Addressing institutional fragmentation in climate adaptation

Climate risks don’t act alone, especially in vulnerable regions. They combine with political tensions, livelihood stress, and weak institutions to create complex, fast-moving challenges for peace and human security. And so, we need tools that can answer critical questions faced by practitioners today: 🔹 Where is climate amplifying conflict and insecurity? 🔹 How do shocks to food, water, and livelihoods drive tension? 🔹 How can we integrate community knowledge with data for early warning? 🔹 What gaps in policy or institutions stall effective response? This is why my colleagues and I developed the Integrated Climate Security Framework (ICSF) - a tool to inform real-world decisions in fragile and climate-vulnerable settings. So what can our integrated framework do in the field? ✔️ Help target interventions in climate-security hotspots ✔️ Profile vulnerable groups with layered socio-economic and exposure data ✔️ Understand how food and nutrition insecurity mediates conflict risk ✔️ Reveal policy and institutional gaps that shape (or stall) adaptation ✔️ Build shared understanding across stakeholders—from local to national The ICSF was applied in many countries across the globe, but was designed to be adapted. If you’re a practitioner, implementer, or policymaker working on climate and security, it may offer a useful structure for your context too. 📄 We published the framework on PLOS Climate. Read here: https://lnkd.in/e8djSPUG

🌍 How can we move beyond fragmented projects to enable real, system-level change? This was the key question that guided a mid-term evaluation I recently had the opportunity to carry out in partnership with the UNDP. Now, their new Systems Portfolio website showcases how to rethink development through portfolios of interventions designed to work together — not in isolation — to address complex challenges like climate change, inequality, and care systems. A systems portfolio is not just a collection of projects. It’s a strategic way of organizing, learning from, and adapting interventions in real time to shift the dynamics of the systems that need to change. I am thrilled that systems change practitioners globally now can access this new resource to: 📌 Explore real-world cases (Zambia, Uruguay, Thailand) 🧰 Access practical tools, methods, and insights 🔍 Learn how this approach supports collaboration, innovation, and investment 🔗 Dive in: https://lnkd.in/d4ss3ymK Thanks to the amazing team Milica Begovic, PhD Xoan Fernandez Garcia Simone Uriartt & colleagues for bringing this important resource to life! #SystemsChange #PortfolioApproach #UNDP #DevelopmentInnovation #GreenTransition #CareEconomy #AdaptiveGovernance #Complexity

Recent storms in Florida briefly pushed climate adaptation into the national conversation. But America’s failure to plan for the future remains largely unaddressed. We continue to rely on reactive, expensive disaster relief—ignoring the profound economic and political consequences ahead. A new report from New Zealand offers a compelling path forward. The Finance and Expenditure Committee laid out five key principles for climate adaptation. First, a lead agency must be responsible for driving an all-of-government approach to adaptation. Second, the government must provide clear warnings about climate risks—so that private risk is no longer shifted onto the public. Third, consistent national standards for risk assessment are essential. We need transparent communication about climate risks and incentives for banks and insurers to reduce exposure. Fourth, local governments must have the legal authority to act decisively. Finally, managed retreat is necessary. We must prioritize the relocation of vulnerable populations over protecting second-home owners. For the U.S., this means leadership from the White House. "Fair warning" can help reduce regulatory takings claims, ensuring that no one expects government protection for risky properties. It also means prioritizing those who need to relocate, rather than safeguarding property owners' financial interests. The clock is ticking. We’re already seeing the effects of climate-driven property devaluation, and those losses won’t rebound. If we don’t start planning now, the financial repercussions will be severe. This New Zealand report is just a beginning—but it shows what forward-thinking, principled adaptation can look like. It’s time for America to act. Before it’s too late.

Delighted to share this International Development Research Centre (IDRC) supported research article in which we analyzed the institutional barriers for accessing international climate finance in the SADC Secretariat countries. Access to finance towards addressing climate change in Southern Africa remains low, particularly financing adaptation in this highly vulnerable region. The ability to develop pipelines of bankable projects is constrained by a lack of institutional capacity in both the public and private sector. We undertook an in-depth understanding of the institutional barriers that limit climate finance actors from mobilizing greater #climate #finance. One of the primary barriers this research found was the lack of clear policies and regulatory and legal frameworks, including the lack of policy enforcement where policies do exist. We hope that the findings from this research will help to align institutional policies and procedures in SADC Secretariat with the conditions of climate financing mechanisms under the UN Climate Change such as the Green Climate Fund, Adaptation Fund and the Global Environment Facility.

Disaster response isn’t just about logistics—it’s also about power, politics, and institutional fragmentation. This new peer-reviewed study analyzes Türkiye’s post-earthquake response, exposing how bureaucratic politics significantly shaped outcomes. Researchers found that while formal structures emphasized centralization and coordination, actual implementation was marred by turf battles, miscommunication, and overlapping mandates. Informal networks and internal rivalries often dictated decisions more than official protocols. The result: delays, inefficiencies, and missed opportunities for community engagement. The paper argues for more transparent, integrated governance models that account for political behavior within institutions—not just procedural reforms. In an era of escalating disasters, resilience requires aligning systems with how institutions truly operate—not just how they’re supposed to. Key Takeaways: - Bureaucratic politics can undermine coordinated disaster response - Informal networks often override official protocols during crises - Governance reforms must address institutional behavior, not just structure Read the full article: https://lnkd.in/evBMnD64