Scientists have found that the devastating floods triggered by intense rainfall in Southern Africa in recent weeks were made worse by climate change and have exposed deep social vulnerability, causing a disaster described as “a textbook case of climate injustice”.
The scientists working with the World Weather Attribution (WWA) group said extreme 10-day rainfall events in the region are now about 40% more intense than in pre-industrial times, driven primarily by human-induced climate change – and on this occasion amplified by a weak La Niña pattern. While such rainfall remains relatively rare, the analysis shows it would have been far less severe in a cooler climate.
With more than 100 deaths recorded in Mozambique alone since the rains began in late December, the scientists said the impacts have been compounded by rapid urbanisation, weak planning and high levels of informal settlements, which left communities highly exposed and led to widespread collapses of housing and displacement of families.
-
Court rules Netherlands is not doing enough to meet 1.5C goal and protect Bonaire
A Dutch district court ruled that the country is using up more than its fair share of carbon emissions, and ordered the government to review its emissions-cutting plan -
Africa urged to unite on minerals as US strikes bilateral deals
In the race for minerals critical for clean energy technologies, experts at the World Economic Forum said African nations should coordinate negotiations with trade partners
Renate Meyer, Southern Africa focal point for the Red Cross Red Crescent Climate Centre, said that when studying extreme events, the WWA group now also looks at people’s vulnerability and exposure, to understand the context and the drivers of risk beyond meteorological conditions.
“Mozambique and parts of South Africa, Eswatini and Zimbabwe are no stranger to floods, but the recurring frequency of the hazards such as drought and intense rainfall have had a significant impact on communities experiencing, amongst others, displacement, health challenges, socio-economic loss and psychological distress,” Meyer told the press launch of the WWA study.
Friederike Otto, professor of climate science at Imperial College London’s Centre for Environmental Policy, said the Southern Africa floods are “a textbook case of climate injustice” because the people of the affected countries have not contributed to climate change, nor are they profiting from using or selling fossil fuels, yet they are the ones losing their lives, homes and livelihoods.
Such disasters can no longer be treated as “acts of God” when they are the direct result of a system built on exploitation and a global failure to phase out fossil fuels, she argued. “We have the know-how and tools to stop this from getting worse,” she added. “We now need the political will that prioritises everyone instead of just the very rich and GDP [gross domestic product]. ”
Climate and social vulnerabilities collide
Separately on Thursday, the charity Water Aid said that in Mozambique and Malawi, more than 800,000 people have been affected, with thousands living in temporary accommodation and shelters, while the number of deaths and people missing continues to rise.
In a statement launching an emergency funding appeal, Water Aid’s Southern Africa director Robert Kampala said the floods are some of the worst the region has ever seen. “This is rapidly becoming a public health crisis,” he added, noting that water sources are become contaminated with floodwater and people are forced to live in cramped shelters, raising the threat of cholera outbreaks and other diseases.
Meyer of the Red Cross said health risks in the region have soared during the floods, with more than 11,500 pregnant women and about 169,000 women of reproductive age among those hit hardest. Many are sheltering in overcrowded conditions with limited access to sexual and reproductive health services, exposing them to stress and increased risk of preterm birth and low birth weight, she told journalists.
Flood risk is higher for people with disabilities when emergency shelters lack ramps and adapted sanitation and support services. “These structural exclusions force people to remain in high-risk locations, converting exposure into avoidable loss,” Meyer said.
Children are also vulnerable, she noted, with around 40% of children in Mozambique currently experiencing malnutrition. “These children are repeatedly exposed to droughts, floods [and] cyclones, with insufficient time or resources to recover nutritionally or physiologically between shocks – and this erodes the possibility of building resilience,” she added.
“New era of climate extremes” as global warming fuels devastating impacts in 2025
Bernardino Nhantumbo, climate researcher with Mozambique’s INAM National Institute of Meteorology in Maputo, said the flooding had caused a “collision” between a climate that grows more dangerous by the day and the region’s deep-rooted social vulnerabilities.
“When 90% of homes are made of sun-dried earth, they simply cannot withstand this much rain,” he said. “The structural collapse of entire villages is a stark reminder that our communities and infrastructure are now being tested by weather they are just not designed to endure.”
Growing needs, shrinking aid
Field reports from aid workers on the ground echo the WWA’s scientific findings. ActionAid Mozambique has said that humanitarian funding cuts and the climate crisis are putting thousands at risk after the dramatic rains and flooding in central and southern parts of the country.
With many people already living in poverty and informal housing, the floods have devastated lives and livelihoods, the aid organisation said. Elsa Manhique, a resident of the Buna area in Manhiça district, told ActionAid she had to “flee with nothing”. “Everything I had was taken by the water. The houses collapsed. We left without documents, without clothes, without anything,” she said.
Marcia Cossa, ActionAid Mozambique’s acting head, said the country is one of the world’s most climate-vulnerable nations, facing cyclones, floods and droughts that are intensifying due to climate change. “As needs grow, international aid and cooperation are shrinking, and that rollback is costing lives,” she added.
Comment: Tripling adaptation finance is just the start – delivery is what matters
Save the Children, an international aid charity, reported that thousands of children are at risk, with some families rescued by boat from submerged areas. Temporary shelters are overstretched, with some housing both people and livestock, creating serious health and hygiene concerns, the agency warned.
Ilaria Manunza, the charity’s country director, said the floods are unfolding amid a wider humanitarian emergency, pushing already exhausted communities further into crisis. With continued heavy rains forecast and emergency response capacity severely strained, families are being uprooted and children are at extreme risk, she said, calling for urgent support to prevent the emergency escalating further.
The WWA study said strengthening resilience against floods will require full implementation of existing policies and better coordination across river basins. It recommended investing in infrastructure and early warning systems, and building community capacity to prepare for, respond to, and recover from flooding.
The post Southern Africa floods intensified by warming highlight climate injustice, scientists say appeared first on Climate Home News.
Southern Africa floods intensified by warming highlight climate injustice, scientists say
Scientists have vowed to keep working on the next flagship set of reports for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), after a political row over the timeline for their release saw its latest session suspended on Friday evening without agreement.
During the weekend, government officials and scientists alike expressed disappointment over the inability to reach a compromise before some delegates from developing countries and small island states had to leave the week-long meeting in Ethiopia to catch flights home.
The disagreement – which has persisted since early 2024 – turns on whether the three key parts of the AR7 assessment should all be published before the conclusion of the UN’s next Global Stocktake of global climate action, which is due to be completed in late 2028.
The IPCC issued a statement after the close of the session, saying that “key agenda items” – the timelines for the three AR7 reports, as well as the IPCC budget – remain open and under discussion. It said the IPCC’s plenary session and its deliberations on the pending agenda “will resume at the earliest opportunity”, giving no further details of when.
IPCC Chair Jim Skea told delegates in closing remarks that recent months had been some of the most turbulent for the climate science panel and that, if there were stronger words than “profound disappointment” he would use them, according to a summary published by the Earth Negotiators Bulletin (ENB). IPCC discussions happen behind closed doors.
IPCC scientists remained committed
In an open letter, issued on Monday, a group of nearly 120 scientists – from a total of 664 AR7 authors – said they “stand committed to continue working to deliver the AR7 reports in a manner that is rigorous, timely and inclusive, in line with our mandate to be policy-relevant”.
“An assessment that arrives after the decisions it is meant to inform cannot serve its purpose,” they emphasised. “The second Global Stocktake in 2028 is such a decision point, and the world should not have to face it without the IPCCʼs latest assessment.”
Europe, small islands and the least developed countries, plus many Latin American and developed nations, want the IPCC to meet this deadline, arguing that the findings from the UN climate science body are irreplaceable in the UN climate policy-making process.
However, around a dozen developing countries plus Russia have argued that the reports should come later in order to allow for greater research input from the Global South – something that, in their view, would make the findings fairer. They also claim that a shorter timeline would put excessive pressure on experts.
-
Who shapes climate science? The equity question facing the IPCC
Early completion of the next global climate science assessment reports risks excluding research from the Global South, which is key to ensuring the findings are fair -
Governments that support climate science must stand firm against naysayers
The IPCC is meeting to decide the timing of its next major report, as some countries try to delay it and weaken the case for faster emissions cuts
The most vocal of this group at last week’s meeting were India and Saudi Arabia, according to the ENB summary and a developed country diplomat. Critics see this push for a longer timeline as an excuse to deprive government decision-makers of the latest science and ease pressure on emerging economies to raise their ambition, particularly on cutting emissions.
Commenting on last week’s meeting, France’s ambassador for climate negotiations Benoît Faraco said a broad coalition of developed and developing countries from all five continents, “united in their support for science and the timeline proposed by scientists”, had withstood pressure “from a few countries” seeking to slow down the process of adopting the IPCC reports.
He added that France would not back down and would “continue to fight tirelessly for science, protect the integrity of information, and convince our partners that without the best available scientific data, we will be less effective in tackling climate change and protecting our populations”.
Inclusivity proposal stalled
In a bid to unlock a solution for the AR7 timeline, countries discussed ways to improve the inclusivity of the IPCC’s work. One option put on the table was for the IPCC to expand its funding for delegates from developing countries to attend some or all of its sessions from one to two participants, according to the ENB summary and a delegate speaking to Climate Home News.
That would increase the costs for the IPCC to complete AR7 by up to a quarter, according to an assessment shared by the secretariat. The panel’s budget is under severe strain and its officials have warned that, without additional voluntary contributions, it risks running out of money before it can deliver on this assessment cycle.
Climate Home News understands that some of the IPCC’s traditional donors – which mainly include European countries, Japan and Australia – indicated a willingness to support funding for an additional developing country participant. But without an agreement over the budget or the timeline for the reports, that option was ultimately not adopted.
‘Disappointed and worried’
The three reports are managed by working groups that collate and draw overall findings from the latest scientific studies and data on the physical effects of global warming around the world, how to adapt to it, and pathways for cutting planet-heating emissions in order to meet the temperature goals of the Paris Agreement.
Winston Chow, an urban climate professor at Singapore Management University who co-chairs Working Group II on adaptation, wrote in a LinkedIn post that he was “disappointed and worried” for the IPCC authors who have worked “extraordinarily hard” to assess the relevant climate science over the past two years.
He said he shared their concern that “the rigour, time and goodwill they’ve invested are now being put at risk by the Panel’s stalemate”.
As science comes under attack at UN talks, climate movement splits over how to respond
For Working Group II, a meeting for 250 experts writing that report is scheduled for January 2027, followed by the approval of a special report on cities and climate change in Singapore next March.
But because the IPCC’s budget has not been confirmed due to uncertainty about the AR7 schedule, travel support for those researchers is at risk, wrote Chow. “If they cannot participate, our assessments will lose vital expertise, perspectives and scientific breadth, and the collective effort of our authors will be undermined,” he warned.
Scientific work continues
Despite the political holdups, he – together with French climate scientist Robert Vautard, co-chair of Working Group 1 – agreed with IPCC head Skea who told the IPCC’s closing session on Friday: “The engine room of the IPCC is working, and it’s healthy.”
Vautard commented in a separate post on LinkedIn after it ended: “The boat is at full steam.” Working groups I and II are due to start revising the first drafts of their reports, while Working Group III on reducing emissions is finalising its first draft which will be out soon, he wrote.
“The most exciting two years of the cycle are ahead, for the authors. The momentum in the engine room is here and now. Trust the engine room!” he added.
The IPCC and some scientists report that progress has been made towards achieving an equitable balance of authors from the Global North and the Global South.
The group of researchers who signed the open letter on Monday noted that “inclusivity is at the heart of how we work”, with author teams bringing together experts from developed and developing countries with diverse backgrounds and at different stages of their careers.
Plea to overcome political differences
The signatories include several scientists from some of the countries opposed to the alignment of all IPCC reports with the Global Stocktake.
“We are committed to an assessment in which the knowledge, experience and priorities of every region are fully reflected, a commitment we share with the leadership of the IPCC.
Equity is built into how our assessment is being drafted,” they added.
They appealed to governments that make up the IPCC “to overcome their political differences and work together as we do as a global scientific community, so that we can deliver the IPCC reports the world needs to hear”.
In a statement published on Monday, IPCC chair Skea said reaching consensus on the schedule for the reports is “vital”. He added that the assessments provide authoritative scientific evidence to inform national climate policies, strengthen adaptation and resilience and support access to climate finance, as well as helping communicate the scale of the climate crisis and the urgency of efforts to tackle it.
The post IPCC scientists vow to press on with climate reports despite political deadlock appeared first on Climate Home News.
IPCC scientists vow to press on with climate reports despite political deadlock
An Lambrechts is a biodiversity politics expert at Greenpeace International with extensive experience in biodiversity-related multilateral negotiations. She is the head of the Greenpeace delegation at the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) COP17 happening in Yerevan, Armenia.
In 2022, COP15 delivered the landmark Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework to halt and reverse biodiversity loss by 2030. With COP17 starting in Yerevan, we are now halfway to the deadline, and according to the first Global Review of progress, countries are not on track to meet the biodiversity targets, and implementation must accelerate fast.
One of the main findings of the Global Review is that funding falls far short of the scale needed to halt and reverse nature loss. But the crisis facing the world’s biodiversity is not an absolute scarcity of capital – it is a profound public policy distortion.
The global economy currently spends roughly $30 destroying nature for every single dollar invested in its protection. According to a report from the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, a staggering $2.4 trillion is spent in public subsidies for fossil fuels, agriculture and water use, while global investment in biodiversity conservation and restoration stands at a mere $220 billion.
Countries urged to ramp up “insufficient” nature policies at COP17
Yet, discussions about how to close the biodiversity finance gap continue to claim that salvation lies in mobilising private capital, scaling offsets and “derisking” investments in nature. This is a fundamental misunderstanding of both the nature of ecological stewardship and of the global financial architecture.
Biodiversity conservation is not a speculative investment portfolio – it is the foundation of human survival. The health of our planet is a non-monetisable, non-excludable public good. Expecting profit-seeking private capital to protect nature perpetuates the structural drivers of ecosystem destruction in the first place.
But if private market mechanisms cannot save biodiversity, where will the necessary public resources come from?
Money going to the wrong places
The answer lies in recovering the vast public wealth currently drained by cross-border tax abuse, financial secrecy and corporate impunity. Finance and environment ministers meeting in Yerevan must give a strong political signal that, to avert ecological breakdown, countries need to take swift action to reform global tax rules, eliminate harmful public subsidies and cancel unsustainable sovereign debts for the public revenues to end up where they belong.
Extractive sectors such as industrial agriculture, fishing, timber and mining continue business-as-usual, often heavily subsidised by public treasuries, while voluntary carbon and biodiversity offset markets pose a serious risk to nature conservation. Offset schemes have delivered only a negligible fraction of the funding needed to preserve ecosystems, allowing industries to continue with their destructive business-as-usual practices.
-
Global deforestation slowed in 2025 but Brazil’s election could undo “fragile” gains
Countries remain 70% off track to meet a goal to end deforestation by 2030, as progress in Latin America offset by failures in Africa -
Brazil confident new rainforest fund will reach $10bn donor milestone
Brazil’s environment minister said the Tropical Forest Forever Facility has raised billions in record time – which he hopes will convince more investors
In advanced economies, public funding often actively undermines biodiversity. In Europe, over €5.3 billion in public subsidies is funnelled annually into intensive forest biomass harvesting under renewable energy directives, degrading primary forest ecosystems and undermining long-term climate resilience. Pleading with private investors to fill a “finance gap” while pouring billions into ecological destruction is an exercise in futility.
Developing countries struggle with debt burden
For developing countries, reliance on private finance is further compounded by a crushing sovereign debt crisis. In 2024, public debt in developing economies reached record levels, with net interest payments alone absorbing $921 billion. A record 61 developing countries now spend more than 10% of government revenue on foreign debt service, with many climate-vulnerable nations spending twice as much servicing external debt as they receive in climate and biodiversity finance combined.
This burden acts as a structural driver of ecosystem destruction. Under pressure from external creditors and international financial institutions to avoid default and secure foreign exchange, governments are routinely forced into austerity measures and pushed to expand raw commodity exports into pristine biomes.
Comment: World Bank and IMF should lead the financial system in responding to the climate crisis
The current negotiations for a United Nations Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation (UNFCITC) also offer a way forward. An estimated