This post was originally published on this site.
The UK has been warned that cutting climate financing for poorer countries would be an “act of self-harm” that would hinder its global influence and damage food security.
According to UK newspaper The Guardian, ministers plan to cut climate finance for the “developing world” from £11.6 billion (around €13.37 billion) over the past five years to £9 billion (€10.37 billion) in the next five. When factoring in inflation, this would mean a proposed cut of around 40 per cent in spending power since 2021.
At the UN COP29 Summit in 2024, almost 200 nations – including the UK – agreed to triple finance to developing countries to $300 billion (around €254.5 billion) annually by 2035.
A year later, at COP30 in Belém, developing countries called for more support for adaptation to help protect people from climate change by building infrastructure such as flood defences and drought-resistant water systems. However, parties only agreed to call for efforts to at least triple adaptation finance by 2035 – reiterating a previous commitment without further progress.
Is the UK about to cut its climate financing?
A government spokesperson tells Euronews Green that it is “modernising” its approach to international climate financing to focus on “greater impact” – making sure that every pound delivers for the UK taxpayer and the people it supports.
“The UK remains committed to providing International Climate Finance, playing our part alongside other developed countries and climate finance providers to deliver our international commitments,” they add. “The UK is on track to deliver £11.6 billion in International Climate Finance by the end of this financial year.”
The Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office, which has historically never commented on leaks, did not confirm whether the alleged cuts are going ahead, or respond to criticism that has already ensued.
‘Damaging trust’ in the UK
Gareth Redmond-King of the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit (ECIU) describes such a move as an “act of self-harm” for the UK – if it goes ahead.
“We import two-fifths of our food from overseas, much of which is grown in countries being hit hardest by extremes of heat and flood,” he says.
“The UK’s climate finance helps farmers in these countries to adapt their farming to maintain both their livelihoods and our food security.”
Redmond-King argues that going back on climate commitments would also damage trust in the UK’s position at a time when it has made real progress in cutting emissions and striving towards net zero targets.
“With China potentially offering forms of climate finance to poorer nations which need it, the longer-term risk is to the UK’s relative power and influence around the world.”
A ‘national security’ risk
The report comes just weeks after the UK’s Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) published a 14-page document warning that the collapse of global ecosystems is a direct threat to the country’s national security and prosperity.
With alleged involvement from MI5 and MI6, the report found that the world is also experiencing the impacts of biodiversity loss such as crop failures, intensified natural disasters and infectious disease outbreaks.
However, without “major intervention”, the report says these threats will increase alongside environmental degradation.
Officials highlighted the UK’s reliance on global markets for its food and fertiliser, with around 40 per cent of its food – such as vegetables, sugar and soy for animal farming – coming from overseas.
“Biodiversity loss, alongside climate change, is amongst the biggest medium- to long-term threats to domestic food production – through depleted soils, loss of pollinators, drought and flood conditions,” the report states.
“Ecosystem collapse would place the UK’s agriculture system under great stress, leaving it struggling to pivot to the new approaches and technologies that would be required to maintain food supply.”
Disruption to the international markets caused by ecosystem collapse would put UK food security at risk. This paves the way for organised crime to “exploit” scarce resources and could push more people into poverty, the report warns.
As more people cross the threshold into food insecurity, migration will rise. According to a landmark 2021 report by the Council on Strategic Risks, even a one per cent increase in food insecurity in a population compels 1.9 per cent more people to migrate.
The report also highlights growing political polarisation and instability in food and water-insecure areas, which could trigger a spike in disinformation.
“Conflict and military escalation will become more likely, both within and between states, as groups compete for arable land, food and water resources,” the report adds. “Existing conflicts will be exacerbated.”