It is increasingly recognised that the current level of global funding in climate mitigation (reducing global emissions) and adaptation (disaster mitigation through minimisation of exposure and/or vulnerability to climate hazards) is nowhere near that needed to achieve the transition to a sustainable, net zero emissions and resilient world. Funding needs to increase drastically everywhere to meet this need.

At the moment, climate funding everywhere is focussed on supporting mitigation activities to reduce emissions, via renewable energy investment and shifting high emitting industries such as transport to low emission alternatives. Adaptation activities account for less than 10% of total available funding.

Measuring how well countries are adapting to climate change is very difficult, but we can measure how much countries have reduced their emissions. Other countries have been able to reduce their emissions more than Australia. CO2 emissions in the UK were almost 50% lower in 2020 than in 1990. Germany, Russia, and France have also managed to substantially reduce their emissions. The US were about 11% lower. In contrast, Australia’s emissions increased by approximately 40% over this period. China and India have seen an over 300% increase in emissions over this period associated with their economic growth. 

Whilst China’s emissions have grown substantially, they are spending the most money of anywhere to reduce this. Almost a third of climate funding is spent in China, which has led to China’s production being much more efficient than in the past.

Climate funding in Australia is much lower. Less than 2% of global climate funding occurs in Australia, NZ and PNG combined.

This year, Australia updated its climate change commitments, pledging to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 43% below 2005 levels by 2030. This compares to commitments by 2030 of other countries (US: 50-52% below 2005 levels; China 60-65% below 2005 levels; UK 68% below 1990 levels; EU: 55% below 1990 levels). 

Australia has also this year announced major programs that will support adaptation activities, and we hope will improve Australia’s ability to withstand future climate disasters.

Further reading:

Naran, B. et al. Global Landscape of Climate Finance 2021 (Climate Policy Initiative, 2021).

Crippa, M., Solazzo, E., Huang, G. et al. High resolution temporal profiles in the Emissions Database for Global Atmospheric Research. Sci Data 7, 121 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-020-0462-2

Australia has seen plenty of climate related disasters in recent years. Most recently during the past year, floods in Qld, NSW, Vic, SA and Tasmania have been very damaging and costly to communities across the country.

Before the floods, we saw widespread bushfires during the summers of 2019/20 (mainland Australia) and 2018/19 (Tasmania), which motivated a Government investigation into how Australia can improve its National Natural Disaster Arrangements. The outcomes of that report states ‘Australia’s disaster outlook is alarming, with climate change exacerbating bushfires, extreme rainfall and flooding’.

‘Responding to climate disasters’ requires action in many ways.

• We should seek to prevent disasters. This would include activities like removing or reducing the population that live in areas that are exposed to climate hazards like floods or bushfires.
• We should be well prepared for disasters. This would include activities like having accurate early warning systems, that initiate action to minimise impacts in the immediate lead-in of a hazard event.
• We would be well positioned to respond during an event. During the time of crisis, we should have the resources to assist people in need and minimise harm.
• We should be able to support communities to recover after an event. After a disaster has struck, it takes a lot of time and effort for a community to recover to what it was beforehand. Ideally, we should aim to recover to be better prepared for future events (build back better).

Currently, almost all of the money spent on disasters is during the event (responding) or after (recovering). We should aim to be better prepared in the first instance, to minimise any damage happening at all.

Responding to the climate crisis needs us to both

1. reduce our emissions as fast as possible (e.g., the emphasis on emissions reduction and targets for net-zero), AND
2. invest early in climate change adaptation and/or disaster mitigation (e.g., steps to minimise the adverse impacts of foreseeable hazards, by reducing the exposure and/or vulnerability to those hazards), to manage the climate change impacts already committed.

Further reading:

Natural Disaster Commission Report