In a notable shift, United Nations humanitarian and development agencies have altered their discourse regarding climate change, as evidenced by internal strategy documents. This trend has emerged since Donald Trump’s re-election, highlighting a significant realignment in how these organisations address the escalating climate crisis. Despite the intensifying impacts of climate change worldwide, references to the issue have markedly decreased across key UN agencies, raising concerns about the implications for global climate action.
Shift in UN Climate Messaging
Recent findings reveal that prominent UN bodies, including the World Food Programme (WFP), the International Organisation for Migration (IOM), and the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), have notably diminished their references to climate change in pivotal strategic documents. This reduction occurs amidst a backdrop of rising global temperatures, extreme weather events, and increasing food insecurity exacerbated by climate-related factors.
According to Catherine Pettengell, executive director of the Climate Action Network UK, this change is reflective of a broader retreat from global cooperation initiated by the current US administration. “The current US administration decided to withdraw from 66 international organisations, in what was a profound retreat from global cooperation that is actively undermining the collective safety and health of people everywhere,” she stated. This shift in rhetoric may compromise the UN’s ability to advocate effectively for climate action, as it responds to the pressures exerted by one of its largest funders.
Implications for Programme Funding and Strategy
The World Food Programme, which aims to assist 110 million individuals in 2026, has historically relied on substantial US funding. However, internal assessments reveal that country strategies from vulnerable nations like Rwanda, Iraq, and Guatemala have seen drastic reductions in climate-related terminology. For instance, Rwanda’s latest strategic plan mentions “climate” only twice, a stark contrast to 31 mentions in its previous document. Such a trend is concerning, especially as these nations grapple with the dire consequences of climate change on their populations and economies.
Mauricio Vazquez from ODI Global noted that the WFP’s shift may be a strategic response to ensure its survival amid changing funding landscapes. While funding applications for climate initiatives continue, the reluctance to address climate change openly in strategic documents may hinder long-term development effectiveness. “Climate risk does not disappear because it is no longer prominently featured in strategy documents,” he cautioned, emphasising the need to integrate climate adaptation into development outcomes.
Broader Trends Across UN Agencies
The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) has also witnessed a notable decline in climate references, reducing mentions from 25 in its 2022-2025 Strategic Plan to just 15 in the 2026-2029 version. The earlier document unequivocally identified climate change as a core priority, while the latest iteration begins with broader concerns, downplaying the urgency of climate issues.
Other UN agencies exhibit a similar pattern, often employing “climate” as a qualifier rather than addressing it as a critical crisis. This shift in framing can lead to a perception of climate-related challenges as natural phenomena rather than human-induced events. The IOM’s appeal for 2026 illustrates this trend, with the term “climate change” appearing only twice compared to 41 instances in its 2024 appeal.
Karen Mathiasen of the Center for Global Development highlighted the importance of UN strategies, asserting that these documents are not merely for communication but play a significant role in shaping resource allocation and accountability frameworks.
Funding Cuts and Future Challenges
The funding landscape for UN agencies has significantly altered under the current administration, with the WFP’s budget slashed from £3.4 billion to £1.6 billion and the UNHCR experiencing similar cuts. While some agencies, like UNICEF, have maintained or increased climate references, others have succumbed to pressure to reduce focus on climate change, potentially jeopardising their operational effectiveness.
Andrew Harper, a special advisor on climate action to UNHCR, acknowledged that while climate change remains a priority, shrinking foreign aid pools compel partners to prioritise immediate humanitarian needs over long-term climate strategies.
In contrast, UNICEF has generally seen an increase in climate references in its strategies, illustrating a divergence in how different agencies are adapting to the current political climate. However, Argentina’s strategy, which has omitted all climate references, reflects the influence of political leadership on climate discourse.
Why it Matters
The softening of language on climate change by UN agencies amid shifting political dynamics underscores a troubling trend that could have significant repercussions for global climate action. As these organisations adapt their messaging to align with funder preferences, the urgency of addressing the climate crisis risks being overshadowed. This reticence could undermine vital support for vulnerable communities already bearing the brunt of climate impacts, ultimately jeopardising progress toward sustainable development goals. The implications are profound, as the world faces a growing array of climate-related challenges that demand immediate and coordinated action.
