Both recipients and providers mentioned the importance of tracking so called “brown” or fossil fuel intensive investments in addition to climate finance, to effectively measure progress towards greenhouse gas emission reduction across their broader portfolio of investment activities. However, considering the resource intensity of establishing and operating tracking systems and the recent focus on defining and tracking flows in the context of the UNFCCC USD 100 billion commitment, providers of climate finance were sometimes of the view that an over-emphasis on tracking per se can itself be a barrier to effectiveness, redirecting scarce resources from achieving impact on the ground. On the other hand, recipient countries claimed that domestic systems tracking finance can be useful in verifying finance reported to the UNFCCC.