Search Climate Insights Directory

The document examines the necessity of aligning national financing strategies for climate adaptation with other financial frameworks, such as NDCs, SDGs, and national development plans. It highlights that fragmentation caused by ministerial silos or varying partner influences can lead to duplicated efforts. By integrating adaptation finance into the broader economic decision-making process, countries can better identify cross-ministerial synergies, improve the evidence base for investment, and ensure that adaptation actions are resilient to macroeconomic pressures like sovereign debt. The briefing provides lessons on engaging finance and planning ministries to move from a project-based approach to a systemic portfolio approach to adaptation investment.

The report outlines a framework for developing countries to bridge the adaptation finance gap through seven guiding principles. These are divided into process-related principles—emphasizing country-driven approaches, the engagement of finance ministries, and inclusivity—and content-related principles, which focus on the strategic use of diverse financial instruments, alignment with national development goals, improving the enabling environment, and establishing monitoring and evaluation processes. The report supports these principles with case studies from Kenya, Nepal, and Peru, highlighting that a financing strategy is a continuous process rather than a single document.

The Coral Restoration Programme in Soufriere, Saint Lucia, employs 'coral gardeners' to restore endangered elkhorn and staghorn coral species to combat bleaching caused by warming ocean temperatures. Integrated into Saint Lucia's National Adaptation Plan (2018–2028), the initiative is a partnership between the government, non-profits, and the private sector, including CLEAR Caribbean Ltd and the Department of Fisheries. The programme aims to produce 4,000 coral colonies to protect coastal communities from storm surges and support the tourism and fishing sectors, which are critical to the local economy.

The document examines the challenges of aligning long-term low greenhouse gas emission development strategies (LT-LEDS) with global adaptation goals. It explores the potential for combined, synergistic strategies that ensure emission reductions are climate-resilient and that long-term adaptation plans align with mitigation targets, specifically within the framework of the Paris Agreement.

The report explores how repeating national climate risk assessments (CRAs) can support the monitoring, evaluation, and learning (MEL) of national adaptation efforts. While CRAs are traditionally used to inform planning, the author argues they can also track changes in vulnerability over time to assess adaptation success. Analysis of 12 countries reveals a shift toward viewing CRAs as continuous learning processes rather than static reports, with a growing consensus that updates should occur roughly every five years to align with policy cycles. However, the report finds that fully standardized approaches to repeating CRAs are often impractical due to evolving science and shifting policy priorities. Instead, it suggests a flexible approach where only specific components are standardized. Early adopters like Germany and the United Kingdom have begun using CRAs to evaluate NAP effectiveness, though they face methodological challenges, including the time lag between implementing measures and seeing tangible risk reductions.

Zambia has revised its monitoring, evaluation, and learning (MEL) framework for its National Adaptation Plan (NAP) to improve coherence across national policies and ensure inclusive, sub-national engagement. The framework aims to provide evidence-based reporting, promote accountability, and integrate gender-responsive measures across nine priority sectors. Key efforts include aligning indicators with the 8th National Development Plan and Nationally Determined Contributions, and establishing a data flow process from ward and district levels up to national ministries.

The report explores how national climate risk assessments (CRAs) can transition from one-off planning documents to iterative tools for monitoring, evaluation, and learning (MEL). Based on analysis from 12 countries, it argues that while periodic CRAs are essential for evidence-based National Adaptation Plans (NAPs), a fully standardized approach is often impractical due to evolving scientific knowledge and shifting policy priorities. The document highlights that countries like Germany and the UK are beginning to use CRAs to assess whether vulnerability is decreasing, though methodological challenges remain, such as the time lag between adaptation action and observable risk reduction.

As of 30 April 2023, the GCF has approved 693 readiness grants totaling USD 513 million for 142 countries. Analysis of 239 completed grants shows significant progress in capacity-building, strategic framework development, and adaptation planning, with a strong focus on vulnerable regions. However, the portfolio has faced substantial delays, primarily due to the COVID-19 pandemic, leading to 336 grants receiving no-cost extensions. The GCF is implementing operational improvements, including the Readiness Results Management Framework (RRMF) and the Portfolio Performance Management System (PPMS), to enhance reporting and efficiency.

The Kune-Vaini Lagoon System (KVLS) in northern Albania, a biodiversity hotspot for approximately 200 bird species, faced severe threats from climate-induced flooding and sea-level rise. Between 1997 and 2017, floods caused USD 218 million in damage across Albania, with a third of coastal areas expected to face regular flooding by 2030. In response, the Albanian government, through its National Adaptation Plan (NAP) launched in 2015, implemented a pilot EbA project from 2016 to 2020 funded by the Global Environment Facility (GEF) and implemented by UNEP. The project employed three primary strategies: rehabilitating 2,000 metres of coastal dunes using over 65,000 seedlings of marram grass and marina; planting over 14,500 climate-resilient tree seedlings to create a "green belt" buffer; and using a sand dredger to reopen the tidal channel inlet to restore seawater circulation. These interventions have led to increased populations of sea bass, eels, pelicans, and flamingos, while improving flood resilience and water quality. The project also addressed capacity gaps in national and local government regarding EbA concepts. Based on these results, the Ministry of Tourism and Environment intends to replicate these approaches in the Narta and Karavasta lagoons in southern Albania.

Fiji employs a multi-sectoral approach to climate adaptation, utilizing a National Adaptation Plan with 160 measures and a hybrid seawall strategy combining mangroves, boulders, and vetiver grass. The government coordinates these efforts through the Climate Change Division, utilizing GIS and the Adaptation Impact Analysis Tool to monitor village-level projects. For communities facing immediate risk of inundation, Fiji has established a Standard Operating Procedure for Planned Relocations and the Climate Relocation of Communities (CROC) Trust Fund to ensure voluntary, culturally-sensitive movement to higher ground, as seen in the relocation of the village of Cogea.

The proposal seeks USD 2,726,404 over 36 months to overcome five primary barriers to climate change adaptation (CCA) in Georgia: limited national and regional coordination, insufficient mainstreaming of CCA in policies, low awareness among decision-makers, limited funding, and the lack of a comprehensive monitoring and evaluation (M&E) system. The project, implemented by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the Ministry of Environmental Protection and Agriculture (MEPA), will establish thematic working groups, conduct climate risk assessments in four representative regions, develop six sectoral adaptation plans, and create a private sector engagement strategy. A central goal is the formulation and submission of a costed National Adaptation Plan to the UNFCCC, supported by a new M&E framework and a targeted adaptation finance action plan.

The report details the NAP Global Network's support for 22 countries in leveraging their National Adaptation Plan (NAP) processes to create Adaptation Communications (AdComs) for the UNFCCC. It argues that utilizing NAP results for AdComs is effective regardless of whether a country is in the early stages of the NAP process or has been implementing it for several years, thereby boosting the profile of adaptation needs and progress while avoiding redundant reporting burdens.

The report examines how developing countries can use the results of their National Adaptation Plan (NAP) processes to create Adaptation Communications (AdComs) under the Paris Agreement. It analyzes trends in AdCom submissions, provides case studies of countries at different NAP stages, and offers lessons on consultation and strategic alignment to boost the visibility of adaptation needs and progress.

The report provides guidance and analysis on leveraging National Adaptation Plan (NAP) processes to develop Adaptation Communications (AdComs). It details flexible submission options, analyzes trends among developing countries—particularly regarding gender integration and climate finance—and shares lessons from the NAP Global Network's support of 22 partner countries to streamline reporting and enhance the visibility of national adaptation priorities.

The report provides guidance for developing countries to align their National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) with Adaptation Communications (AdComs) under the Paris Agreement. It analyzes trends among the 56 countries that have submitted AdComs, noting that most developing nations use either standalone documents or their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) as vehicles. The document outlines how countries at different stages of the NAP process—early stage, finalizing, or implementing—can use AdComs to consolidate information, advocate for support, or share lessons learned. It also highlights trends in gender integration, adaptation costing, and the use of case studies to demonstrate resilience.

The report details a regional assessment conducted by the IAI to map national and international global change policies and decision-making landscapes. Using surveys, listening sessions, and policy document analysis, the assessment identifies 'Climate Action' as the top current policy priority for member parties, followed by 'Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services'. It also highlights emerging priorities related to social consequences, such as human health and poverty, and identifies intersectoral collaboration gaps as a primary barrier to integrating scientific information into policy decisions.

The report argues that the Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA) should avoid a rigid, top-down indicator framework, which often creates bureaucratic burdens and fails to reflect local realities. Instead, it proposes a 'mixed approach' that combines a few high-level global targets with bottom-up, country-driven indicators derived from existing national MEL systems. The authors emphasize that the MEL system must be iterative and pragmatically bold, focusing on enhancing adaptive capacity and reducing vulnerability without imposing new reporting burdens on developing countries. Key recommendations include leveraging existing frameworks like the SDGs and the Sendai Framework, strengthening participatory processes, and defining clear roles for UNFCCC bodies to analyze collective progress for the Global Stocktake.

The report analyzes 41 multisectoral National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) to explore their role in managing loss and damage. It finds that while nearly half of NAPs explicitly mention loss and damage and almost all incorporate disaster risk management, there are significant gaps in addressing non-economic losses and irreversible impacts. The authors argue that NAPs are essential tools for minimizing loss and damage and recommend that international funding and planning for loss and damage build upon existing NAP risk assessments and institutional frameworks.

The report analyzes 41 multisectoral NAPs to determine the extent to which they integrate loss and damage (L&D) information and actions. It argues that NAPs are fundamental tools for minimizing L&D through adaptation and disaster risk management, though they often lack detailed analysis of irreversible impacts and non-economic losses. The authors propose a 'spectrum' approach to L&D—ranging from avoidance (mitigation) to minimization (adaptation/DRR) and addressing (humanitarian response/reparations)—and recommend that international financing mechanisms leverage existing NAP risk assessments to avoid duplication and ensure climate justice.

The report analyzes 41 multisectoral National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) to assess their integration of loss and damage (L&D) strategies. It finds that while nearly half of NAPs explicitly mention L&D and almost all include disaster risk management (DRM) components, there is a significant gap in addressing non-economic losses and irreversible impacts. The document proposes a 'spectrum' approach to L&D, ranging from avoidance (mitigation) and minimization (adaptation/DRR) to remediation (humanitarian response and reparations). It recommends that governments and international funders leverage existing NAP risk analyses as a starting point for L&D assessments and ensure that new L&D financing targets impacts that exceed adaptation limits to avoid duplicating existing adaptation efforts.