**
In a concerning trend for global climate action, several United Nations agencies have begun to downplay their references to climate change in strategic documents, marking a significant shift since Donald Trump assumed the presidency once more. This adjustment comes despite escalating climate impacts worldwide, including record heatwaves, devastating droughts, and catastrophic flooding, raising alarms about the future of humanitarian aid and climate resilience initiatives.
A Shift in Climate Language
Internal documents obtained by The Update Desk reveal that key UN agencies, such as the World Food Programme (WFP), the International Organisation for Migration (IOM), and the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), have notably reduced their discussions regarding climate change in recent strategic plans. With the Trump administration’s return to power, there has been a marked decline in the term’s usage, even as the global climate crisis intensifies.
For instance, the WFP, which aims to support 110 million people globally in 2026, has witnessed a stark decrease in climate references in its strategic planning. Countries that are highly vulnerable to climate impacts, such as Rwanda, Iraq, and Guatemala, reduced their mentions of climate in their recent plans to just a handful of times, compared to dozens in earlier versions during the previous Trump administration.
Pressure from the US Government
This shift in rhetoric correlates with a broader retreat from climate-focused action by US government departments and aid programmes since Trump’s re-election. Catherine Pettengell, executive director of the Climate Action Network UK, highlighted the detrimental effects of the US’s withdrawal from numerous international organisations, calling for the UN to remain steadfast in addressing climate change despite the pressure.
Tracy Gilbert, a British MP and co-chair of the UK All-Party Parliamentary Group on the UN Sustainable Development Goals, echoed these sentiments. She warned that the repercussions of climate change are being felt acutely in the UK, and the impact will be even more severe in developing nations reliant on aid.
Global Institutions Responding to Political Pressures
The World Bank recently exemplified this trend by abandoning a target to deliver climate-related benefits in 45 per cent of its annual lending, further indicating how global institutions are responding to the pressures exerted by the US. Mauricio Vazquez from ODI Global emphasised that this shift in the UN agencies’ rhetoric is an attempt to ensure their survival, particularly given the US’s historical role as a key funder of organisations like the WFP since its inception.
Despite the apparent scaling back of climate rhetoric, agencies like the WFP continue to respond to climate-related needs around the globe. However, the reluctance to prominently feature climate change in their strategic planning could have significant ramifications for development programmes. Vazquez warned that simply ignoring climate risks in strategic documents will not eliminate the vulnerabilities that exist.
The Broader Implications
The UN Development Programme (UNDP) has also seen a decline in climate-related language, reducing mentions from 25 in its 2022–2025 Strategic Plan to just 15 in its latest iteration for 2026–2029. This change is indicative of a broader trend across UN agencies, where references to climate are now often couched in terms of resilience and disaster response, rather than as a direct consequence of human-induced climate change.
While some agencies, like UNICEF, have increased their climate references in recent strategies, the overall trend within the UN system remains troubling. Funding cuts from the US have drastically affected various UN agencies, with the WFP’s budget slashed from $4.5 billion to $2.1 billion and the UNHCR’s from $2.1 billion to $0.8 billion since the beginning of Trump’s second term.
Why it Matters
The gradual dilution of climate change from the strategic frameworks of major UN agencies poses a grave threat not only to vulnerable populations relying on aid but also to the global fight against climate change itself. As the world faces increasing environmental challenges, the reluctance of these organisations to confront the climate crisis head-on undermines both their operational effectiveness and the urgency needed to address this existential threat. The implications of this trend could reverberate across humanitarian efforts, potentially leaving millions more vulnerable in an increasingly unpredictable world.