In a significant shift reflective of changing political dynamics, key United Nations agencies have notably reduced their focus on climate change in strategic documents, following the return of Donald Trump to the White House. This development emerges despite the intensifying climate crisis, which has been marked by unprecedented heatwaves, severe droughts, and catastrophic flooding across the globe. The adjustments in phrasing and priorities signal a worrying trend among organisations that are supposed to address some of the most pressing challenges of our time.
A Shift in Strategy
Documents obtained by The Independent reveal that prominent UN agencies, including the World Food Programme (WFP) and the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), have significantly diminished their references to climate change in recent planning materials. This trend coincides with a broader retreat from climate action observed in various US government departments since Trump’s re-election.
Catherine Pettengell, executive director of the Climate Action Network UK, expressed concern over this transformation, stating, “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.” Pettengell emphasised the need for the UN to maintain its commitment to addressing climate change, irrespective of external pressures.
Implications for Humanitarian Aid
The World Food Programme, which aims to assist 110 million people in 2026, has been particularly affected. Historically, the US has been a crucial supporter of the WFP, which was founded on the recommendation of President Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1961. Mauricio Vazquez from the ODI Global think tank noted that the shift in language is a strategic move to ensure the survival of these agencies.
The evidence is stark: countries like Rwanda and Guatemala, which are highly vulnerable to climate impacts, previously included numerous references to climate in their strategic plans drafted during Trump’s first term. However, revised documents under the current administration show a dramatic decline in mentions, raising alarms about the long-term implications for development programmes.
The Broader UN Landscape
This trend is not isolated to the WFP. The UN Development Programme (UNDP) similarly reduced its climate mentions in its strategic plans, shifting from 25 references in its 2022-2025 plan to just 15 in its 2026-2029 iteration. The earlier plan boldly addressed the climate emergency, while the new version adopts a broader focus that downplays the urgency of climate action.
Other agencies, such as the International Organisation for Migration (IOM), echo this pattern, with their climate references dropping significantly in recent appeals. In stark contrast, some UN bodies like UNICEF have seen an increase in climate-related discussions, which may be attributed to their reliance on government partnerships that dilute the influence of major donors like the US.
Challenges Ahead
These changes in rhetoric are concerning because they could have profound implications for how UN agencies allocate resources and address climate vulnerabilities. Karen Mathiasen from the Center for Global Development highlighted the importance of agency strategies, remarking that they guide priorities and resource distribution. “They are more than communications documents,” she pointed out, “and they help shape an agency’s strategic direction.”
As US funding for UN agencies has been drastically cut, the pressure to conform to a political narrative that minimises climate discourse could lead to inadequate responses to the urgent needs of vulnerable populations.
Why it Matters
The diminishing focus on climate change within UN strategies poses a substantial risk not only to the effectiveness of humanitarian aid but also to global climate response efforts. As climate-related disasters continue to escalate, a retreat from recognising the human-driven causes of these events undermines the necessary actions required to address them. The world needs robust leadership on climate issues, and the apparent capitulation of influential organisations to political pressures could have dire consequences for those most affected by the climate crisis. Without a clear commitment to tackling these challenges, the path forward looks increasingly precarious.
