Labour has an opportunity to resolve the climate crisis

David Miliband, The Independent

There are many areas where Britain’s new government has the opportunity for a fresh start. There are few more striking than in the field of international development. Where the previous government was known for what it demolished (the world-leading Department for International Development), the new government can build. And nowhere is that more necessary than in the linked problems of conflict, climate and poverty. Analysis by the International Rescue Committee (IRC) finds that just 16 climate-vulnerable and conflict-affected countries — including Sudan, Myanmar, Syria and Somalia — are home to a staggering 43 per cent of all people living in extreme poverty, 44 per cent of all people affected by natural disasters, and 79 per cent of all people in humanitarian need. This is the new geography of crisis.

And this trend towards the concentration of crisis is only deepening. Three decades ago, 44 per cent of conflicts happened in climate-vulnerable states. Now, it is more than two-thirds. Although the rest of the world has cut extreme poverty by over half since the 1990s, it has grown by half in fragile and conflict-affected states. As former US secretary of the Treasury Larry Summers and his colleagues on the G20 Expert Panel reported, over $200bn (£153bn) was taken out of emerging economies in 2023. Last year, African governments spent over 50 times more on external debt payments than the entire UK aid budget to the continent. The share of G7 aid going to Africa today is at its lowest point in 50 years.

When it comes to what to do, we need a comprehensive route map for adaptation and resilience that thinks about the people affected by climate change, not just the land affected by climate change. We’ve seen important advances in the science and technology required to respond to the climate crisis, but there’s a gap between those advancements and how they are used to improve the lives of vulnerable people.

In Nigeria, the IRC is leveraging the latest climate modelling, AI and machine learning systems, and our experience with cash assistance, not just to respond to needs when a climate shock hits, but to anticipate needs and deliver support before a crisis starts. Research from this programme shows that anticipatory cash can build climate resilience, improve food security, and protect economic livelihoods at the same time as reducing negative coping strategies.

In Syria, Pakistan, Niger and South Sudan, the IRC is working with local farmers on innovative ways to strengthen the resilience, quality, and yield of crops through a seed system strengthening project driven by citizen science and incentives for farmer participation. By identifying and scaling production of high-yielding and climate-resilient seeds, it’s possible to build a sustainable food system that’s resilient to climate shocks even in settings that are subject to protracted conflict.

When it comes to how to fund it, the World Bank’s International Development Association (IDA) is one of the few sources of grants (and some highly concessional loans) for these climate-vulnerable, conflict-affected countries, given their debt burdens and lack of creditworthiness.

However, the people on the sharp end of conflict and crisis need a set of decision rules that force funding into the most vulnerable places. Otherwise it is deemed all too risky and they get left out. The IRC believes that setting a target for climate-vulnerable, conflict-affected countries to receive 18 per cent of all adaptation finance for developing countries, based on the current best available estimate of the costed needs, would help not just to direct more climate finance to where it is needed most; it would also be a fair recognition of those needs.

When it comes to how to deliver it, we have to take more risk and embrace a more flexible approach to delivery partners. This includes enhancing collaboration with and providing direct financing for non-government partnerships at scale. These partnerships have demonstrated their added value in navigating fragility and insecurity while safeguarding access to vital services for target communities. Global problems take global action to resolve, and the new government here in the UK has not just an incredible opportunity, but also a serious responsibility, to make climate, development, and humanitarian action work better together. Here are three practical steps where the UK could come back onto the stage in a meaningful way.

First, the 1997 white paper on international development, Eliminating World Poverty: A Challenge for the 21st Century, put tackling poverty centre-stage in funding allocations. From a situation where a couple of decades ago 80 per cent of the extremely poor were in stable states, today around 50 per cent are in fragile states. So, the UK should be aiming to devote half the aid budget to fragile and conflict-affected states. At the moment it is a paltry 15 per cent — less than half what it was in 2018. Second, the UK can roll out commitments to investing in climate resilience and adaptation, contributing to green growth. Fighting climate change, through decarbonisation, is cheaper than living with climate change. But this does not only apply to developed economies or to climate-crisis mitigation. It also applies to fragile states and climate adaptation. The proposed Resilience and Adaptation Fund is a good example of this; when implemented, it should prioritise achieving impact and scale.

Third, the IDA21 replenishment is a vital moment to support improvements to the IDA’s financing for, and delivery in, conflict settings. We know that the UK government has stated that the commitment to devote 0.7 per cent of GDP to overseas aid can only be restored when economic conditions allow. But before then, the IDA is a prime example of how the UK’s experience of service delivery and public service reform can be put to good use. Of course, the UK cannot and should not offer a quick fix — but it needs to be part of the argument. We remain one of the richest countries; we have platforms that are not available to others; and we have public bodies, private companies and NGOs with ideas and expertise that are globally relevant. There is no better time than now to put them to good use.