We handpick and explain the most important stories at the intersection of climate, land, food and nature over the past fortnight.
This is an online version of Carbon Brief’s fortnightly Cropped email newsletter. Subscribe for free here.
Key developments
Forest and biodiversity funds
TRANSFORMING FOREST FINANCE: A Forest Declaration Assessment report revealed that global forest finance is “not only falling short, but actively fuelling deforestation”, said Down to Earth. According to the report, for every dollar allocated to forest protection, six dollars go to activities driving deforestation. In 2023 alone, private financial institutions invested $6.1tn in sectors linked to deforestation, while governments spent $500bn in subsidies harmful to nature. Relatedly, several organisations launched a call to action for forest protection. It listed the priority actions for governments in 2025, which include enhancing ambition in forest goals, promoting deforestation-free trade, scaling up forest finance and securing land rights of forest communities.
NEW CONTRIBUTIONS: Brazil’s planned $125bn “Tropical Forests Forever Facility” is on track to be launched at COP30 this year, the Straits Times reported. The outlet said that several countries, including Germany, France and the United Arab Emirates, have expressed interest in contributing to the fund. Brazilian outlet ((o))eco said that the fund “would pay countries for each hectare of rainforest maintained or restored”. Meanwhile, Ireland announced its first donation, of $16m, to Brazil’s Amazon Fund, according to Reuters. The fund, which is already supported by seven other countries, seeks to halt deforestation and boost sustainable development in the Amazon rainforest.
SHORT SCOPE: The Kunming Biodiversity Fund is only supporting six projects of $1.2m, according to the UN Development Programme, cited by Dialogue Earth. The fund was launched by China at the first part of the COP15 biodiversity summit in 2021. The outlet noted that China’s $207m pledge is the only contribution to the fund so far. The fund approved its first nine projects at COP16 last year, with six of them currently underway. Elsewhere, carbon credit registry Verra suspended the activities of four auditors that “overlooked integrity problems” with methane-cutting rice offset projects in China, Climate Home News reported.
England’s new national forest
INTO THE WOODS: BBC News reported that 20m trees will be planted to create England’s first new national forest in three decades. The “Western Forest” will be composed of new and existing woodlands in the south-west of the country, the outlet said. It will be the first of three new national forests to help meet woodland goals, according to the UK government. The 20m trees will be planted over the “coming decades”, the Times noted, and will be spread across farmlands and urban areas. Meanwhile, a new government-led group of major landowners in England met to discuss ways to cooperate on nature restoration goals, Business Green said.
BUDGET WOES: Farming representatives “reacted with fury” after the UK government closed England’s sustainable farming incentive subsidy scheme to new applicants until next year, the Times reported. The newspaper said: “Labour promised £5bn in nature-friendly farming subsidies over this year and the next financial year, but has burnt through the budget already.” The 37,000 existing agreements will still be honoured, the newspaper said. Gavin Lane from the Country Land and Business Association described it as a “disaster for nature recovery”. A “reformed” version of the scheme will be announced this summer, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs said in a statement.
PESTICIDE CUTS: Meanwhile, the UK government announced plans to cut pesticide use on farms by 10% by 2030 to help “protect bees and other pollinators”, according to the Guardian. The plan, which the newspaper said had been delayed since 2018, included penalties for irresponsible pesticide use. A spokesperson for Pesticide Collaboration, a group of health and environmental organisations, academics, farmers and others, said they were “thrilled” with the plan. The group told the Guardian that they were pleased that it “takes into account both how much of a pesticide is used and how toxic it is”, but added that they had hoped for a higher target.
HABITAT CHANGES: Elsewhere, proposed changes to the UK’s planning system “sparked job security fears among thousands of ecologists”, the Financial Times said. The newspaper explained: “The proposed measures will significantly reduce the number of protected species surveys required for development to be approved, as part of a government drive to speed up delivery of big infrastructure projects”. Ecologists who complete these surveys are concerned about the impacts for their work, according to the FT. The proposed reforms survived their “first Commons test” this week, the Independent said, while the Guardian reported that UK nature charities called on ministers to “urgently strengthen environmental protections in new planning laws”.
Spotlight
Third of US birds should be prioritised for conservation
This week, Carbon Brief looks at the 2025 US State of the Birds report, which assesses the health of bird populations in the country.
Nearly a third of all bird species in the US face a decline in their populations or other threats, such as habitat loss, a new report concluded.
The 2025 State of the Birds report, published by a coalition of conservation organisations under the North American Bird Conservation Initiative, used bird population data over 1970-2022 to identify the avian species most at risk.
The “at-risk” species were those with low population numbers or declining populations, as well as those facing external threats.
These species – 229 in all – “should be prioritised in conservation planning to protect existing populations and build toward population recovery”, the report said.
Conservation concerns
Of the birds studied, 112 species are of “high concern” for conservation.
These species have faced “steep” population losses and have lost at least half of their populations in the last 50 years. They include the whooping crane, chimney swift and California condor. The report termed these species “tipping point species” and called for increased scientific research to determine the drivers of their declines, as well as “immediate help through voluntary and proactive conservation action”.
Another 117 bird species are of “moderate concern”, meaning they have small or declining populations, but have not faced such steep declines as the higher-risk species. This category also includes common birds that have “experienced large losses”, such as sparrows and blackbirds.
The remaining 489 bird species are of “low concern” for conservation, although the report noted that half of these have also experienced long-term declines in population, but “fall short of the thresholds for priority conservation planning”.
Threatened species
The report also looked at the changes in the population of species from different ecosystems.
The chart below shows the population change, since 1970, for eight types of birds classified in the report.
Notably, grassland birds have seen the largest overall declines, losing around 43% of their total population since 1970 and with several species reaching the “tipping point” described in the report. US grasslands are “in collapse”, the report noted, due to expanding agriculture, drought and invasive alien species.
Aridland birds have also lost more than 40% of their population since 1970, the report said. About a quarter of the 31 aridland species analysed, including the scaled quail and rufous-crowned sparrow, are in the “high concern” category. Shorebirds have the largest number of species listed as high concern. The report noted that the largest declines of these species are registered in migratory staging sites along the Atlantic coastline.
By contrast, ducks and waterbirds are the best-placed groups, with 24% and 16% increases in their populations, respectively. The abundance of duck populations coincides with policies aimed at conserving their wetland habitats and other conservation programmes.
Nonetheless, individual species within these groups have also seen declines in population, the report said. Additionally, while their numbers have still improved since 1970, duck populations have dropped steeply over the past decade.
The document also listed various benefits provided by birds. Nearly 100 million people in the US are birdwatchers, a hobby that contributes to the mental well-being of people with depression and reduces symptoms of stress and anxiety. Moreover, birding yields $108bn annually in trips and equipment and generates 1.4m jobs.
The report concluded:
“Restoring bird populations and addressing causes of their declines benefits millions of Americans.”
News and views
COP ‘CONTRADICTION’: Earlier this month, BBC News reported on the building of a new highway “to ease traffic to” COP30 host city Belém that would run through “thousands of acres of protected Amazon rainforest”. The Brazilian newspaper O Globo quoted scientists who said the 13km road is a “contradiction in the governor’s environmental discourse”. In response, the Brazilian government clarified that the highway is not “part of the 33 infrastructure projects planned for COP30” and said that the initial framing “misinforms readers by misleadingly suggesting a connection between the construction project and the federal government’s actions” preparing for COP30.
US AG CUTS: The US Department of Agriculture (USDA) cut two programmes that paid farmers $1bn to provide food to schools and food banks for low-income families, the New York Times reported. It added that the agriculture secretary has “broad discretion” to use the funding “for purposes aligned with the administration’s aims”. A smallholder farmer from Missouri told the newspaper that her production had doubled thanks to those programmes, but now she is concerned about how she will make payments on her debts. The Washington Post reported that the USDA also cancelled an additional $500m in deliveries to food banks.
NATURE DEALS: Colombia rejected a number of debt-for-nature swap offers due to “fears” about the impact they could have on the country’s credit rating, Bloomberg reported. Susana Muhamad, who resigned as Colombia’s environment minister in February, told the outlet that these swaps could “send the wrong message to the markets and make our financial situation worse”. This is also the government’s current stance, a spokesperson for the environment ministry told Bloomberg. (See Carbon Brief’s Q&A for more on these financial agreements, where a developing country’s debt is effectively exchanged for investment in conversation.)
PAYOUT PUSHBACK: Context News reported that farmers in India’s most vulnerable districts can pay higher crop insurance premiums, but receive lower payouts, than farmers in less vulnerable areas. The outlet cited a thinktank report saying that this “undermines the purpose” of India’s government-run crop-insurance scheme, which is the world’s largest. The report, from the Centre for Science and Environment, found that farmers living in “climate-vulnerable districts” faced higher premiums, lower levels of insurance cover and smaller payouts than farmers in lower-risk areas, Context News said.
‘FRAGILE’ MOUNTAINS: “Unprecedented changes” to mountains and glaciers threaten fresh water access for more than two billion people, according to a UN report covered by Carbon Brief. Mountains and glaciers are becoming “increasingly vulnerable” to climate change and unsustainable human activities, the report said. This is having a wide range of impacts on agriculture, local ecosystems and other aspects of life. One expert told Carbon Brief that glacier loss is already causing “loss of life, loss of livelihood and, most importantly of all, the loss of a place that many communities have called home for generations”.
‘METHANE MESS’: Major supermarkets are not reporting on their methane emissions or setting targets to reduce emissions of the potent greenhouse gas, according to a new report. The analysis, published by environmental campaign groups the Changing Markets Foundation and Mighty Earth, said that there is a “disconnect between retailers’ climate promises and action”. The report analysed climate reports and other data from 20 “top-grossing” food retailers in the US and Europe to assess their progress on mitigating methane emissions. It identified a “significant lack of action” to address methane emissions, with US retailers performing “especially badly”.
Watch, read, listen
REN-EWE-ABLE?: Ambrook Research explored whether grazing sheep under solar panels “count[s] as clean energy”.
OFF THE MENU: A Climate Home News comment article by a former Colombian negotiator argued that food systems have been “sidelined” in the agenda for the COP30 climate summit.
IN DANGER AGAIN: Euractiv covered the increase in wolf hunting in the EU, against a backdrop of “manipulated numbers” and lax regulations.
MARINE LIFE: A “sustainable blue economy” is needed to protect the ocean from “surging” threats, including overfishing and climate change, researchers wrote in Dialogue Earth.
New science
- A Nature Communications study found that three-quarters of species’ ranges in border areas between countries are not under protection. The findings, based on analysis of the distributional ranges of almost 20,000 land-based species, show the “urgent” need for cross-border cooperation to meet global biodiversity goals, the researchers wrote.
- Grass-fed beef in the US is generally more carbon-intensive than industrially produced beef, according to a study in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. The research found that the emissions per kilogram of protein in “even the most efficient” grass-fed beef are 10-25% higher than industrial beef – and as much as 40 times higher than plant protein and other animal alternatives.
- Nearly 30% of forest loss in 15 tropical countries over 2001-20 occurred within one kilometre of a road, a Communications Earth and Environment study found. The researchers used datasets of roads and forest loss to produce high-resolution maps of deforestation, highlighting the “urgent need” to protect and restore forests along tropical roads.
In the diary
- 24-28 March: 20th session of the UN FAO commission on genetic resources for food and agriculture | Rome
- 30 March: International day of zero waste
- 2-3 April: 41st UN-Water meeting | Rome
Cropped is researched and written by Dr Giuliana Viglione, Aruna Chandrasekhar, Daisy Dunne, Orla Dwyer and Yanine Quiroz. Please send tips and feedback to cropped@carbonbrief.org
The post Cropped 26 March 2025: US birds in peril; UK ecologists ‘job fears’; Finance ‘fuelling’ deforestation appeared first on Carbon Brief.
Climate Change
DeBriefed 3 July 2026: US faces scorching Independence Day | Record ocean temperatures | Vietnam’s EV surge
Welcome to Carbon Brief’s DeBriefed.
An essential guide to the week’s key developments relating to climate change.
This week
Heating up
NOT FREE FROM HEAT: “Dangerous, record-breaking” heat altered plans for 4 July celebrations across the US this weekend, reported the Associated Press. New York and Boston hit 100F (37.8C) on Thursday, said the newswire. CNBC reported that temperatures of up to 105F (40.5C) are forecast in central and eastern parts of the country, with “daily, monthly and all-time records possible”.
TEMPERATURES SOAR: Heat that hit western Europe last week spread east to “scorch” Germany, Hungary, Romania, Poland and others, said Bloomberg. Red warnings for extreme heat were issued in a number of nations, noted the outlet, adding that the heat “underscores how climate change is transforming summers in the world’s fastest-warming continent”. The Independent said last month was confirmed to be England’s hottest June on record.
HEAT DEATHS: June’s extreme temperatures caused more than 2,000 excess deaths in Spain and France, reported the Guardian. The countries are bracing for further heat that “could bring temperatures of 44C (111F) over the coming days”, said the newspaper. Deaths in France rose almost 30% at the heatwave “peak” on the week of 22 June, according to Le Monde. Last week’s conditions also led to around 480 excess deaths in the Netherlands, reported Reuters.
BOILING: Global ocean temperatures reached record levels for this time of year, reported NBC News, “fuelling fears of more dangerous heatwaves this summer and fanning concerns over the escalating global climate crisis”. Scientists told the Financial Times that this could lead the world towards “uncharted territory”. The newspaper said global average sea surface temperatures reached 20.96C on 21 June, exceeding June records for 2023 and 2024.
Around the world
- GOAL DROPPED: The World Bank will “abandon” its goal to devote 45% of annual lending resources to climate-related projects, reported Reuters. Carbon Brief explored what it could mean for global climate action.
- FIVE-YEAR PLAN: China plans to invest more than 20tn yuan ($2.9tn) in “key energy projects and new business models” over the next five years, according to International Energy Net.
- DRILLING: The Guardian said UK Labour politicians “urged” the likely next prime minister Andy Burnham to ignore “deluded” calls to develop the Rosebank oil field located in the Atlantic north of Scotland.
- PLASTIC TALKS: Countries and activists feared key issues could be sidelined at “critical” talks on a global treaty to curb plastic pollution in Kenya, said Climate Home News. A treaty could have “important implications” for climate change, reported Carbon Brief in 2024.
- CANADA PIPELINE: Canadian prime minister Mark Carney announced plans to build an oil pipeline to supply Asia with up to 1m barrels per day, reported the Financial Times. Earlier this week, Carney called the previous government’s climate plans “expensive” and “divisive”, said CBC News.
63
The number of UK newspaper editorials calling for more oil and gas extraction in the North Sea so far in 2026, according to Carbon Brief analysis.
Latest climate research
- Including emissions from permafrost thaw raises the likelihood of the Arctic becoming a net-carbon source by more than 50% at 2C of warming | Earth System Dynamics
- Net-zero scenarios relying less on carbon dioxide removals lead to fewer residual emissions, which offers greater health improvements for “non-white and low-income groups” in particular | Nature Climate Change
- Agricultural plots of land in sub-Saharan Africa owned by women face heat impacts 2-2.5 times higher than those owned by men | Nature Sustainability
(For more, see Carbon Brief’s in-depth daily summaries of the top climate news stories on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday.)
Captured
Wind and solar were the world’s largest source of new energy in 2025, according to Carbon Brief analysis of the latest Energy Institute statistical review of world energy. Wind and solar also saw the fastest growth, up by 18% in 2025. Nevertheless, every source of energy – including coal, oil, gas, nuclear and hydro – also reached global all-time highs last year.
Spotlight
Vietnam’s EV surge
Carbon Brief explores the reasons behind soaring electric-vehicle sales in Vietnam.
Motorbikes are a constant fixture on streets across Vietnam. They pollute the air in cities and make crossing the road a feat of endurance.
But, increasingly, people are moving away from petrol-powered vehicles to save money and reduce air pollution.
Sales of electric motorbikes, scooters and mopeds more than doubled in Vietnam last year, according to a recent report from the International Energy Agency (IEA).
This identified that Vietnam has the largest electric vehicle (EV) market in south-east Asia.
Nearly one-in-five of the two-wheeled vehicles sold last year were electric, it noted, in a nation with 102 million people and 77m motorbikes.
This is “particularly impactful” given they are the main mode of transport in Vietnam, said Lam Pham, Asia energy analyst at thinktank Ember. He told Carbon Brief:
“Electrifying road transport is essential for Vietnam to achieve its net-zero target by 2050. Road transport accounted for around 86% of transport-sector emissions in 2022.”
The nation has just 6.8m cars, but this number is also climbing, partly due to EVs, with nearly 40% of new car sales being electric.
This is “above levels seen in most European countries”, noted the IEA. (The UK’s figure is around 30%.)
EV incentives
Fuel costs surged in south-east Asian countries earlier this year after the energy crisis caused by the US-Israel war on Iran.
This “accelerated” discussions from “why use EVs” to “why keep paying more for fuel”, said Dr Tham Nguyen, a lecturer at the Ho Chi Minh City campus of Australia’s Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology (RMIT) University, who has researched Vietnamese public attitudes to EVs.
But the surge is “not driven by fuel prices alone”, noted Pham.
Increased EV sales can also be attributed to a “convergence of affordability, convenience and sustainability”, Nguyen said:
“Vietnamese consumers buy EVs because they see real value with immediate personal benefits, such as cost savings and energy security, alongside long-term environmental gains.”
Government policies have also incentivised sales through registration fee exemptions and tax cuts for EVs.
Another factor is affordable EVs sold by Chinese companies and Vinfast, a Vietnamese manufacturer. The IEA report noted that Vietnam is the only country in south-east Asia with “sizeable” domestic production of accessible EVs.
Vinfast reported a 219% year-on-year increase in orders for electric motorbikes and e-bikes in the first quarter of 2026, but the company has yet to turn a profit.
Pham noted that “growing public awareness of air pollution” has also “dramatically strengthened” public support for EVs.
Future plans
Vietnam’s major cities also have plans to get drivers to go electric or turn to public transport.
The capital city Hanoi announced that it would ban fossil-fuel-powered motorbikes from a central zone this month, but this has been postponed until 2028.
Ho Chi Minh City, the nation’s largest city with more than 9.5 million people, intends to introduce low-emission zones and swap 400,000 petrol-powered motorbikes to electric by 2028.
The city’s green transport plans focus on metro lines, electric buses and e-bikes, explained RMIT associate professor Catherine Earl. She noted that walking and cycling are currently “not popular, accessible or safe for many residents in Ho Chi Minh City’s hot and humid climate”.
Looking ahead, Pham said Vietnam could focus on “purchase subsidies, financing schemes and adequate charging or battery-swapping infrastructure, to ensure lower-income riders, including delivery and ride-hailing drivers, are not negatively affected”.
Watch, read, listen
‘JUST 1%’ OF EMISSIONS: The Guardian debunked arguments that climate actions from smaller countries are “insignificant”.
DRILLING RISKS: Mongabay reported on the possible impacts oil drilling in the Amazon could have on a “little-known reef”.
HEATING UP: The BBC Climate Question podcast discussed the weather pattern El Niño and its links to climate change.
Coming up
- 7-10 July: AI for good global summit, Geneva, Switzerland
- 7-15 July: UN high-level political forum on sustainable development, New York
- 8-10 July: Ninth meeting of the board of the fund for responding to loss and damage, Manila, Philippines
Pick of the jobs
- Green Alliance, senior partnerships officer | Salary: £42,748-£47,346. Location: London
- World Vision, environment and climate action senior adviser | Salary: Unknown. Location: Kenya
- Nature Energy, interim associate or senior editor | Salary: Unknown. Location: London or Milan
- Climate Analytics, senior communications manager – climate policy (maternity cover) | Salary €60,605-€66,880. Location: Berlin
- Carbon Exchange, researcher | Salary: Unknown. Location: Hong Kong
DeBriefed is edited by Daisy Dunne. Please send any tips or feedback to debriefed@carbonbrief.org.
This is an online version of Carbon Brief’s weekly DeBriefed email newsletter. Subscribe for free here.
The post DeBriefed 3 July 2026: US faces scorching Independence Day | Record ocean temperatures | Vietnam’s EV surge appeared first on Carbon Brief.
The World Bank has abandoned a target for 45% of the funding it gives developing countries to be “climate finance”, following months of pressure from the Trump administration in the US.
However, a concerted effort by developed- and developing-country shareholders has seen the bank hold onto its “action plan” for tackling climate change.
The multilateral development bank (MDB) – which is headquartered in Washington DC – is the single largest provider of climate finance globally, distributing $39.2bn in 2025 alone, primarily as loans.
Amid widespread aid cuts by developed countries, the World Bank and other MDBs have previously pledged to significantly scale up their climate finance over the next decade.
Despite scrapping its central target, the bank says it will continue to support the demands of its “clients”, many of which have explicitly stated their need for climate-related investment.
Here, Carbon Brief looks at the likely impact of the World Bank’s policy shift and whether it is – as one expert puts it – “mostly a symbolic victory” for the US.
- How does the World Bank support climate action?
- Why has the World Bank abandoned its climate-finance target?
- Why is the World Bank important for international climate finance?
- How will these changes affect global climate action?
How does the World Bank support climate action?
The World Bank is the oldest and largest MDB. It is tasked by its 189 member governments – the bank’s shareholders – with supporting development projects around the world.
The US is the bank’s largest shareholder, followed, in order, by Japan, China, Germany, France and the UK.
Every year, the bank provides billions of dollars – predominantly as loans – to developing countries.
(One part of the World Bank, the International Development Association – IDA – specifically distributes grants to lower-income nations, as well as lower-interest loans.)
Through its financing, the World Bank also has an important role in “mobilising” private investments in developing countries.
In recent years, the bank has increasingly focused on helping developing countries to cut emissions and adapt their economies for climate change.
The World Bank provided $164bn in what it calls financing with climate “co-benefits” between 2020 and 2025.
The largest share of this funding – roughly one-fifth – went to clean energy and electricity access projects. Smaller shares went to areas such as public transport, water supply and sustainable farming.
As the map below shows, the largest recipients of the bank’s climate funds since 2020 have been emerging economies, such as Turkey ($10.3bn), India ($9bn) and Nigeria ($6.3bn).
Among the largest World Bank projects in recent years are two extensive programmes in India, totalling nearly $3bn, supporting renewables and green hydrogen.
Others include $1.7bn for a Pakistan hydropower project, $926m for Iraq’s railways and $803m to boost “green development” in Colombia.
Despite the bank’s major role in providing climate finance to developing countries, it has faced heavy scrutiny from climate advocates.
In particular, they have noted the dominance of loans that push developing countries further into debt. The World Bank has also been criticised for a lack of transparency around how it classifies projects as “climate-related”, as well as “over-reporting” of climate finance.
Why has the World Bank abandoned its climate-finance target?
When World Bank president Ajay Banga – nominated by former US president Joe Biden – took over the institution in 2023, there were widespread calls for MDB reform.
Many of the bank’s shareholders wanted to see billions more dollars being channelled to support climate action. Later that year, Banga announced that the bank would ensure that 45% of the bank’s funding was climate finance by 2025.
This replaced an existing target of 35% for climate finance between 2021 and 2025, which had been set out in the bank’s second climate change action plan (CCAP).
The CCAP is intended to “mainstream” climate action in the bank’s work. With it in place, the World Bank’s climate finance more than doubled from $17.2bn in 2020 to $39.2bn in 2025.
As the chart below shows, this meant the World Bank exceeded its 2025 goal, with climate-related projects making up a 48% share of total funding that year.
When Biden was replaced by Donald Trump as president in 2025, the US administration turned against international cooperation, including climate finance.
However, the US did not walk away from the World Bank, where it exerts considerable power as the largest shareholder.
With the CCAP due to expire in July 2026, the US has spent months pressuring the bank and its shareholders to weaken or abandon the plan altogether.
US Treasury secretary Scott Bessent issued a statement during the 2026 World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF) spring meetings in April 2026, in which he called for “jettisoning” the 45% climate-finance target. More broadly, he said:
“We welcome the coming expiration of the CCAP and…expect the bank to immediately shift its myopic focus on climate and financing volumes to one that emphasises high-quality, durable projects.”
This vision involves a push for the World Bank to finance more fossil-fuel projects, including drilling for new gas. (The bank has committed since 2019 to stop funding upstream oil and gas projects.)
The decision on whether to continue with the CCAP was negotiated behind closed doors by the board of directors – representing national shareholders. There were reports of “deep divides”.
A joint statement from 19 of the 25 directors last year affirmed the need for both a plan and a target. The US, Russia, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia all declined to sign up, while Japan and India abstained, according to Reuters.
There were reports of European nations championing a climate plan, bolstered by support from the developing countries that would stand to receive climate finance. The US call to drop the 45% target entirely was reportedly backed by Saudi Arabia and Russia.
Ultimately, the day before the CCAP was due to lapse, the World Bank announced what appeared to be a middle ground. It would drop both the 45% target and the 35% goal it had replaced, while also “extend[ing]” the CCAP.
UK development minister Jenny Chapman told a committee hearing in the House of Commons the next day that this marked a “compromise”. She said:
“It wasn’t clear we were going to get a CCAP at all and a bank without an action plan on climate is a problem for us – so that’s a good outcome.”
Supportive shareholders had been pushing for a one-year extension of the plan. While the World Bank did not initially define the length, Chapman confirmed on LinkedIn that the plan had, in fact, been extended “indefinitely”.
The bank said it would also engage an “independent evaluation group” to assess the CCAP, in line with a board request.
Gaia Larsen, director of climate finance at the World Resources Institute (WRI), tells Carbon Brief that this evaluation will likely be “relatively free from political ideology” and could be “focused on how to make the CCAP more effective”.
Why is the World Bank important for international climate finance?
Under the Paris Agreement, developed countries – including major World Bank shareholders in Europe and elsewhere – are obliged to provide climate finance for developing countries.
This includes a target of $300bn a year by 2035, which is expected to largely come from developed countries. One significant way these nations can contribute to this goal is via their support for MDBs, particularly the World Bank.
The World Bank has described itself as “by far the largest provider of climate finance to developing countries”. Each year, it oversees half of all climate finance from MDBs and far more than any single donor country.
Many developed countries have, therefore, enthusiastically backed the World Bank’s climate efforts, as well as a “bigger” role for MDBs in development more broadly. The bank can lend sums that far exceed the amount of new public finance that individual nations are willing to commit.
This is particularly significant, given many of these nations, including the UK, Germany and France, have announced large cuts to their aid budgets in recent years.
Carbon Brief analysis suggests that roughly a fifth of the international climate finance provided and “mobilised” by developed countries in recent years can be attributed to their World Bank contributions, as the chart below shows.
(This only accounts for the World Bank financing that can be linked to developed-country shares in the bank. Developing countries, such as China, also have significant shares, which are not included in the chart below.)
MDBs – including the World Bank – have committed to providing $120bn in climate finance to developing countries by 2030.
This was set to come from greater shareholder contributions, combined with a programme of reforms to free up capital.
If the World Bank continued to provide half of the MDB total, it would need to increase its climate finance by around 50%, from $39.2bn today to $60bn in 2030.
Therefore, experts see a “key” role for the World Bank in achieving not only the $300bn target, but also the more aspirational $1.3n target that countries agreed as part of the “new collective quantified goal” (NCQG) on climate finance at COP29 in 2024. This includes the private capital it could “unlock” through its lending.
Joe Thwaites, international climate finance director at Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), tells Carbon Brief that these “NCQG politics” are “quite important”. He says:
“The maths of the $300bn does not work if the MDBs pull back and so I think that’s why you’re seeing developed countries taking a stand.”
How will these changes affect global climate action?
To date, the World Bank has only released minimal details about its new climate plans. As such, experts say the impact on future climate finance remains uncertain.
Jon Sward, environment project manager at the Bretton Woods Project, tells Carbon Brief:
“They have said they are going to retain all the same processes about climate-finance reporting. So, of course, there is a world in which, actually, climate finance continues to increase like it has been.”
Some of the World Bank’s internal organisations will, in fact, keep their climate-finance goals for the time being. For example, the IDA’s largely grant-based funding retains a 45% target for its current round, which will last until 2028 – the year of the next US presidential election.
However, WRI’s Larsen tells Carbon Brief that the changes, from a bank that was previously a “champion for climate action”, remain significant:
“This reality, reinforced by the elimination of the 45% goal, means that it would not be surprising to see a reduction in climate investments.”
In a statement, the World Bank said its “work on climate is and will remain firmly client driven”, noting that it supports nations undertaking their Paris Agreement climate plans.
Therefore, its climate focus may come down to whether there is demand for climate action from “client” countries receiving finance.
At an April event in discussion with the climate sceptic Bjørn Lomborg, Bessent said that global financial institutions should focus on growth, characterising climate action as an “elite belief”.
The implication from the US Treasury secretary was that recipient countries are not interested in climate action. However, as reported by Devex, a group of World Bank shareholders representing nearly 100 developing countries, wrote a letter that appeared to push back against this framing.
This “G11+” group, led by Brazil and China, said the bank “must remain firmly client-driven”, noting that countries are “following nationally determined pathways toward climate action”. NRDC’s Thwaites tells Carbon Brief:
“It’s one thing for the Europeans to talk about climate…This was the client countries [100 developing countries] saying: ‘No, we want this.’”
Recent research by the ODI thinktank found that 79% of developing-country officials polled wanted to see MDB investment in solar projects, 54% wanted hydropower and 47% wanted wind power. Only 13% wanted investment in gas-power plants.
Rishikesh Ram Bhandary, a senior development researcher at Boston University, has stressed the need for an “enhanced CCAP”, which could be supported by the bank’s new independent evaluation. Among other things, he tells Carbon Brief:
“The bank needs to make a more convincing case about how climate change is being integrated into development priorities rather than competing with them.”
Thwaites says he is hopeful that the outcome is “mostly a symbolic victory for the US”.
However, he says major shareholders from Europe and elsewhere should make it clear to the bank that it is not “the only game in town” when it comes to climate finance. He says:
“If [the World Bank] are going to cave into one shareholder, when the vast majority of the other shareholders are supportive of continuing climate action, they can take their money elsewhere.”
The post Q&A: How will the World Bank’s abandoned finance goal affect climate action? appeared first on Carbon Brief.
Q&A: How will the World Bank’s abandoned finance goal affect climate action?
Rich Wilson is CEO of the Iswe Foundation and co-founder of the Global Citizens’ Assembly.
The numbers are stark. According to the 2026 Global Report on Food Crises, 266 million people across 47 countries experienced high levels of acute food insecurity last year, nearly double the figure recorded a decade ago.
Meanwhile, disruptions to oil, gas and fertiliser flows through the Strait of Hormuz drove a 46% month-on-month spike in urea prices early this year, sending agricultural price indices up 8% and raising the spectre of a global affordability crisis.
This is not a blip. It is a new baseline. The EAT-Lancet Commission concluded that food systems now account for roughly 30% of total greenhouse gas emissions and are the largest single contributor to the climate crisis. The science has been clear for years.
Now some of the solutions to the problem are becoming socially acceptable too.
-
Can giant batteries unlock Africa’s green industrial future?
Battery energy storage systems (BESS) could drive clean tech manufacturing in Africa but shortfalls in finance and data are still limiting deployment at scale
Earlier this year, people from more than 60 countries and territories, selected not by vested interest, but by lottery, spent seven weeks examining the evidence on food and climate for the latest Global Citizens’ Assembly. They heard from scientists, farmers and industry. They worked through 42 hours of structured deliberation, engaging with some difficult trade-offs.
They were not asked to endorse a predetermined conclusion. They were asked an open question: what changes, if any, should we make to how we grow, share and eat food, so that everyone has enough to nourish themselves while tackling the causes and impacts of climate change?
Phase down industrial animal farming
Their answer was unambiguous. They voted to protect forests. They voted to phase down industrial animal food production. They voted for supply chain reform and corporate accountability, explicitly rejecting the idea that the burden of change should fall on individual consumers. All 22 of their Calls to Action passed with over 85% support, a super-majority of randomly selected people from every region of the world, in agreement.
Consider what the assembly was actually being asked to decide. Industrial animal food production is the primary driver of tropical deforestation. Protecting more land as forest and ecosystem means less land available for the expansion of industrial production. That is a real trade-off, with real consequences for real livelihoods. Politicians have spent years avoiding it.
These randomly selected people looked at the evidence, deliberated across time zones and cultures, and chose the forests, with 64% in strong support and a further 20% in favour. People from livestock farming communities voted for change. Not because they were told to. Because deliberation led them there.
We estimate there have now been more than 7,000 citizen participation initiatives worldwide in the last decade. They have been organised because, as our 2025 report: People in the Lead demonstrated, people are now consistently and significantly ahead of politicians on issues ranging from climate to AI governance.
The people know best
What the research consistently shows is that ordinary people, given proper evidence and time, produce recommendations that are more effective and more aligned with public values than what emerges from elected legislatures. The gap in global governance is no longer primarily between science and the public. It is between citizens and their political leaders.
That gap matters for more than procedural reasons. When policy treats people as passive recipients rather than active participants, it leaves out the very actors whose behaviour, trust and consent the transition depends on. Institutions that speak only to other institutions, and negotiate only with state actors and industry lobbies, are missing out on the trust and energy of the people they are supposed to serve.
Governments, left to their own devices, are not moving fast enough to prove that argument wrong. At COP30 in Belém last November, countries failed to agree on a fossil fuel phaseout roadmap, and even full implementation of every submitted national climate plan still leaves the world on course for 2.3 to 2.8C of warming.
Citizens’ track at COP
But the Brazilian presidency grasped something important. Among the conference’s more significant outcomes was the formal launch of a Citizens’ Track within the UNFCCC process, a mechanism for connecting the global participation field to intergovernmental climate negotiations. Türkiye and Australia, who together hold the COP31 presidency in Antalya this November, now have the opportunity to strengthen and institutionalise what Brazil began.
In Guatemala, Indigenous women build climate resilience with old and new farming methods
The question before us is no longer whether citizens can contribute to solving these problems. Across the world, in local food networks, in community assemblies and in participatory planning processes, they already are, quietly generating more ambitious and more legitimate solutions than those emerging from formal diplomatic channels.
What is required now is the political courage to connect people to power. Not to consult citizens and file the results. Not to invite them to observe while the real decisions are made elsewhere. But to recognise the public as partners in perhaps the most consequential governance challenge of our time.
The post As food shocks spread, citizens are showing more leadership than governments appeared first on Climate Home News.
As food shocks spread, citizens are showing more leadership than governments
-
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”
-
Renewable Energy8 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
-
Greenhouse Gases12 months ago
嘉宾来稿：探究火山喷发如何影响气候预测