Search Climate Insights Directory

The ADVANCE Approach is a partnership between the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) and the Columbia University Center for Climate Systems Research (CCSR) designed to move away from short-term consultant-based climate science engagement. It employs a seven-step co-generation process—analyzing context, developing learning questions, gathering data, obtaining feedback, revising information, providing integration guidance, and evaluating outcomes—to ensure climate risk data is fit-for-purpose and usable for local decision-makers. The approach focuses on identifying specific climate thresholds and variables relevant to stakeholders, such as maximum temperature in tropical regions or upland precipitation for mangrove conservation, and builds local capacity to interpret and apply this information to build resilience.

The brief contends that current disaster risk reduction (DRR) efforts often fail because they ignore local cultural interpretations of risk, leading to a disconnect between international aid and on-the-ground realities. Despite significant global investment in aid, climate-related risks continue to rise. The authors argue that failing to engage with culture results in wasted resources and can exacerbate existing inequalities related to gender, ethnicity, or disability. They call for the development of tools and frameworks that equitably reflect diverse, culturally-influenced understandings of risk to make DRR strategies more effective and context-specific.

The study identifies that disaster risk is increasing globally, driven significantly by climate change, while the underlying causes of social vulnerability remain inadequately addressed in policy and practice. It argues that reducing vulnerability to environmental hazards requires coherent political action to correct faulty development processes and suggests that the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction aims to connect DRR with adaptation and development.

The Green Climate Fund (GCF) Secretariat reports progress in its public and private sector pipelines, the simplification of funding proposal templates, and the expansion of readiness support to 45 countries. Key achievements include the signing of contribution agreements with five additional countries and the launch of a new website to enhance stakeholder engagement. The Secretariat also operationalized its accreditation framework, moving 11 applicants to stage II, and provided substantive support for the development of the GCF Strategic Plan.

The report details two readiness requests: one for Vanuatu to develop Climate Information Services (CIS) to support adaptation and disaster risk reduction, and one for Senegal to establish a pipeline of privately funded, grid-connected solar projects to address an acute energy crisis.

Botswana faces significant climate risks, primarily driven by water scarcity and rising temperatures, which threaten its water, health, agriculture, livestock, and forestry sectors. While the country possesses higher adaptive capacity than its neighbors due to its development status and governance, the government has not yet made climate change a national priority. Consequently, there is a lack of guiding legislation, strategy, and dedicated adaptation funding. Most current adaptation efforts are integrated into larger regional projects rather than national initiatives, and civil society engagement remains limited.

The report examines Ethiopia's high vulnerability to climate change, particularly for pastoralists and smallholder farmers. It analyzes national strategies like the Climate Resilient Green Economy (CRGE) and the Programme of Adaptation on Climate Change (EPACC), noting that while political will is strong, adaptation efforts are heavily skewed toward agriculture and disaster risk management, leaving gaps in health, energy, and transportation. It also details the role of international funding and the lack of robust national knowledge-sharing networks.

The document reviews Ghana's climate risk profile, noting that while it is less vulnerable than some West African neighbors, the northern regions face high risks due to poverty and reliance on rain-fed agriculture. It evaluates national policies like the National Climate Change Policy (2014) and the National Climate Change Adaptation Strategy (2010–2020), finding that while these provide a framework, sectoral policies—particularly in agriculture and health—often lack concrete adaptation actions. The review identifies a strong concentration of adaptation projects in the agricultural sector, primarily in northern Ghana, and notes that while Ghana is a significant recipient of bilateral adaptation funds in Sub-Saharan Africa, there is a gap in funding for the water, fisheries, and health sectors.

Mali is highly vulnerable to climate change due to its dependence on agriculture, low development levels, and political fragility. While the government has established a comprehensive policy framework—including the National Climate Change Policy and the Mali Climate Fund—integration of climate risks into sectoral and sub-national policies remains weak. Adaptation efforts are heavily concentrated in the agricultural and livestock sectors, with significant gaps in support for the fishing sector and pastoralists in the northern regions. Most adaptation projects are funded by international donors and focus on institutional capacity building and food security.

Namibia is highly vulnerable to climate change due to its extreme aridity and reliance on climate-dependent livelihoods, particularly in agriculture. While the government has established a National Climate Change Policy (NCCP) and a National Climate Change Strategy and Action Plan (NCCSAP), adaptation is not yet meaningfully integrated into sectoral policies for water, health, and agriculture. Current adaptation projects are limited in number and primarily focus on agriculture and capacity building, with a significant gap in programming for health, tourism, and coastal zones. Adaptation finance is heavily dependent on international donors, with minimal domestic budget allocation.

The document reviews Tanzania's climate risks, highlighting a high vulnerability due to reliance on climate-dependent livelihoods and poverty. It evaluates the government's progress in establishing institutional structures and strategies, such as the National Climate Change Strategy (2012), while noting gaps in sectoral policy integration and the need for more targeted funding for priority sectors like forestry and infrastructure.

Senegal is highly vulnerable to climate change due to its dependence on rain-fed agriculture and fisheries, and a population concentrated along a coastline exposed to sea level rise. While the government has established coordinating bodies like the National Climate Change Committee and identified priority sectors in its NAPA and INDC, the report finds that climate adaptation is not yet effectively mainstreamed into most national sectoral policies or subnational planning. Current adaptation projects primarily target agriculture, water resources, and disaster risk management, often using ecosystem-based approaches, but gaps remain in the health and tourism sectors.

Uganda faces significant climate risks, particularly in its semi-arid northern regions and the 'cattle corridor,' where rising temperatures and rainfall variability threaten agriculture, water, and health. While the government has established a National Climate Change Policy and a coordinating institutional structure, adaptation mainstreaming into sectoral plans and district-level decision-making remains limited. International adaptation finance is heavily concentrated in the agriculture and water sectors, leaving gaps in fisheries, forestry, and health. The country is currently working toward a National Adaptation Plan to better integrate climate resilience into its goal of becoming a middle-income country by 2040.

Tajikistan is highly vulnerable to climate change, particularly in its water, agriculture, and energy sectors, due to high sensitivity to climate risks and low adaptive capacity. While the government has initiated policy frameworks and is developing a national adaptation strategy, progress is hindered by institutional capacity limitations. Adaptation efforts are currently driven largely by the Pilot Program on Climate Resilience (PPCR), with a strong focus on infrastructure and technical capacity, though rural communities and the health sector remain underserved.

Bangladesh is highly vulnerable to sea level rise, flooding, and cyclones, leading the government to establish early adaptation frameworks like the National Adaptation Programme of Action (NAPA) and the Bangladesh Climate Change Strategy and Action Plan (BCCSAP). While the country has created dedicated institutions and funds, such as the Bangladesh Climate Change Trust Fund (BCCTF), adaptation efforts have predominantly focused on large-scale infrastructure in coastal urban areas, often neglecting sectors like livestock and regions prone to drought. Despite being a major recipient of international climate finance, disbursement remains fragmented, and there is a significant gap between planned budgets and actual leveraged funds.

The report analyzes India's high climate sensitivity, driven by its geography and agrarian economy. It details the transition from stand-alone sectoral actions to integrated development planning, centered on the National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAPCC). While progress is noted in water and agriculture, the document identifies critical gaps in adaptation for the northeast, Indian Ocean islands, the Sundarbans, and regarding gender and health. It also highlights a significant imbalance in international climate finance, which heavily favors mitigation over adaptation.

The document provides a comprehensive review of Kenya's climate adaptation landscape, highlighting the high vulnerability of its arid and semi-arid lands (ASALs) and the dependence of its economy on rain-fed agriculture. It details the national policy framework, including the National Climate Change Response Strategy and Action Plan, and evaluates the role of the 2010 constitution in devolving adaptation responsibilities to 47 counties. The report identifies a strong focus on agriculture and livestock in international adaptation projects but notes significant gaps in addressing the needs of the tourism sector, coastal zones, and urban areas.

Burkina Faso is highly vulnerable to climate change due to its heavy reliance on rain-fed agriculture and livestock, which employ approximately 80-90% of its workforce. The country faces risks from rising temperatures, rainfall variability, and extreme events like floods and droughts. While the government has established a National Adaptation Plan (2015) and a coordinating body (CONEDD), adaptation efforts remain heavily concentrated in the agricultural sector, with limited integration into health or urban planning. Adaptation is largely driven by international funding and regional projects, with a significant gap in subnational guidance and local government capacity.

The document provides a comprehensive review of Pakistan's vulnerability to climate change, focusing on the gap between national policy goals and actual implementation. It identifies critical risks to water, food, and energy security, and notes that while the government has established a National Climate Change Policy and an implementation framework, progress is hindered by weak governance, limited funding, and a lack of capacity at the provincial level following the devolution of responsibilities under the 18th Amendment. The report also catalogues 26 discrete adaptation projects, noting a heavy focus on research and water management, while highlighting significant gaps in health, forestry, and gender-sensitive adaptation.

The document argues that the Sendai Framework's emphasis on multi-level collaboration, learning, and innovation aligns with adaptive governance, which can help manage the complexity of social-ecological systems. While the Framework provides a window for transformative change, its implementation faces hurdles including high operational costs, power imbalances, and the lack of a dedicated funding mechanism.