Reported Federal Climate Change Funding Increased for Three of the Four Funding Categories, but Data May Not Be Comparable Over Time

Federal climate change funding, as reported by OMB, increased from $2.35  billion in 1993 to $5.09 billion in 2004 (116 percent), or from $3.28 billion to  $5.09 billion (55 percent) after adjusting for inflation and also increased for  technology, science, and international assistance between 1993 and 2004,  as shown in table 1. Second, OMB reported that it expanded the definitions of some accounts to  include more activities, but did not specify how the definitions were  changed. CCSP used several ways of categorizing data on science  funding in its reports, but the data were difficult to compare over the entire  time period because CCSP periodically introduced new categorization  methods without explaining how the new methods could be compared with  the ones they replaced. International Assistance

From 1993 through 2004, international assistance funding decreased from 9  percent to 5 percent of total federal funding on climate change, as reported  by OMB. For example, OMB reported climate change funding of $2  million in 2003 and $3 million in 2004 by USAID on the Andean  Counterdrug Initiative, but OMB did not report funding for this account in  previous years. Tax Expenditures

Although not required to provide information on tax expenditures related  to climate change, OMB reported certain information related to climate- related tax expenditures for each year. OMB officials said that they consistently reported proposed tax  expenditures where a key purpose was specifically to reduce greenhouse  gas emissions. Reported Funding for Most Agencies Increased, but Unexplained Changes in Report Content Limit the Comparability of Data Over Time

OMB reported that 12 of the 14 agencies that received funding for climate  change programs in 2004 received more funding in that year than they had  in 1993. Unexplained changes in the content of OMB reports limit the comparability  of agencies’ funding data, and therefore it is unclear whether funding  changed as much as was reported by OMB. Similarly, OMB reported  funding for other agencies in some years but not in others, without  explanation. We also recommend that OMB  include information on existing climate-related tax expenditures in its   use the same criteria for determining which tax expenditures to include  as it uses for determining which accounts to include;  request that the Congress clarify whether future reports should be  presented in terms of expenditures and obligations or in terms of budget  authority, and if the Congress prefers the former, OMB should request  the necessary time to prepare reports on that basis; and  if it continues to report budget authority rather than expenditures and  obligations, clearly identify the information reported as budget authority  throughout the report. Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

This report examines federal climate change funding from 1993 through  2004, as reported by OMB and CCSP to determine (1) how total funding and  funding by category changed and the extent to which data on such funding  are comparable over time and (2) how funding by agency changed and the  extent to which data on such funding are comparable over time. The term “funding” in this report reflects discretionary  budget authority, or the authority provided in law to incur financial  obligations that will result in outlays, as reported by OMB and CCSP in  their reports. CCSP reports already presented climate  change science funding by agency.
Why GAO Did This Study

The Congress has required the administration to report annually on federal spending on climate change. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) reports funding in four categories: technology (to reduce greenhouse gas emissions), science (to better understand the climate), international assistance (to help developing countries), and tax expenditures (to encourage reductions in emissions). The Climate Change Science Program (CCSP), which coordinates many agencies' activities, reports only on science. To measure funding, OMB and CCSP use budget authority, the authority provided in law to enter into financial obligations that will result in government outlays. GAO was asked to examine federal climate change funding for 1993 through 2004, as reported by both agencies, including (1) how total funding and funding by category changed and whether funding data are comparable over time and (2) how funding by agency changed and whether funding data are comparable over time.

What GAO Found

Federal funding for climate change increased from $2.4 billion in 1993 to $5.1 billion in 2004 (116 percent), as reported by OMB, or from $3.3 billion to $5.1 billion (55 percent) after adjusting for inflation. During this period, inflation-adjusted funding increased for technology and science, but decreased for international assistance. The share for technology increased (36 to 56 percent), while the shares for science and international assistance decreased (56 to 39 percent and 9 to 5 percent, respectively). However, it is unclear whether funding changed as much as reported because modifications in the format and content of OMB reports limit the comparability of funding data over time. For example, OMB reported that it expanded the definitions of some accounts to include more activities, but did not specify how it changed the definitions. Also, while OMB's totals for science funding were generally comparable to CCSP's totals, the more detailed data in CCSP reports were difficult to compare over time because CCSP introduced new categorization methods without explaining how they related to the previous methods. OMB officials stated that changes in their reports were due, in part, to the short timeline for completing them, and that it has not been required to follow a consistent reporting format from one year to the next. The Director of CCSP said that its reports changed as the program evolved. GAO was unable to compare climate-related tax expenditures over time because OMB reported data on proposed, but not on existing tax expenditures. For example, while OMB reported no funding for existing climate-related tax expenditures in 2004, GAO identified four such tax expenditures in 2004, including revenue loss estimates of $330 million to develop certain renewable energy sources. OMB reported that 12 of the 14 agencies that funded climate change programs in 2004 increased such funding between 1993 and 2004, but unexplained changes in the reports' contents limit the comparability of data on funding by agency. GAO found that OMB reported funding for certain agencies in some years but not in others, without explanation. For example, OMB reported funding of $83 million for the Department of Defense in 2003, but did not list any such funding in prior reports. OMB told GAO that it relied on agency budget offices to submit accurate data.