacy. The CDRI seeks to address the systemic vulnerabilities of global infrastructure systems to climate and disaster risks. Launched by the Prime Minister of India at the United Nations Climate Action Summit in New York on 23 September 2019, the CDRI became an international organisation in 2022. It is a multi-stakeholder partnership involving national governments, UN agencies, MDBs, the private sector, and academic institutions, operating with an interim secretariat in New Delhi, India.

The foundational idea for the CDRI was inspired by a crucial policy realisation that the cascading failure of infrastructure systems (power, transport, telecommunications, water) during extreme events accounts for a significant portion of economic losses and disrupts vital services, hindering long-term development progress.^[12] This realisation was reportedly prompted by India’s experience, especially the aftermath of the 2001 Gujarat earthquake. The concept was officially outlined during the 2016 Asian Ministerial Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction, placing resilient infrastructure at the centre of sustainable development. The CDRI was thus established to change the global approach from a reactive, disaster-response model to a proactive, prevention-focused strategy emphasising capacity building before a catastrophe occurs.

Strategic Mandate and Importance

The primary aim of the CDRI is to enhance the resilience of both new and existing infrastructure systems against climate and disaster risks, thereby supporting sustainable development across all member states. Its mandate is closely aligned with the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, the Paris Agreement on Climate Change (SDG 13), and the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction.^[13]

The significance of the CDRI can be examined through three functional pillars:

1. Systemic Risk Mitigation: Disasters highlight the interconnectedness of modern infrastructure. A failure in the power grid can disrupt telecommunications, impact water supply pumps, and halt transport systems. The CDRI prioritises systemic resilience, moving beyond protecting individual assets to understanding and managing cross-sectoral dependencies. By concentrating on critical sectors such as power, transport, health, and telecommunications, the CDRI aims to safeguard society’s essential “lifelines”.
2. Global Knowledge Platform: The CDRI serves as a vital hub for knowledge generation and exchange. It develops global methodologies, such as the Infrastructure Resilience Review (IRR) methodology, in collaboration with the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR), and formulates guidance like the framework for heat-resilient infrastructure. This technical capacity building assists countries, especially Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and Small Island Developing States (SIDS), the latter supported through the Infrastructure for Resilient Island States (IRIS) initiative, in updating their national codes, standards, and policy frameworks to incorporate disaster risk reduction (DRR).
3. Financial De-risking: The global average annual loss (AAL) due to infrastructure damage from disasters is estimated to be hundreds of billions of dollars, representing a significant fiscal challenge. The CDRI works to embed resilience into investment decisions by making the economic case for prevention. By providing tools for cost-benefit analysis and advocating for risk-informed financial taxonomies, it aims to attract private capital and MDB support, establishing resilient infrastructure as a distinct and viable asset class.

Challenges and Constraints

Despite its clear mandate and high-level support, the CDRI faces complex and multifaceted challenges.

1. Institutional and policy fragmentation within member countries creates a significant challenge. Infrastructure planning, DRR, and climate change adaptation often function separately, causing bureaucratic delays and inconsistent application of resilience standards. Addressing this fragmentation requires profound institutional reform that the CDRI can only suggest, not enforce.
2. The financing gap for resilience remains significant. Although the economic case for investing in resilience is evident, with returns estimated at up to 6:1 in avoided losses, converting this into bankable projects for risk-averse private investors, particularly in high-risk regions, is challenging. The difficulty lies in moving beyond policy documents to establishing resilient, sovereign-backed risk-sharing mechanisms that lower the capital costs for such projects.
3. Data and technological hurdles remain. Effective resilience planning demands detailed, multi-hazard risk data and advanced modelling, which are often unavailable or inaccessible in developing countries. Closing this data gap to guide resilient design and policy is essential for CDRI’s success.

Potential, Future Role, and Recommendations

The CDRI is poised to play an increasingly vital role in the future, especially in tackling the interconnected challenges of climate change and pollution. By promoting infrastructure capable of withstanding extreme weather events, CDRI also supports climate adaptation and resilience. Additionally, resilient infrastructure, such as distributed and climate-resilient power grids, enables the continuous operation of green technologies, including electric vehicle charging networks and water treatment plants, which are crucial for reducing pollution and achieving net-zero targets. Emphasising the resilience of existing infrastructure is a key part of sustainable development, ensuring that new investments avoid repeating the mistakes of previously vulnerable, carbon-intensive practices.

To maximise its effectiveness, the following recommendations are suggested:

1. Mandate Resilience Audits: The CDRI should promote the global adoption of compulsory, systemic resilience audits for all significant public infrastructure investments, directly linked to MDB lending conditions.
2. Establish a Sovereign Risk-Sharing Facility: To address financing constraints, the CDRI should advocate for the creation of a pooled, multilateral Sovereign Resilience Investment Fund. This fund would offer concessional financing and credit guarantees specifically for resilience-enhancing retrofitting and new DRI projects in vulnerable nations, effectively bridging the gap in risk-return expectations for private finance.
3. Promote Nature-Based Solutions (NBS): The CDRI should strengthen its focus on integrating NBS, such as restoring wetlands, mangroves, and urban green spaces into infrastructure planning. These solutions often deliver resilience benefits (e.g., coastal protection and flood attenuation) alongside co-benefits in pollution reduction and biodiversity enhancement, providing a holistic approach to sustainable infrastructure.

By adopting these strategic enhancements, the CDRI can reinforce its position as the leading global partnership, fostering systemic resilience and ensuring that the infrastructure supporting human progress remains secure against future threats.

The Global Biofuels Alliance (GBA): Towards Energy Transition

Introduction and Genesis

Following the ISA and CDRI, a third India-led initiative was launched at the G20 New Delhi Leaders’ Summit on September 9, 2023, in the form of the GBA. Its creation marks a significant collaborative effort among major biofuel producers (such as the United States, Brazil, and India) and consumers, aimed at accelerating the global development and adoption of sustainable biofuels. The GBA is organised as a multi-stakeholder partnership involving governments, international organisations (including the IEA and World Bank), and industry bodies.^[14] Its main aim is to position biofuels as a key element of the global energy transition, advancing beyond fossil fuels to reach net-zero emission targets.^[15]

The core idea behind the GBA stemmed from two main goals: improving global energy security and addressing climate change, especially in the difficult-to-decarbonise transport sector. Major biofuel-producing nations, such as India, aimed to utilise their domestic biomass resources to decrease reliance on expensive imported crude oil, a realisation strengthened by global geopolitical instability. This merging of energy security and climate objectives, facilitated through the G20 platform, positioned the GBA as a vital mechanism for unifying disparate national biofuel policies and establishing international standards for sustainability and trade.

Strategic Mandate and Importance

The core objective of the GBA is to encourage sustainable use of biofuels by catalysing policy exchange, technical assistance, and the adoption of internationally recognised standards.^[16] Its strategic significance resides in three key areas:

1. Decarbonisation of Challenging Sectors: Biofuels, especially Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF) and bio-based diesel, provide some of the few viable, commercially available solutions for decarbonising heavy transport, aviation, and shipping, where direct electrification is not yet practical. The GBA supports the necessary technological progress, such as second-generation and third-generation biofuel processes, which utilise non-food feedstocks like agricultural residue and algae, thereby addressing the food versus fuel dilemma.
2. Market Mobilisation and Standardisation: The GBA aims to establish a global virtual marketplace, enabling the mapping of demand and supply and reducing reliance on fragmented regional markets. By developing strong sustainability codes and certification procedures, the GBA intends to minimise investment risks, encourage international trade, and unlock the significant growth potential forecasted by the International Energy Agency (IEA), which predicts a required 3.5 to 5-fold increase in biofuels by 2050 to reach net-zero targets.
3. Global South Empowerment: By emphasising capacity building and technology transfer, the GBA offers developing nations and emerging economies a pathway to energy self-sufficiency, rural economic growth, and lower import costs, thereby aligning the energy transition with the SDGs.

Challenges and Constraints

1. Sustainability Paradox: Despite its ambitious mandate, the GBA faces significant challenges. The primary issue is the ‘Sustainability Paradox’. While biofuels produce lower end-use emissions than fossil fuels, unsustainable production practices, such as converting highly biodiverse land for energy crops, can lead to high indirect land-use change (ILUC) emissions, potentially offsetting the climate benefits. The alliance must ensure a comprehensive life cycle assessment is mandated to prevent carbon leakage.
2. Financing and Technology Gap: Advanced (second and third generation) biofuel technologies are capital-intensive and lack economies of scale, making them less competitive than subsidised fossil fuels. Mobilising large-scale private capital for infrastructure, such as bio-refineries and distribution networks, especially in risk-sensitive developing nations, remains difficult without strong sovereign guarantees.
3. Supply Chain Risks: Feedstock security and variability present challenges that demand international policy coordination to mitigate.

Potential, Future Role, and Recommendations

The GBA is poised to play an increasingly vital role in reaching global climate goals. By encouraging feedstocks made from waste (e.g., agricultural residue, municipal organic waste), GBA directly helps reduce pollution, providing solutions like Compressed Bio Gas (CBG) that tackle issues such as crop stubble burning and methane emissions. Its success is crucial for closing the 2050 Net Zero Emissions pathway gap identified by the IEA, especially in sectors that are difficult to electrify.

To maximise its effectiveness, the following recommendations are suggested:

1. Implement robust ILUC and Water Use Mandates: The GBA must immediately define and enforce strict, measurable metrics to exclude high-risk land-use changes and water-intensive feedstocks from its approved certification standards.
2. Establish a dedicated R&D and de-risking facility: a specialised fund should be set up to offer concessional finance and risk guarantees for scaling 2G and 3G biofuel technologies, thereby lowering the cost of capital and enabling rapid commercial parity with conventional fuels.
3. Integrate Biofuels into Carbon Pricing: The GBA should promote international carbon pricing systems that explicitly recognise the verified life-cycle carbon reductions of sustainable biofuels, establishing a clear economic benefit over fossil fuels.

By adopting these strategic policy instruments, the GBA can evolve from a policy forum into a leading force promoting global, sustainable bioenergy deployment, thereby ensuring a cleaner and more secure energy future.

Conclusion

Carbon neutrality goals are admirable, but their realisation requires not only ambition but also strong institutional capacity and practical initiatives. For developing nations, this challenge is increased by the need to address urgent development priorities. The task, therefore, involves finding a careful balance, progressing with climate transitions while also strengthening resilience to protect growth.

The establishment of the GBA at the G20 Summit marked the culmination of a new era in Indian climate diplomacy, building on the achievements of the ISA and the CDRI. These three initiatives collectively signify a clear and decisive shift in India’s international stance. Where India’s foreign policy on climate was once primarily defensive, advocating for the principle of Common but Differentiated Responsibilities (CBDR), it has now confidently shifted to a proactive role as a global leader and architect of practical, scalable solutions. This embodies India’s ‘Resource Diplomacy’.

The ISA mobilises solar finance across the Global South; the CDRI concentrates on infrastructure resilience, a vital yet often neglected aspect of climate adaptation; and the GBA advocates for the deep decarbonisation of hard-to-abate sectors through sustainable waste-to-fuel technologies. By integrating its national goals—such as reducing dependency on crude oil, alleviating urban pollution, and increasing rural incomes—into these global frameworks, India ensures that the energy transition remains inclusive, equitable, and responsive to the needs of developing countries. This proactive multilateral approach not only accelerates global climate action but also strategically positions India as an essential leader, capable of mobilising consensus and driving constructive change within the emerging world order.

Author Brief Bio: Yashasvi Singh is an Advocate at the Supreme Court of India and Former Head of Legal at the Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority, Government of Telangana. She holds an LL.M. in International Law and maintains a keen interest in international developments, particularly within the legal realm. She can be reached at: yashasvi.nliu@gmail.com

Rewferences: