The liberal limits to transformation in the Green Climate Fund

International climate finance institutions increasingly articulate their goals as catalyzing transformation, but can these institutions bring about deep structural change when they reflect the same liberal logics that arguably created the challenges they are designed to address? In this analysis, we use a virtual ethnography of Green Climate Fund (GCF) board meetings. We ask: how does the GCF navigate the tensions between different conceptualizations of transformation? Our sample included deliberations on 181 projects, and over 42 h of board meetings. Discussions were thematically coded to reveal concerns raised by board members and observers, followed by a structured content analysis. We found that while the transformational potential of proposals featured prominently in deliberations, there was no unified vision or clear definition of transformation. However, approaches that emphasized economic efficiency, technology and infrastructure, and market mechanisms and the private sector aligned with the liberal logic of the fund, while proposals that framed transformation in other ways faced more scrutiny. Board members and observers also raised concerns that proposals had the potential to increase vulnerability or cause harm. Despite this, almost all projects in our sample were approved, suggesting that more work is needed to expand beyond liberal understandings of transformation.