Somali farmers and herders battered by droughts, floods and decades of conflict are starting to get help in the form of climate-smart crops and animals, new wells and restoration of barren landscapes to boost their resilience in a warming world.
Some of this support is being provided under Ugbaad, the Somali name for a new project meaning “fresh sprouting pasture”. Backed by an $80-million grant from the UN’s Green Climate Fund, it is enabling farmers to earn a more reliable living as climate shocks intensify. The project is also reducing conflict tensions among communities, according to a government representative.
Abdiaziz Ibrahim Aden, adaptation and resilience lead at Somalia’s Ministry of Environment and Climate Change, said farmers who lost their land to floods and erosion have been able to rehabilitate it and plant crops like banana and sesame for export. “Their productivity is increasing now,” he told Climate Home News.
He said the project, which aims to benefit over 2 million people in total, has made young people less vulnerable to recruitment by armed groups. Beyond improved water access for pastoralists, the initiative also includes ways to disseminate timely climate information to communities and build government capacity to keep land and ecosystems in better shape.
Nonetheless, Somalia remains one of the countries most vulnerable to climate change, with millions of its people facing food insecurity, displacement and recurring climate disasters.
Poor rains and major aid shortfalls have forced critical food and nutrition programmes to close, worsening hunger. The Integrated Food Security Phase Classification, a global system used to measure hunger crises, has warned that nearly 2 million Somali children could face acute malnutrition this year.
Climate change – a threat multiplier
Somalia’s economy hinges on agriculture and repeated climate shocks continue to inflame tensions related to farming and food production. According to the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), every two in three conflicts in the country stems from competition over natural resources.
During drought periods, disputes often flare up among neighbouring communities over scarce water sources as herders move with their livestock in search of boreholes, Haji said.
Clashes can quickly escalate in Somalia where many herders carry guns for protection, he added. “If two people meet at the water borehole and they fight over that area, then the war prolongs and extends from that zone to other zones,” he explained.
Aid agencies grapple with climate adaptation in fragile states
Somalia is not alone. Across conflict-affected parts of Africa, climate change is fast becoming more than just an environmental challenge. From the shrinking of Lake Chad in the Sahel region to devastating floods in South Sudan and prolonged droughts across the Horn of Africa, stronger climate impacts are intensifying competition to maintain livelihoods in regions already struggling with weak governance, displacement and insecurity.
Alec Crawford, director of nature for resilience at the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD), described climate change as a “threat multiplier” that worsens already existing social and economic tensions. “It is a contributing factor to violence and instability and conflict, but it’s not the sole driver,” he emphasised.
Fragile states coordinate peacebuilding and adaptation
The growing overlap between climate vulnerability and insecurity is forcing governments and development agencies to rethink adaptation efforts. This was evident at a recent conference in Nigeria that brought together conflict-affected African countries including Burkina Faso, Somalia, Mali, South Sudan, Cameroon, Central African Republic and Chad.
At the event, governments explored how peacebuilding can be integrated with their national climate adaptation plans, helping prevent conflict in communities facing mounting pressure over fertile land, water and other natural resources.
For many of these countries, none of the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals will be achieved until peace and security are in place, Crawford said. They are currently trapped in a vicious cycle. “Some of these climate impacts are potentially worsening the conflict dynamics, while at the same time conflict is really getting in the way of reducing vulnerabilities and adapting to climate change,” he explained.
Politically fragile countries are increasingly looking for solutions to reduce the tensions within their borders that are preventing them from tackling climate change impacts. At the COP28 climate summit in Dubai in 2023, governments and aid agencies issued a joint call for “bolder collective action to build climate resilience at the scale and speed required in highly vulnerable countries and communities”.
Crawford said many fragile states are overstretched and under-resourced because of conflict. He pointed to South Sudan as an example of a country simultaneously trying to house displaced people, rebuild schools and clinics, and restore basic infrastructure after war, making climate adaptation difficult to prioritise. However, ignoring climate risks could undermine any progress such countries manage to make, he warned.
UN adaptation metrics exclude conflict
Another thorny problem is finding ways to track progress on climate adaptation in conflict-affected states. A set of indicators to measure how countries are doing in their efforts to implement the Paris Agreement’s Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA), finally agreed 10 years later at COP30 in Brazil, deliberately left out metrics relating to peace and conflict.
Katharina Schmidt, policy advisor at the NAP Global Network, a global initiative coordinated by IISD to help developing countries advance their climate adaptation planning, pointed to longstanding reluctance to formally integrate peace and conflict issues into core UN climate frameworks. This, she said, is partly because some countries want climate finance to stay separate from funding for peacebuilding and development.
However, Schmidt said the absence of specific indicators in the GGA framework does not mean adaptation in fragile and conflict-affected states is being ignored. “Everybody agrees that there needs to be adaptation in [these] states,” she said, even if it is “often not reflected prominently in these negotiation documents”.
New data shows rich nations likely missed 2025 goal to double adaptation finance
This is why the NAP Global Network, which organised the recent conference in Abuja, is trying to strengthen coordination and peer learning among conflict-affected countries, helping them overcome some of the barriers that make adaptation planning difficult.
Many lack the climate data and infrastructure needed to understand and respond to climate risks, in some cases because conflicts destroy weather stations and disrupt climate monitoring systems, Crawford said. To fill these gaps, the network is helping countries tap into existing global systems and open-source data platforms.
Bridging the gap through the NAP process
For over a decade, the process for putting together National Adaptation Plans (NAPs), established under the UN climate framework in 2010, has helped countries identify climate vulnerabilities, integrate adaptation into long-term development planning and strengthen resilience to climate impacts.
Crawford, who also works with the NAP Global Network, said one core pillar is to strengthen governments’ capacity to plan and implement adaptation measures across ministries.
As part of its NAP process, Somalia conducted vulnerability assessments in several states and regions, helping the government understand how climate impacts, risks and adaptation needs vary across the country, according to government official Aden. This also revealed previously undocumented challenges facing different communities, from drought and water scarcity to coastal threats and land degradation.
“The NAP project helped Somalia identify some cases that were not known before,” he said, adding that it allowed the government to plan its budget to meet differing regional needs.
More than 6,000 kilometres away, the Liberian government, through its NAP process, is also identifying potential sources of tension around land rights, tenure and resource distribution, particularly as people fleeing conflict in Burkina Faso cross into Liberia through Ivory Coast.
Arthur Becker, Liberia’s NAP coordinator, said Liberia’s ongoing NAP review process will incorporate peacebuilding considerations that were largely absent from its current 2020-2030 adaptation plan.
The NAP process aims to help countries move beyond short-term responses to climate disasters, Crawford said.
“It’s really about looking to the medium and long term and saying, this is how the climate is changing within our country, this is going to have fundamental impacts on our development trajectory – how do we put adaptation to climate change at the heart of that development trajectory?”
Nigeria addresses conflict and climate risks together
Nigeria, which is already grappling with multiple security challenges linked to resource competition and environmental pressures, is also integrating peacebuilding into its NAP.
A climate risk and vulnerability assessment found that factors such as drought and desertification across northern Nigeria have made food less available and encouraged criminality and banditry. Down south, sea level rise, coastal erosion and flooding are destroying livelihoods and property and displacing people. Those impacts are increasingly fuelling tensions between communities and driving protests over environmental injustice.
Nigeria’s deadly flood exposes urgent need for climate adaptation plan
Kayode Aboyeji, Nigeria’s NAP coordinator, said it was in the course of the NAP process that “we realised that some of the conflicts in Nigeria are not just politically driven but that environmental issues, demand for natural resources, [and the] threat of climate change are some of the triggers.”
He said Nigeria has now integrated conflict sensitivity and peacebuilding into its NAP – which has yet to be formally approved and published – recognising the need for climate responses that do not worsen existing tensions. It is also raising awareness among key actors, including the Ministry of Agriculture and Water Resources, around the importance of adopting conflict-sensitive approaches to climate adaptation.
In addition, Nigeria has developed adaptation strategies tailored to each of its geopolitical zones, which local authorities can use to better address climate-related challenges in their regions.
Finance a major barrier to implementation
While countries are increasingly integrating peacebuilding into their climate adaptation planning, financing such work on the ground remains a major challenge, especially for fragile African states already grappling with insecurity, debt and weak public finances.
Nigeria’s Aboyeji said the country’s NAP requires resources to roll it out across the country. While the government is looking to development bodies, philanthropies and the private sector for support, it is also exploring domestic financing mechanisms such as green bonds and budget appropriations to help fund implementation.
For countries like South Sudan – where ongoing instability continues to undermine the government’s ability to finance adaptation measures – the struggle is even more pronounced. Peter Jonglei Kureng, acting deputy director for its Budget Policy Directorate, said the government tries to include adaptation in national budgets, but implementation often stalls because the promised funds are never released.
“We can budget for it, but when it’s time for execution, there is no money,” he said.
Can climate funders overcome fear to tread in conflict zones?
Liberia faces similar constraints. Becker said adaptation interventions are expensive, and the country is committing domestic resources to climate action even while expecting the bulk of financing to come from international partners.
The financing gap remains one of the biggest hurdles to adaptation efforts. New OECD data shows that wealthy nations are likely to have missed their 2025 goal of doubling adaptation finance for developing countries, with funding reaching just under $35 billion in 2024 – far below estimated needs.
While international support remains non-negotiable and should be increased, especially for fragile countries, Crawford said they cannot rely solely on external funding, especially as many donors are cutting their overseas development assistance.
Governments will also need to explore how to harness more domestic resources, while recognising the role private-sector actors can play, he added.
“Advocating for more of that financing flowing into adaptation is going to be crucial, because after all the work that goes into NAPs, it’s essential that they turn into concrete measures and don’t just gather dust on a shelf,” he said.
The post Climate adaptation helps African nations tackle rising conflict over resources appeared first on Climate Home News.
Climate adaptation helps African nations tackle rising conflict over resources
Britain’s new prime minister announced in his first week that he will cut the cost of public transport and electricity, making lower-emission technologies like bus travel, electric vehicles and heat pumps more affordable for voters. But some of the funding for those policies will come from the budget for international climate finance, the government has said, raising concerns about fairness.
Former Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham took over from Keir Starmer as Labour Party leader and prime minister on Monday, appointing climate advocates Ed Miliband as foreign and development minister and Miatta Fahnbulleh as climate and energy minister.
On Tuesday, Burnham said his government would cut the value added tax (VAT) households and some small businesses pay on their electricity bills from 5% to zero from October 1, saving households £45 ($60) a year.
On Wednesday, he said the maximum fare bus companies in England can charge for a single journey will be reduced from £3 ($4) to £2 ($2.67) from January 1, 2027. The government said the subsidies to achieve this would be mostly funded by switching money set aside for overseas climate finance projects from grants to loans. It did not give further information in its announcement, while the UK’s transport minister told Sky News the plan is still being worked out.
-
Tropical forest protection fund at risk after UK stalls on pledge
The Brazil-led TFFF was launched at COP30 as an innovative financial model to keep rainforests standing, but is still short on startup cash -
UK halves Green Climate Fund contribution, as it spends more on security
After promising £1.6 billion to the UN’s flagship climate fund in 2023, the UK government has now said it will only hand over half as much -
EU, UK lead push for electrification as “powerful weapon” against fossil fuels
A group of dozens of countries seeks to build momentum for a COP31 pledge to electrify 35% of global energy use by 2035 as an alternative to fossil fuels
The floated changes to the climate finance budget were immediately criticised by groups working on climate justice for developing countries, including Bond, the UK network for NGOs, which described the decision as “disappointing”.
“Robbing Peter to pay Paul is not the answer and pitches marginalised communities in the UK against marginalised communities in lower-income and climate-vulnerable countries,” BOND CEO Romilly Greenhill said in a statement. “Climate finance must not worsen the debt burden of countries that are already suffering the worst – and most costly – impacts of a climate crisis they did not cause.”
Hunt for money
Burnham promoted both policies as measures to combat the rising cost of living and “give people breathing space”, with climate campaigners and industry groups noting they are also likely to reduce the UK’s climate-heating emissions by encouraging bus travel and the use of electric vehicles and heating.
But thorny questions remain over how the policies will be paid for. The government said Tuesday’s VAT cut for electricity would be funded by scrapping the previous government’s digital ID programme, but Darren Jones, a former minister involved with that policy, said it had been “unfunded” – a statement that dominated media coverage.
A day later, the government said the new bus fare cap would cost £454 million ($606m). Transport minister Heidi Alexander told Sky News that £54 million would be taken from an under-spend in the budget of the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) and £400 million would come from changing unspecified international climate finance from grants to loans. The details “still need to be worked through”, she said, adding that the government “had wanted to make an announcement today”.
Mohamed Adow, director of Nairobi-based think-tank Power Shift Africa, said “climate finance was never meant to be a pot of money that governments raid when they need to pay for domestic spending”.
DESNZ had not responded to a request for comment at the time of publication. “We’re not wanting to fleece anyone here, and we actually want to maximise the development potential of this money that is available,” minister Alexander said in her TV interview.
Aside from the controversy over their funding, the policies themselves were widely welcomed by climate campaigners. Jess Ralston, energy lead at the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit (ECIU), said the tax cut on electricity bills “could help households to switch to electric heat pumps, protecting UK homes from becoming ever more exposed to the whims of Putin and Trump when turning on their gas boiler”.
The last few months have seen global momentum build behind electrification, spurred by the US-Iran war disrupting oil and gas supplies and driving up prices. The Turkish and Australian COP31 presidencies have announced a global target to boost electrification, backed by the European Union, Canada, Philippines, UK and others.
Campaigners call for lower power prices
While reaction to the VAT cut was supportive, some questioned whether £45 a year of savings per household is enough and called for more measures to cut electricity bills.
Friends of the Earth’s energy lead Imogen Dow said those on the lowest incomes should be given cheaper electricity through a “social tariff” and the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) think-tank – which is close to the Labour Party – said levies on energy bills should be shifted to general taxation.
Matthew Paterson, a politics professor at Manchester University, told Climate Home News that the most effective way to reduce electricity bills is to take on the UK’s private electricity companies, while consumer-oriented measures like the VAT cut are “tinkering around the edges”.
Jarrod Birch, head of policy and public affairs for the EV charging industry association Charge UK, said that while the policy would make home-charging cheaper, people who charge their vehicles at public points will still have to pay 20% VAT. The UK’s tax authority is fighting a court ruling that ordered it to reduce the tax motorists pay on public chargers to the current household rate of 5%.
Further measures will be the responsibility of Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero Miatta Fahnbulleh, who is relatively new to politics after a career at left-wing, pro-climate think tanks the IPPR and the New Economics Foundation.
Michael Jacobs, political economy professor at Sheffield University and former adviser to UK Labour prime minister Gordon Brown, said Fahnbulleh would be a “climate advocate” who would continue the “progressive climate agenda” of her predecessor Ed Miliband.
“She’s a very creative policy wonk so I expect there to be lots of policy innovation under her,” he said, “I think she will be looking at new ways to encourage take-up of heat pumps and domestic batteries.”
Aid budget in Miliband’s hands
Despite reports he could be made finance minister, Miliband has been appointed Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs. Miliband has attended many climate COP meetings over several decades, most recently representing the UK at COP29 and COP30, and has been targeted by the right-wing media for his support for climate action and opposition to new oil and gas drilling in the UK’s part of the North Sea.
In his new role, Miliband will be responsible for the UK’s overseas aid budget including its international climate finance, which the Starmer government had slashed to fund increases in defence spending.
UK cuts support for climate action abroad to fund military instead
Jacobs said he expected Miliband to prioritise climate and development in the UK’s foreign policy and to push Burnham and new finance minister John Healey to reverse Starmer’s aid cuts.
But there are fears Healey could try to cut the aid budget further to fund the military. Healey was a surprise pick for Chancellor of the Exchequer and grabbed headlines when he resigned as Starmer’s defence minister in June over what he saw as insufficient defence spending.
The post Will new UK PM’s green measures at home cause climate finance pain overseas? appeared first on Climate Home News.
Will new UK PM’s green measures at home cause climate finance pain overseas?
AMSTERDAM, Netherlands, 22 July 2026 – Greenpeace Netherlands has launched legal proceedings against a multi-billion-dollar global expansion plan by the biggest meat producer in Australia, JBS, in an escalation of climate litigation against the livestock industry.
Greenpeace petitioned a Dutch court to compel the meat giant to disclose information in order to challenge its business policies in court, including a US$6 billion global expansion, for which almost half is earmarked for Nigeria.
Elizabeth Atieno, Food Campaigner at Greenpeace Africa, said: “JBS’ meat empire expanded hand-in-glove with Amazon destruction, colossal emissions, human rights and corruption scandals, all with barely a semblance of transparency. This is the business model it wants to export to sub-Saharan Africa. JBS promises food security, but its expansion in Nigeria risks causing irreversible environmental damage and the displacement of smallholder farmers to line the pockets of wealthy global elites.
“Nigerians know well from the legacy of companies like Shell the destructive impact wrought by unchecked corporate power. As Greenpeace Africa has argued before the African Court of Human Rights, states with jurisdiction over multinationals must hold those corporate actors accountable – wherever they operate in the world. We welcome this bold legal action: the Netherlands and other European states must not be safe havens for corporations like JBS seeking to evade their responsibilities.”
In light of JBS’ longstanding failure to publish accurate and reliable information on its climate, nature and human rights impacts or its expansion plans, Greenpeace Netherlands views accessing this data as a necessary precursor to formal litigation in order to support its case. The case has the potential to be the first climate litigation of this scale against the livestock industry. This could set a major precedent for future legal challenges against the industrial agriculture sector, a major source of global emissions, particularly of methane, a potent greenhouse gas, responsible for 0.5°C of warming since the Industrial Revolution.[1]
JBS, via its subsidiary JBS Foods Australia, is the largest meat and food processing company in Australia. With a weekly processing capacity of over 50,000 cattle, it accounts for almost a quarter of all beef processing in the country, as well as a significant presence in the lamb, pork and farmed fish markets. [2] In 2022, ABC’s Four Corners accused the company of ‘repeatedly failing to protect its workers from horrific injuries.’ [3]
Marieke Vellekoop, Executive Director at Greenpeace Netherlands, said “In a month where JBS has thrown its flagship environmental commitments onto the scrap heap, JBS’ disdain for basic transparency only adds to the impression that this meat giant has something to hide and is desperate to prevent its expansion plans from going public. We were hoping we wouldn’t have to trouble a judge with this matter, but JBS has left us no choice but to seek our right to information through the Dutch courts.
“JBS appears to believe that despite moving to the Netherlands, our rules do not apply to it. This legal action aims to prove it wrong – and lay the ground for a first major climate and nature lawsuit against the dangerous expansion of the global meat industry.“
At the centre of the dispute is JBS’ planned US$ 2.5 billion investment in industrial livestock production in Nigeria.[2] Civil society groups in Nigeria have raised urgent warnings that the aggressive expansion will threaten local food security, drive regional instability, and accelerate ecological degradation. There is no available evidence that JBS has conducted any impact assessments or community consultations in Nigeria, and local efforts to gather more information via Freedom of Information requests have reportedly been ignored.[3]
The escalation to the courts follows the refusal of JBS, the world’s largest meat company, to comply with a formal disclosure demand delivered by Greenpeace Netherlands in April. The environmental group is utilising new Dutch legislation, which grants parties with a legitimate interest the right to demand access to specific corporate data necessary to build litigation against Dutch companies.[4]
Greenpeace Netherlands’ lawyers allege that JBS’ historic business practices and future expansion plans are inconsistent with the company’s climate and biodiversity obligations and represent a breach of its Dutch duty of care, which requires companies to act in line with international human rights law.[5]
If the court rules in favor of Greenpeace Netherlands, it is entitled to seek the required information in the form of documents and from senior JBS figures under oath, raising the prospect of the Batista brothers being forced to testify in Dutch court. JBS reincorporated as a Dutch entity (JBS N.V.) last year to facilitate a dual listing on the New York Stock Exchange.
In April, JBS was forced to temporarily suspend its first annual general meeting since moving its headquarters to Amsterdam after it was disrupted by dozens of Greenpeace Netherlands activists.
Last week, JBS scrapped two flagship commitments to reach Net Zero emissions by 2040 and eradicate deforestation from its supply chain. It also removed any explicit reference to Indigenous lands from all of its current policies. Greenpeace Netherlands is concerned this indicates JBS is seeking to expand unconstrained by the climate, nature and human rights impacts of its business.
–ENDS–
Notes:
[1] The livestock sector is estimated to be responsible for 31% of global methane emissions (more than oil and gas operations). In comparison to CO2, methane is shorter lived (around 12 years) but has a much stronger ability to trap heat in the atmosphere over its lifetime: it has approximately 80 times more climate impact than CO2 when measured over 20 years. This means that changes in methane emissions have a more rapid effect on the climate than changes in CO2. See Greenpeace Netherlands letter to JBS dated 30 April 2026.
[2] JBS Foods Australia, Our Business
[3] ABC, Australia’s biggest meat company JBS is repeatedly failing to protect its workers from horrific injuries, 25 April 2022
[4] JBS announcement
[5] Experts raise concerns over the risks of industrial animal farming (The Sun Nigeria)
[6] Simplification and modernisation of Dutch evidence law (Fieldfisher)
[7] Greenpeace Netherlands petition to Dutch court available here. Media briefing with further details on JBS expansion plans, including in Nigeria, available here.
Greenpeace launches legal challenge against Australia’s biggest meat company
Climate Change
“Next year is too late for regulations”: Beetaloo Energy’s 2GW gas-powered AI data centre a “disaster proposal” destined to cause climate chaos
SYDNEY, Wednesday 22 July 2026 — Beetaloo Energy has secured land from the NT Government for a massive $40 billion “hyperscale” AI data centre near Darwin, which would be powered by 2 gigawatts (GW) of gas power fracked directly from the Beetaloo basin, prompting calls from Greenpeace for urgent federal legislation.
The proposal marks a dangerous escalation in the AI data centre industry’s expansion, which threatens to entrench fossil fuel infrastructure for decades and put immense pressure on the region’s fragile water resources — while continuing to be unregulated.
Joe Rafalowicz, Head of Climate and Energy at Greenpeace Australia Pacific, said: “This disaster proposal for a 2GW gas-powered AI data centre in the NT is a shocking example of the unchecked expansion of hyperscale data centres in Australia. It is also, critically, more evidence for the urgent need for a moratorium on all new data centres until strong, binding regulations are put in place to protect our communities and climate.
“This proposal mirrors the frenzied, unchecked expansion currently wreaking havoc on communities in the US. We are seeing cowboy data centre operators treat Australia like a playground, steam-rolling ahead with projects that would lock down precious water resources and spike emissions, despite the overwhelming community opposition.
“Every day, more councils, communities and environmental groups are joining Greenpeace’s call for a moratorium on data centres, yet as of today there is still no system of safeguards or rules in place to regulate these companies.
“While Beetaloo Energy and the NT Government prepare to bulldoze ahead with this climate and water disaster, the Prime Minister is asleep at the wheel, promising to legislate a vague set of standards next year.
“Next year is too late, and anything less than mandating data centres cover their own energy demand, and then some, with new renewable energy is not enough.”
-ENDS-
Media contact
Lucy Keller on 0491 135 308 or lucy.keller@greenpeace.org
Best of Sustainability In Your Ear: Colorado’s First-Of-Its-Kind EPR Oil Recycling Program With David Lawes
Will new UK PM’s green measures at home cause climate finance pain overseas?
Greenpeace launches legal challenge against Australia’s biggest meat company
-
Climate Change11 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases11 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Renewable Energy9 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
-
Greenhouse Gases1 year ago
嘉宾来稿：探究火山喷发如何影响气候预测