Global experts say agrifood systems remain sidelined in climate finance, urging a just transition that protects farmers, restores degraded land and redirects investment toward resilience, equity and food security.
Only around 4% of global climate-related development finance currently reaches food production systems, despite farmers and rural communities being on the front lines of escalating climate disruption. That stark imbalance set the tone at a high-level dialogue co-convened by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the ODI Global during London Climate Action Week 2026, where experts called for a fundamental redesign of how agrifood systems are financed and governed.
With more than 1,000 events and over 75,000 participants, London Climate Action Week has become a key bridge between global climate negotiations and real-world implementation, bringing together policymakers, scientists, businesses, and communities to accelerate practical solutions toward net-zero and resilience.
A finance system out of balance
Speakers warned that agrifood systems sit at the frontline of climate impacts—from prolonged droughts and extreme heat to erratic rainfall patterns—yet remain structurally underfunded and underprioritized in global climate governance, which continues to be dominated by energy-sector transitions.
Rather than framing the challenge as a “finance gap,” participants emphasized a deeper structural issue: trillions already flow through agrifood systems, but these flows are misaligned with resilience, equity, and sustainability goals.
ODI Managing Director Hans Peter Lankes stressed that climate transitions are not neutral—they redistribute power and risk—and without deliberate design, they risk deepening inequality, particularly for smallholder farmers, informal workers, and rural women.
Resilience begins at the farm
FAO Assistant Director-General Kaveh Zahedi noted that climate shocks are already undermining food production across regions, with El Niño impacts, extreme heat, and overlapping crises compounding risks for farmers.
He emphasized that resilience must be built at the ground level through affordable, locally available solutions, not only large-scale technological interventions.
Agrifood systems were repeatedly described as both highly vulnerable and highly underutilized: while exposed to climate shocks, they also offer some of the most effective tools for mitigation and adaptation.
Practices such as composting, mulching, cover cropping, and agroecological approaches were highlighted as low-cost solutions that improve soil health, reduce emissions, and strengthen resilience simultaneously.
From waste to value in rural economies
FAO showcased practical examples of how agrifood innovation is already delivering results.
In Mongolia, through a Global Environment Facility (GEF)–supported partnership, lower-grade and waste wool is converted into fertilizer pellets that improve soil moisture retention during dry periods. The approach reduces waste, strengthens soil health, increases herder incomes, and builds local value chains.
Such bioeconomy solutions were presented as scalable models linking climate action with livelihoods, provided they are supported by enabling policy, investment, and measurement systems.
As part of the Bioeconomy Challenge launched at COP30, FAO is leading a working group on metrics and indicators to develop globally comparable frameworks while respecting national contexts and capacities.
Land degradation and the investment gap
More than 20% of global cropland is already degraded, posing a growing threat to food security and rural livelihoods.
To address this, the Resilient Agriculture Investment for Net Zero land degradation (RAIZ) initiative—launched at COP30 under the Brazilian COP30 Presidency and now implemented through the FAO FAST Partnership—was highlighted as a flagship effort to scale land restoration finance.
The initiative focuses on identifying high-impact restoration zones, connecting investable projects with national priorities, and designing blended finance models that combine public and private capital to de-risk investment and unlock large-scale restoration.
What a just transition means for food systems
A parallel ODI–FAO dialogue focused on how agrifood systems fit into global just transition frameworks.
Participants stressed that a just transition must ensure smallholder farmers can sustain livelihoods, secure land and tenure rights, and access decent work, social protection, and clean energy.
IPCC Chair Jim Skea highlighted land policy as a cornerstone of adaptation, pointing to recognition of customary tenure, community mapping, decentralization, co-management, and regulated rental markets as key tools for resilience.
He stressed that no single solution exists, and that effective adaptation depends on place-based, context-specific policy mixes grounded in local realities.
From recognition to delivery
While agrifood systems are increasingly acknowledged in UN climate negotiations, speakers warned that progress remains fragile and uneven.
Advocates called for embedding agrifood systems within the evolving UNFCCC Just Transition Mechanism ahead of COP31 and COP32.
A central concern was that climate finance architecture continues to prioritize energy transitions, while food systems—despite their central role in livelihoods, emissions, and adaptation—remain structurally marginalized.
Three priorities emerged clearly: redirect existing finance toward resilience rather than only expanding funding volumes; strengthen local agency through land rights and Indigenous knowledge systems; and align markets so agroecological transitions become economically viable and sustained.
The narrowing window for action
Despite growing momentum, experts warned that agrifood systems still sit at the margins of global climate governance.
The central message of the dialogue was clear: there is no credible pathway to climate resilience, equity, or food security that excludes the people who produce food.
As preparations advance toward COP31 and COP32, the debate is shifting from recognition to implementation—whether global finance, policy, and markets will finally be realigned with the realities of those on the front lines of the climate crisis.
