The design process of the CWG has raised several questions. These include ongoing questions on how to finance, the role of the private sector, the level of “country accountability” for resources and the transparency of the board of directors itself.  In addition, questions have been raised about the need for a new international climate institution, which could further fragment the public dollars spent each year on mitigation and adjustment.  During COP-16 in Cancun, the leadership of the GCF was entrusted to the newly created Green Climate Fund Board and the World Bank was elected as a temporary agent.  In order to develop a concept for how the GCF works, the “Transition Committee for the Green Climate Fund” was also established in Cancun. The committee met four times in 2011 and presented a report to the 17th COP in Durban, South Africa. On the basis of this report, the COP decided that the “GCF will become an operational unit of the financial mechanism” of the UNFCCC and that the necessary rules should be adopted at COP-18 in 2012 to ensure that the CGDC “is responsible and must be held accountable under the leadership of the COP.”  Researchers at the Overseas Development Institute say that without this last-minute agreement on a government instrument for the GCF, the “African COP” would have been considered a failure.  In addition, the CWG Council has been tasked with developing rules and procedures for disbursing funds to ensure that they are consistent with the national objectives of the countries where projects and programmes are implemented. The CWG Board of Directors was also responsible for the establishment of an independent secretariat and a permanent director of the GCC.
 The Fund has set a goal of raising $100 billion per year by 2020, which is not an official figure of the size of the Fund itself. Uncertainty about the source of the money led to the creation of a High-Level Advisory Group on Climate Finance (AGF) by UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon in February 2010. There is no formal link between the AGF and the GCF, although its report is a source of debate on “resource mobilization” for the DMA, a point that will be discussed at the EMB meeting in October 2013.  Whether the funding objective is based on public sources or whether “loan-financed” private financing is imputed to the sum also remains controversial.  Joe Thwaites, a climate financial analyst at the World Resources Institute in Washington DC, says other promises could come from some developing countries that contributed to the Fund in 2014, such as Mexico and Peru.