The impacts of climate change are already being felt by both humans and ecosystems, with extreme weather events and record-high temperatures becoming increasingly frequent and intense.
Established in the Paris Agreement, the global goal on adaptation (GGA) is designed to “ensure an adequate adaptation response” to protect people, livelihoods and ecosystems as the world aims to keep warming “well below” 2C or even to 1.5C.
However, intergovernmental negotiations on implementing the GGA have been bumpy and slow going.
Areas of disagreement include the setting of ambitious and measurable adaptation targets, how to track adaptation progress and support for increased adaptation.
In a recent policy brief article, we set out the need for robust, ambitious and time-bound targets for adaptation actions. These targets could cover adaptation planning, support and implementation for key sectors and systems, including food, health, water, ecosystems, infrastructure, cities and livelihoods.
The COP28 summit in Dubai, United Arab Emirates (UAE), is crucial for achieving consensus on putting the GGA into action, as the Glasgow-Sharm El Sheikh work programme on operationalising the GGA is expected to conclude at the talks with establishment of a GGA framework.
Already, the issue has proven contentious in negotiations, with developing countries pushing for greater focus on climate adaptation finance as part of the goal.
Putting the GGA into operation would set a clear signal for increased ambition and action on adaptation support and implementation.
Operationalising the GGA
The first step in tackling climate change impacts through the GGA is achieving political consensus on adaptation targets and the finance, technology and capacity-building support for achieving them.
Our research suggests this process should draw on recent scientific assessments, such as the IPCC’s sixth assessment report, UN Adaptation Gap reports and national-level submissions to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), such as nationally determined contributions (NDCs), national adaptation plans (NAPs) and adaptation communications (AdComs).
Targets could have quantitative or qualitative elements, or both, but need to be measurable, time-bound and ambitious, given the acceleration of adaptation actions required this decade to minimise loss and damage.
A second step is a further programme of work to develop metrics and indicators for tracking progress against the targets. Political progress on establishing targets better enables technical work for tracking adaptation progress, through monitoring and evaluation of adaptation actions. Progress towards the global goal through further work could then be collectively captured and reviewed under the global stocktake (GST) process to track progress together with other goals under the GST globally.
A similar programme of first establishing political agreement on targets and then requesting further technical work on indicators to track progress has been followed by other multilateral target-setting processes, including the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the Sendai Framework on Disaster Risk Reduction.
To initiate development of the GGA framework and to guide its achievement, countries that were signatories to the Paris Agreement created the Glasgow-Sharm el-Sheikh work programme on the GGA at COP26 in Glasgow in 2021. It will consider a structured framework, including different “dimensions” of an iterative adaptation cycle – shown below.
Support in terms of finance, capacity-building and technology transfer should be a consideration under each dimension with a view to enhancing adaptation action and support.
Governments have also agreed to consider targets for key systems and sectors – called “themes” in the GGA negotiations – where increased adaptation action is urgently needed.
The figure below shows the themes under which GGA targets can be implemented.
Other considerations of the framework include fully transparent approaches that are able to capture the issues – highlighted below – which cut across the dimensions and themes of the framework.
Setting ambitious targets
A key part of the GGA framework will be establishing ambitious and measurable targets.
An overarching target for the GGA, for instance, could provide clarity for guiding adaptation investment globally by focusing on reducing climate impacts and risks – the outcome of effective adaptation.
Our policy brief outlines a series of factors to consider when setting an overarching target, as well as individual targets for each of the four “dimensions” mentioned earlier.
These suggestions – shown in the table below – focus on key elements of the GGA framework and are global in nature.
They have been informed by the latest scientific assessments and reports of adaptation needs, including the IPCC, UN Adaptation Gap reports, academic literature and national adaptation documents such as NDCs and NAPs for Africa, as well as other multilaterally agreed targets such as the SDGs and the Sendai Framework.
| Overarching target | Impact, risk and vulnerability target | Planning target | Implementation target | Monitoring and evaluation target |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Guide adaptation action and support | Identify climate risks and hazards to reduce exposure | As of 2022, 84% of countries have at least one national-level adaptation planning instrument in place (AGR 2022) | Increase implementation that aligns with priorities to effectively reduce climate vulnerability, exposure, impacts and risks, and avoids maladaptation | Design, set up, or improve and/or implement MEL processes and systems in light of climate risk including integration of local and Indigenous knowledge, traditional and other vulnerable groups knowledge to enhance buy-in and ownership |
| Reduce climate risk | Assess vulnerability to existing and future climate hazards as basis for early warning system | Ensure all parties have developed national adaptation plans, strategies and policy instrument | Close the adaptation gap | Developing countries having equitable access to MOIs for MEL |
| Scale up adequate support for adaptation | Parties to use identified information to prioritise sectors for adaptation measure and develop a comprehensive adaptation plan | Increase inclusive planning and enhanced implementation of plans | ||
| Should inform the underlying premise of the framework – thus, reduce risk, plan better, enhance implementation and finance adaptation | Access to MOI to prepare and implement plans, including investment and integration across levels and sectors | |||
| Move towards resilience, improving adaptive capacity and reducing vulnerability related to long-term temperature goal |
Factors to consider in developing targets for the GGA dimensions. Source: ACDI (2023)
Theme targets
Of the adaptation “themes” set out in GGA negotiations, we suggest targets for six of them, as published in our recent policy brief and below:
Health: Achieve universal health coverage by 2030 and eliminate global climate-related mortality and morbidity by 2040.
Ecosystem and biodiversity: By 2040 maintain the resilience of biodiversity and ecosystems services at the global scale by achieving effective and equitable conservation of 50% of Earth’s land, freshwater, and ocean areas, including near-natural ecosystems, substantially increase restoration and effective ecosystem-based adaptation, and avoid mitigation measures that damage ecosystems.
Food and agriculture: Achieve food security and end malnutrition in all forms by 2030, despite climate change, and substantially reduce adverse climate impacts on food and agricultural production and productivity, and the entire agriculture value chain by 2040.
Cities, settlements and infrastructure: Ensure resilience of cities, settlements and key infrastructure to climate change by 2040, including by considering climate change impacts and risks in the design and planning of all human settlements and infrastructure, and substantially increasing deployment of integrated social, ecological and grey/physical infrastructure that reduces vulnerability of people, especially in informal settlements and coastal settlements.
Water: Achieve universal access to safe and affordable drinking water by 2030 and substantially reduce climate-induced water scarcity by 2040 including improving water use efficiency and reducing exposure and vulnerability of water and sanitation systems to climate hazards.
Poverty and livelihoods: Increase resilience and substantially reduce adverse climate impacts on livelihoods as a share of a country’s total population by 2040, including through integrating climate change adaptation into social protection programmes supported by basic services and infrastructure.
These proposed targets are global in nature and could set the course for increased adaptation actions while allowing countries to align actions with nationally identified adaptation priorities.
Setting time-bound and measurable targets would further strengthen calls to support implementation and enhance tracking of progress to sustain adaptation actions.
What next for the GGA?
Developing countries are already experiencing widespread loss and damage from climate change underscoring the vital importance of the GGA.
Key considerations that will make the GGA relevant include the ability of a strong GGA framework to catalyse adaptation finance and actions; the potential of the GGA to close the existing adaptation gap that so far is widening for the global-south regions; and, finally, a GGA that avoids maladaptation.
At COP28, a meaningful outcome for the GGA would include agreement on ambitious, measurable and time-bound targets for the dimensions and themes, as well as the finance, technology transfer and capacity building as appropriate means of implementation for the GGA.
A GGA with a strong focus on reducing climate change impacts and risks is all the more pressing considering that the window of opportunity to limit global warming to 1.5C is closing fast and risks may emerge earlier than projected.
Decisions made at COP28 would, hopefully, launch further work on indicators and methodologies for tracking progress on achieving the targets and the means of implementation.
Our recommendations include support for the evaluation of how much adaptation finance each developing country needs. This could help to ensure sufficient financial support from developed countries for adaptation – something that has been insufficient up to this point.
We also suggest that more global climate funds could be set aside to plan, implement and assess adaptation progress.
Other recommendations include reducing the reporting burden for developing countries, establishing the need for comprehensive datasets and providing technical support for developing countries from bodies such as the IPCC.
The post Guest post: What would an ambitious ‘global goal on adaptation’ look like at COP28? appeared first on Carbon Brief.
Guest post: What would an ambitious ‘global goal on adaptation’ look like at COP28?
Saturday, 17 October 2026
7.18 AM AWST
Hi folks! We’re joining you live from the Rainbow Warrior where we will be providing you with updates as our four activists continue scaling and occupying Woodside’s gas platform. The activists are peacefully protesting against Woodside’s latest gas expansion plans, the Browse project, which would see up to 57 toxic wells drilled at Scott Reef.
“Right now our activists are scaling Woodside’s massive Floating Production Unit. They are scaling the South-East pillar and the underside of the Helideck. They’ll be setting up camp soon and have plenty of provisions with them – so stick around!”
5:45 AM AWST
Our RHIBS are in the water! We’ve deployed our four activists and our ship crew on our small fast boats, headed to the gas platform. We’re carrying crew and equipment, plenty of food, all of our safety climbing gear, some big banners, cameras and a whole lot of heart… someone even has something to read after they get settled in.
5:26 AM AWST
Before sunrise activists prepared to launch RHIBS from the Rainbow Warrior.
Looking for a front seat view?
You can follow along with the Live Rainbow Warrior bow cam here!
Looking for more?
Follow us on Instagram for a peek behind the scenes and hear from our Rainbow Warrior crew.
Live blog: Greenpeace activists occupy Woodside gas project to save Scott Reef
Climate Change
Greenpeace activists climb and occupy Woodside’s Scarborough gas project calling on the Australian government to “Stop Woodside’s Dirty Gas” and “Save Scott Reef”
PERTH, Saturday 17 October 2026 — Four Greenpeace Australia Pacific activists are scaling and occupying a Floating Production Unit at Woodside’s Scarborough gas project off the coast of Western Australia, displaying banners reading: “Stop Woodside’s Dirty Gas. Save Scott Reef.”
- Photos and video available here and here. More will be uploaded throughout the day.
- Content and live updates will be uploaded to a live blog and to Instagram
Early this morning at 05:45 AWST, Greenpeace Australia Pacific activists launched from the Rainbow Warrior, Greenpeace’s flagship vessel, scaling and attaching themselves to a Floating Production Unit (FPU), a key piece of gas processing infrastructure at the Scarborough gas field over 200km off the coast of Exmouth.
Woodside has since confirmed it has initiated a temporary shut down of the FPU.
Greenpeace Australia Pacific is occupying the gas platform in peaceful protest of Woodside’s plans to drill for oil and gas at Scott Reef as part of its Browse proposal.
David Ritter, CEO at Greenpeace Australia Pacific, said: “Greenpeace Australia Pacific is taking action today to expose the unacceptable risk to Scott Reef posed by Woodside’s plans.
“Australians love our oceans. Woodside’s reckless Browse gas proposal would turn the magnificent Scott Reef into an industrial gas zone. Woodside wants to drill up to 57 toxic wells around Scott Reef, Australia’s largest oceanic reef, home to nesting green sea turtles, and endangered species like pygmy blue whales and the dusky sea snake; it is a place like nowhere else on Earth.
“Woodside has an alarming track record of oil spills, incidents and environmental neglect, and can’t be trusted with our oceans. From whaling in Albany in the seventies, to Woodside’s threat to Scott Reef today, there’s more than fifty years of history, of Greenpeace taking action off WA’s coasts to protect our oceans.
“There’s no future in new gas projects. Our future is in secure homegrown renewable energy, green industry and exports, where communities and places like Scott Reef are protected — there’s no future in dirty gas shipped offshore.
“The prospect of drilling for oil or gas on the Great Barrier Reef would be considered absolute madness today, but that is exactly the decision before the government: save Scott Reef or risk its destruction at the hands of a gas corporation.”
From aboard the Floating Production Unit, Dr Chris Holden, Greenpeace Australia Pacific activist said: “As a doctor, when I see new fossil fuel projects like Woodside’s Browse project being put forward, I can’t help but think about the impact this is going to have on the health of our communities and planet, and feel a sense of duty to act.
“Not only will this project do irrevocable harm to nature at Scott Reef, it will have a terrible impact on our climate, putting all of our lives at risk.
“On the Rainbow Warrior I’m carrying a copy of the 2025 Lancet countdown report, which warns that health impacts of climate change are worsening, with millions dying needlessly each year due to fossil fuel dependence, growing emissions, and failure to adequately adapt.
“With warnings like this from the leading global health professionals, our government simply can’t allow fossil fuel projects like Woodside’s Browse project to go ahead. It is their duty to do what is in the best interest of our communities.”
Almost half a million people have signed a petition calling on the government to Save Scott Reef and Woodside’s Browse gas project.
-ENDS-
Notes:
- Dial-in, SimSat and Zoom interviews with Geoff Bice, WA Campaign Lead at Greenpeace Australia Pacific, currently aboard the Rainbow Warrior, can be organised separately
Media contact:
Greenpeace Australia Pacific media team on +61 406 231 892 or +61 407 581 404
The board of the Fund for Responding to Loss and Damage (FRLD) will decide on Thursday on whether to “provisionally set aside” $20 million for Nepal to deal with some of the effects of the climate-driven flood it suffered in August.
The motion, seen by Climate Home News, has been drafted by a group of board members from both developed and developing countries and so is likely to pass easily at the fund’s first-ever extraordinary board meeting on October 22.
It invites the government of Nepal to submit a proposal for how to use the money, with the board then deciding at one of its regular board meetings whether to approve the proposal or not.
While Nepali officials have described $20 million as merely “symbolic” in the face of the $4.8 billion estimated costs of recovery and reconstruction, it would be the first time the new FRLD – agreed in 2022 months after devastating floods in Pakistan – has set aside money for a specific disaster.
Until now the fund has only taken requests through a single call for proposals, launched at COP30 in Belém last November, that gave countries six months to submit requests.
Most of the 180 projects the FRLD is currently considering are designed to help countries avoid damage from future climate disasters, for example by strengthening responses to floods in Bangladesh and Lagos.
The draft decision says Nepal’s proposal will serve as a pilot for how funding requests can be submitted outside of the fund’s current timetable. That could let governments seek funds quickly after a climate disaster strikes, rather than waiting for the next call.
This arrangement would set the fund apart from other United Nations funds designed for climate adaptation or cutting emissions like the Green Climate Fund.
Climate campaigners from Fill the Fund said the draft decision is “a real step forward” as it is “the first time this Fund has moved to respond to a specific disaster”.
Too little, too late
The FRLD was agreed by governments at COP27, set up and operationalised at COP28 in 2023 but has yet to award any money. The 180 funding requests it is currently considering would cost around $2.8 billion, but it only has $350 million to allocate.
The United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres has described the amount of money available in the fund as “ridiculously small” and Fill the Fund said $20 million “is a meaningful signal but it is a drop against an ocean of need”.
A glacial rock and ice collapse sent a torrent of water and debris through Nepal and the Chinese-administered region of Tibet on August 26. It killed more than 1,400 people, left thousands more missing and destroyed homes, bridges, roads and hydropower plants. Nepal’s finance and environment ministers quickly appealed to the FRLD board for funds, saying that “time is of the essence”.
Their call was followed swiftly by a letter from developing country FRLD board members urging the board’s co-chairs to organise an extraordinary meeting to allocate funds to Nepal.
But developed countries initially called for an informal consultation rather than a full board meeting. It took a further 45 days for the board’s co-chairs to organise an extraordinary board meeting for October 22 and to draft a motion for adoption.
Fill the Fund called for a permanent way of the fund rapid responding to disasters as “Nepal should not have required historic letters, an informal drafting group and the Fund’s first-ever extraordinary meeting simply to unlock an emergency response. The next country cannot wait two months and a bureaucratic marathon. Speed must be built in, not improvised.”
The post UN’s loss and damage fund set to give Nepal $20m for flood recovery appeared first on Climate Home News.
UN’s loss and damage fund set to give Nepal $20m for flood recovery
