The volume of climate adaptation finance has long been a politically charged topic and a recurring focal point in international negotiations. For developing nations, it represents a lifeline in the face of escalating climate risks and a matter of equity and justice. At COP29, held in Baku last year, developed countries reiterated their commitment to increasing adaptation finance for emerging markets and developing economies. While this pledge was welcomed, it reignited a more fundamental concern—namely, that such finance’s effectiveness remains unmeasured and poorly understood. Dr. Jonathan Verschuur notes, “It is not only the amount of money that matters. We currently lack evidence to determine whether the adaptation finance disbursed so far has been effective, or even clarity about the outcomes we are trying to achieve in terms of reducing climate risk.”

This disconnect between financing volumes and real-world impact underscores a deeper structural issue. Although well-meaning and staffed by committed professionals, many adaptation projects are hindered by misaligned incentives. A prevailing trend is the superficial expansion of adaptation finance commitments by integrating adaptation-related components into pre-existing development projects. This tactic may help to inflate funding figures on paper, but it does little to address the systemic weaknesses that inhibit genuine climate resilience. In contrast, far less attention—and funding—is given to initiatives that aim to build institutional capacity, enable evidence-based policymaking, and support countries in designing and leading their adaptation agendas. Without such foundational support, adaptation efforts risk being fragmented, unsustainable, and ultimately ineffective.

Unlike mitigation efforts, which are often globally standardised—such as transitioning to renewable energy or phasing out fossil fuels—adaptation strategies are deeply context-dependent. They must consider local agricultural practices, socioeconomic conditions, governance structures, and the specific vulnerabilities of communities and ecosystems. Effective adaptation cannot be imposed from the outside; it must be cultivated from within. One illustrative example is the Netherlands’ Delta Works. Far more than a network of dikes and flood defences, the Delta Works reflect a deeply embedded policy culture of long-term planning, public engagement, and integrated water management. Adaptation efforts could be transformed from reactive coping mechanisms into proactive resilience-building frameworks if such a culture can be nurtured in climate-vulnerable countries.

A paradigm shift is urgently required to realise this vision. According to Verschuur, the path forward involves rethinking how adaptation finance is structured and delivered. His team has put forward five key recommendations to improve adaptation programmes’ design, implementation, and monitoring. These include better identification and understanding of climate risks, strategic planning tailored to local realities, robust monitoring and evaluation frameworks, and the creation of enabling environments that allow finance to translate into meaningful, sustainable change on the ground.

At the heart of all five recommendations lies a single unifying principle: the need for more ambitious and coherent capacity-building efforts. Fragmented or ad hoc training sessions and workshops are not sufficient. Instead, a large-scale, coordinated effort is needed to build institutional and human capacity within governments, across key economic sectors, and at the community level. This will require investment in knowledge and skills and the systems and structures that allow such capacities to be sustained and scaled over time.

Verschuur emphasises that the upcoming United Nations climate conference, COP30, scheduled in Belém this October, could be a pivotal moment to launch a serious international dialogue. Rather than framing success solely regarding pledges and dollar amounts, COP30 should shift the narrative towards how adaptation finance can be made genuinely effective—enabling countries to lead their strategies grounded in local knowledge and long-term vision. If this shift can be achieved, the global adaptation agenda will move significantly closer to delivering the outcomes it promises: protecting lives, livelihoods, and ecosystems in an era of accelerating climate change.

More information: Jasper Verschuur et al, Climate adaptation finance: From paper commitments to climate risk reduction, Science. DOI: 10.1126/science.adx1950

Journal information: Science Provided by Delft University of Technology