COP30 Adaptation Wins & Fails, EPA to Limit Wetlands Protections, and More

COP30 called for a tripling of adaptation finance by 2035, a win for climate-vulnerable nations grappling with worsening extreme weather events.

The “Global Mutirão” deal gaveled through on Saturday — amidst the furious objections of certain parties who said their concerns were ignored at the closing plenary session — establishes a new goal to replace the US$40bn by 2025 target agreed at COP26 five years ago. It also urges developed countries “to increase the trajectory of their collective provision of climate finance for adaptation to developing country Parties.”

However, the agreement falls short of campaigners’ demands in a number of ways. For one, the new target does not specify the baseline level of adaptation finance on which the proposed tripling should be based. The COP26 goal, in contrast, set 2019 as the baseline year. For another, the 2035 target year is far beyond the 2030 deadline sought by advocates. Reporting by Carbon Brief suggests a baseline could be defined in future by the UNFCCC’s Standing Committee on Finance.

Moreover, the new target sits within the overarching climate finance objective established at last year’s COP, rather than being a distinct goal in its own right. This could put a ceiling on the scale-up, as the umbrella target is set at US$300bn-a-year by 2035, covering both adaptation and mitigation.  

Opinions on the outcome are mixed. Adaptation finance consultant Ben Abraham, with Brazilian think tank Instituto Talanoa, admitted the target is “vaguely worded”, but said that’s typical of language produced through multilateral diplomacy. “Developed countries must take the lead and immediately begin reversing aid cuts and put adaptation finance on a trajectory for sustained growth,” he told Climate Proof.

Anne Hammill, Associate Vice President, Resilience at the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD), supported the deal, saying it “effectively keeps adaptation finance on the negotiating table” and indicates “political will” in support of climate-ravaged countries. 

In contrast, Mohamed Adow, Director of Power Shift Africa — a climate policy think-tank — said the finance outcome “does nothing” to close the adaptation finance gap, and leaves vulnerable countries without support. Adaptation finance and policy expert Sabrina Bachrach said that the target should be quantified in a clear dollar amount "alongside a transparency delivery plan.”

Rich nations sent US$26bn of adaptation finance to poor countries in 2023, and are expected to fall short of the US$40bn annual target set at COP26.

The UN’s Adaptation Fund secured US$135mn in new financing pledges at COP30, barely more than last year and well below its US$300mn fundraising target.

Germany was the largest single donor, contributing €60mn (US$69.4mn). Spain, Sweden, and Ireland also contributed double-digit millions. However, many former rich-world donors to the fund — including the UK, European Commission, and Canada — did not contribute this year.

Mikko Ollikainen, Head of the Adaptation Fund, said the organization was “grateful” to the contributors, but that it “faces unprecedented demand for its work” and voiced hopes that more support would be forthcoming.

In 2024, the fund raised US$133mn in new pledges. The last time the fund achieved its fundraising target was 2021, when it took in US$356mn against a US$120mn target. That year, the fund received large pledges from the US, UK, and European Commission, among others. As of December 2024, the Adaptation Fund had committed US$1.3bn to 183 projects worldwide.

COP30 also did not put forward a decision on revamping the Adaptation Fund’s governance — a major concern for some parties who argue that the current structure limits the Fund’s ability to raise and deploy capital effectively. The final text instead merely acknowledged “the continued consideration by the Adaptation Fund Board of arrangements for the transition of the Adaptation Fund to exclusively serving the Paris Agreement.”

The G77 group of countries and China expressed regret about this shortcoming in an official closing statement, adding that the “effective functioning” of the fund “is a priority for developing countries.”

After two years of back-and-forth, COP30 successfully concluded a ‘health check’ of countries’ adaptation strategies — though questions remain over what it achieved.

In a four-page final text, negotiators brought the National Adaptation Plan (NAP) assessment to a close, a process that had been stalled since last year when the previous COP Presidency declined to engage on the issue. This text welcomed the submission of 71 NAPs by developing countries, and a handful from developed countries, while noting “with concern” the “inadequate” amount of climate finance supplied to poor nations to implement these plans.

The decision did not include much-needed guidance on how to ramp up support for developing countries’ NAP processes, however. The International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISDD) noted that it does not mention “adaptation mainstreaming” or outline how NAPs could be integrated with countries’ National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan processes.

However, in order to improve NAP finance provision, the text does ask the Least Developed Countries Expert Group to spearhead an “overview of climate finance flows and financial support provided by developed country parties.” The findings are to feature in a 2026 progress report.

Countries struck a messy compromise over a set of universal adaptation indicators, which could hamstring efforts to measure climate–proofing progress around the world.

Ahead of the Belém summit, a UN-convened expert group submitted 100 potential indicators for consideration by negotiators — covering the 11 targets established under the Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA). This goal, enshrined in the 2015 Paris Agreement, commits nations to strengthening their resilience and reducing their vulnerability to climate shocks.

On Saturday, the COP30 Presidency pushed through an agreement on a limited set of just 59 indicators — many of which deviated from the expert-recommended list — over the objections of several developing countries and the European Union, among others. The approved indicators include those covering water stress, climate-resilient food and agricultural production, and climate impact, vulnerability and risk assessment, among others. A handful of finance indicators also made it through, despite sparking controversy throughout the negotiations.

Timo Leiter, a Distinguished Policy Fellow at the London School of Economics and a key member of the technical expert group that compiled the list of potential indicators, said it was “disappointing” that the wording of many indicators was altered. “One and a half years of expert work was partly replaced by a process so untransparent that most negotiators had no influence over the final outcome. The follow-up arrangements are characterized by multiple parallel and overlapping activities with important details left undefined, including around the new technical taskforce,” he told Climate Proof.

Leiter also pointed out shortcomings in the list of 59 adopted indicators, noting that some parts of the GGA’s targets are now left without any corresponding indicators.

The final text made clear that the indicators are “voluntary” and “non-prescriptive”, and exist simply “to inform national approaches to tracking adaptation action.” In its analysis, the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) said the selected indicators “fall short” in terms of guiding developing countries’ monitoring, evaluation, and learning systems for adaptation, and that the world could now miss out on an opportunity to provide evidence of adaptation blindspots as part of the Second Global Stocktake, the periodic assessment of countries’ progress toward the Paris Agreement.  

“ We’ve been waiting for 10 years for this moment, for these indicators to be part of the GGA so they can become operational, [so that] countries can track progress, they can guide efforts — and now we [may] have these unusable indicators,” said Ana Mulio Alvarez, Policy Advisor at think-tank E3G.

Other observers said the compromise indicators are better than none at all. “The fact that indicators were agreed is a step forward — and that wasn’t at all certain at different points during COP,” Cristina Rumbaitis del Rio, Senior Advisor at the UN Foundation, told Climate Proof.

The agreed-on text also introduced a ‘Belém–Addis vision on adaptation’, a two-year “policy alignment process” for figuring out how countries can deploy the indicators. The work is to be spearheaded by the UNFCCC’s subsidiary bodies, which meet in Bonn, Germany next year. Parties also adopted a plan for the first phase of the ‘Baku Adaptation Road Map’ for the period 2026-28, focused on the implementation of the indicators.

Rumbaitis del Rio welcomed these initiatives — with a note of caution. “The main concern I have is that it’s going to fragment our efforts on the GGA. So there may need to be a little rationalization that goes on,” she said.

While some parties hoped the indicators would be locked down at this conference, the final GGA text says they will be reviewed in 2029, after the Second Global Stocktake, opening up the possibility they will be overhauled.

Latin America and the Caribbean need US$47bn a year by 2035 to implement their National Adaptation Plans, according to a new report by the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) and Marsh McLennan released. The study warns that heavy reliance on post-disaster public spending, together with high debt burdens in countries like Brazil and Argentina, is undermining resilience-building efforts as extreme weather and slow-onset events escalate. The report calls for a strategic shift in financing strategies to bridge the financing gap, using tools like parametric insurance, green bonds, and resilient-debt clauses in sovereign bonds. (Inter-American Development Bank)

Jamaican officials say the island nation has a US$9.5bn financing gap when it comes to addressing the fallout from Hurricane Melissa, the Category 5 storm that ravaged the country in late October. While insurance mechanisms and a catastrophe bond issued by the World Bank — together with other climate disaster reserves — provided US$500mn of financing in the wake of the storm, total damages are estimated at US$10bn. (Reuters)

The African Development Bank Group plans to issue Certified Adaptation Benefits (CABs), a new asset class aimed at unlocking private capital for adaptation. This follows the conclusion of the pilot phase of its Adaptation Benefits Mechanism, the first UN-recognized non-market adaptation finance tool under the Paris Agreement. The purpose of CABs is to encourage developed country governments and other stakeholders to support high-quality adaptation projects, and receive verified ‘redemption codes’ in return to improve tracking and transparency. The Adaptation Benefits Mechanism is now looking to governments and international organizations to host a full-time secretariat to oversee its evolution. (African Development Bank Group)

The Dutch central bank warned that physical climate shocks — particularly floods — are a major threat to the Netherlands’ financial institutions and markets. In its latest annual financial stability report, De Nederlandsche Bank said the slow progress of decarbonization is heightening the threat to financial institutions posed by climate-related disasters. Floods especially could cause “sudden and substantial costs for households and firms” in the country, where almost a third of the land is under sea level. (Green Central Banking)

Australia should adopt a new National Adaptation Investment Framework to help bridge a shortfall in adaptation financing, the country’s Actuaries Institute has said. In a new report, the professional body claims that this would move Australia “away from short-term, reactive, post-disaster spending” and towards “a proactive, evidence-based approach.” Other proposed reforms include revamping public cost-benefit analysis to better reflect adaptation value and diversifying revenue streams for financing adaptation. The government could support this goal by updating the country’s sustainable investment taxonomy to include a standardized definition of adaptation and resilience activities. Lead author Ramona Meyricke warns that current underinvestment is pushing up insurance premiums and dragging on economic growth. (Actuaries Institute)

Governments are increasingly framing climate change as a national security issue, a shift that is expanding investment opportunities across defense, infrastructure, and data technology, according to JP Morgan’s Head of Climate Advisory, Dr Sarah Kapnick. In a new article, Kapnick highlights the growing global demand for scalable civilian solutions to climate-related disasters, as militaries — already stretched thin — are increasingly being called on to respond to extreme weather emergencies. Investment opportunities at the intersection of national security and climate resilience include drones and satellites for boosting situational awareness and decentralized microgrids to maintain electricity supply through large-scale disruptions. (JP Morgan)

South Africa pushed through a G20 declaration calling on the global community to address post-disaster recovery, reconstruction, and adaptation following a summit boycotted by the US and abandoned at the last minute by Argentina. The Trump administration refused to attend the gathering of economic powers in Johannesburg last week over false claims that South Africa is host to an ongoing genocide of white farmers. The remaining leaders in attendance signed off on a sweeping communique that highlighted the importance of ongoing investment in adaptation and encouraging innovative financing mechanisms for addressing climate disasters. Argentina declined to endorse the declaration, allegedly because of its delegation's concerns with language over geopolitical conflicts. (G20)

The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has proposed a rule that could strip federal protections from up to 55 million acres of wetlands and countless intermittent and ephemeral waterways, potentially allowing increased building development in flood-prone areas and eroding the country’s climate resilience. The new definition of “waters of the United States” (WOTUS), prompted by the Supreme Court’s 2023 Sackett v. EPA ruling, would restrict federal oversight to waters with year-round or seasonal surface connections to permanent bodies of water — excluding many wetlands that play critical roles in flood mitigation, water filtration, and habitat provision. The rule is subject to a 45-day public comment period before being finalized. (EPA)

A federal appeals court temporarily blocked California’s Senate Bill 261 (SB 261), a landmark disclosure law requiring companies with over US$500mn in revenue to publicly report on their climate-related financial risks. The motion for injunction, granted last Tuesday, comes amidst a legal fight launched by a host of business lobby groups which claim that SB 261, and its companion law SB 253 — which covers company emission disclosures — are unconstitutional.  The first climate-related disclosures mandated under the law were scheduled for submission by January 1, 2026. The ruling affects a broad swath of major energy and utility firms, including Pacific Gas and Electric, Dominion Energy, Siemens, and Berkshire Hathaway Energy, which were flagged in a preliminary list of over 3,100 companies subject to the new reporting mandates. (Utility Dive)

MaRS Discovery District, the non-profit urban innovation hub, and insurer Definity have launched the AdapTech Accelerator, a first-of-its-kind Canadian program aimed at scaling climate adaptation and resilience start-ups. The one-year accelerator will support up to 10 start-ups with market research, access to labs, capital-raising support, and connections to investors, industry, and government. The program is set to open for applications in 2026. (MaRS)

Ranchbot, a US-based agtech firm, has partnered with Davis Instruments to deliver hyperlocal, satellite-enabled weather data to ranchers across the US — addressing the growing need for real-time insights amid escalating climate volatility. The collaboration integrates Davis’ advanced weather station hardware with RanchBot’s autonomous, off-grid monitoring systems to optimize grazing and water management for over 10 million cattle and 15 million sheep. Ranchbot is used by around 12,000 ranchers, according to CEO Andrew Coppin. (Climate Proof)

Brekland, a Brooklyn-based start-up developing biodegradable foam coatings to protect crops, claimed the US$1mn grand prize at the 2025 Grow-NY Food and Agriculture business competition, part of a US$3mn award pool aimed at boosting agrifood innovation in upstate New York. The company was one of seven winners selected by a panel of agriculture and venture experts following pitches from 20 global finalists at the Grow-NY Summit. Brekland’s technology incorporates pesticide and fertilizer inputs to a spray-on solutions that provide defense against disease, frost, insects, and other threats exacerbated by climate change. (Grow-NY)

Third Derivative, the climate tech accelerator arm of think-tank RMI, has launched a global call for passive daytime radiative cooling (PDRC) technologies for demonstrations across the US and India. PDRC technologies include films and paints that can cut indoor temperatures and reduce heat stress. The initiative — backed by the Bezos Earth Fund and Autodesk Foundation — aims to validate PDRC performance across climates and building types, with a focus on heat-vulnerable communities. (RMI)

Arcadis and Jupiter Intelligence announced a global partnership to integrate the latter’s climate risk analytics into the former’s engineering and consultancy services. The deal embeds Jupiter’s modeling and data into Arcadis’ digital tools, including Climate Risk Nexus, to support asset planning, investment, and regulatory disclosure. The partnership is already being used for a climate risk assessment of campuses run by the State University of New York, which is intended to guide resilience planning for the institution’s sprawling infrastructure. (Arcadis)

Lancet Countdown on health and climate change in Africa: An international collaboration for locally led research and action (The Lancet)

Increasing risk of mass human heat mortality if historical weather patterns recur (Nature Climate Change)

Decolonizing urban climate-resilience strategies in African informal settlements (Nature Cities)

Climate change, risks and ECB strategy: what is the effect on European banks’ stock return? (Springer Nature)

Funding and financing voluntary buyouts and relocation: Going beyond federal grants (NRDC)

Actionable criteria for achieving equitable, climate-resilient water and sanitation laws and policies: Water, sanitation, and climate change in the United States series, Part 4 (Pacific Institute)

Thanks for reading!

Louie Woodall
Editor