In a significant shift in communication strategy, United Nations humanitarian and development agencies have notably reduced their references to climate change in key documents since Donald Trump’s return to the White House. This adjustment occurs despite escalating climate crises worldwide, including unprecedented heatwaves, severe droughts, and catastrophic flooding. Internal reports reveal that leading organisations such as the World Food Programme (WFP), the International Organisation for Migration (IOM), and the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) are now downplaying climate-related discussions in their strategic planning. This trend reflects the growing influence of the U.S. government, a principal donor, which has shifted its focus away from climate action since Trump’s re-election.
UN Agencies Respond to Political Pressures
Documented evidence indicates a dramatic decline in the explicit discussion of climate issues within the strategic frameworks of key UN agencies. For example, the WFP, which aims to assist 110 million people in 2026, has significantly altered its language around climate change. Reports show that references to the term in strategic plans from climate-vulnerable countries like Rwanda, Iraq, and Guatemala have plummeted since the onset of Trump’s second term. In contrast to the previous administration, these countries’ recent plans mention “climate” only sparingly—two times for Rwanda, once for Iraq, and not at all for Guatemala, compared to their earlier plans that cited the term 31, 23, and 41 times, respectively.
Catherine Pettengell, Executive Director of the Climate Action Network UK, highlighted the implications of this shift, stating, “The current U.S. administration decided to withdraw from 66 international organisations… actively undermining the collective safety and health of people everywhere.” She urged the UN to maintain its commitment to addressing climate change, despite the challenges posed by reduced U.S. funding and support.
Impacts of Funding Cuts
The financial implications of this political shift are stark. Funding for the WFP has dropped from $4.5 billion to $2.1 billion, with comparable cuts affecting the UNHCR and other agencies. The diminishing resources compel these organisations to prioritise immediate relief efforts over long-term climate adaptation and resilience strategies. Mauricio Vazquez from the ODI Global think tank commented on the precarious situation, stating, “Climate risk does not disappear because it is no longer prominently featured. Vulnerabilities are only growing.” This sentiment underscores the critical need for development organisations to integrate climate adaptation into their broader objectives.
In a parallel development, the World Bank has also recently revised its lending strategies, abandoning a target to allocate 45% of its annual lending for climate benefits, further illustrating the shifting priorities within international institutions under U.S. influence.
The Broader Context of Climate Messaging
The UN Development Programme (UNDP) has similarly reduced its climate references, from 25 mentions in its 2022-2025 Strategic Plan to just 15 in its 2026-2029 document. This change reflects a broader trend where climate concerns are increasingly framed as qualifiers to other challenges, rather than as a central issue demanding urgent action. Such reframing risks obscuring the human-driven causes of climate change, potentially allowing it to be perceived as a natural occurrence rather than an urgent crisis.
Interestingly, while agencies like UNICEF have seen an increase in climate references during this period, others, such as IOM, have reduced their focus significantly, mentioning “climate change” only twice in their 2026 appeal compared to 41 times in the previous edition. The disparity in climate messaging amongst UN agencies highlights the varying degrees of influence exerted by major donors, with UNICEF’s strategies reflecting a broader engagement with national governments and less susceptibility to U.S. funding cuts.
Why it Matters
The shift in how UN agencies address climate change has profound implications for global responses to one of the most pressing challenges of our time. As these organisations downplay climate issues in their strategic planning, the risk of neglecting vital climate adaptation and mitigation efforts increases. With U.S. funding heavily influencing the direction of UN humanitarian aid, the potential for a diminished focus on climate resilience may jeopardise the livelihoods of millions, particularly in developing countries already facing the harsh realities of climate impacts. This trend calls for urgent reassessment and advocacy for climate priorities within international aid frameworks to ensure that climate change remains at the forefront of global development agendas.
