Climate change is already severely disrupting global agrifood systems, threatening food security, livelihoods, ecosystems, and economic stability, especially in developing countries. This joint FAO–UNDP report analyses National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) from 64 developing countries submitted between 2010 and June 2025 to assess how agrifood systems are integrated into national climate adaptation planning.

Key Findings

1. Agrifood systems are central to climate risk

• 97% of countries report climate-related impacts on agrifood systems, including crops, livestock, fisheries, forestry, value chains, and food security.
• Climate risks include yield losses, water stress, pests and diseases, ecosystem degradation, and supply chain disruptions.

2. Adaptation priorities exist, but are poorly aligned with risks

• All countries prioritize agrifood systems in their NAPs.
• However, only 16% of adaptation actions are directly linked to specific climate hazards or impacts.
• Just 14% of actions are tailored to the needs of vulnerable groups such as women, smallholder farmers, Indigenous Peoples, and youth.
• Systems-based approaches (value chains, nutrition, social protection) remain underrepresented compared to on-farm solutions.

3. Evidence-based planning remains weak

• Less than half of countries use climate risk and vulnerability assessments or downscaled climate models for agrifood systems.
• This limits risk-informed decision-making and increases the likelihood of maladaptation.

4. Finance gaps are severe

• Agrifood systems account for 54% of estimated adaptation finance needs in costed NAPs.
• Yet they receive only 20% of global adaptation finance, representing just 1% of total climate finance.
• While the private sector is widely recognized as critical, over 75% of countries report barriers to private sector engagement.

5. Implementation capacity is constrained

• Nearly half of the countries cite technical, institutional, or financial barriers, including weak coordination and limited expertise.
• Governance and legislative frameworks to scale agrifood adaptation remain insufficient.

6. Monitoring, evaluation, and learning (MEL) systems are underdeveloped

• Almost all countries recognize the importance of tracking adaptation, but only one-third have operational MEL systems.
• Indicators focus mainly on production outputs, with limited attention to food security, nutrition, or resilience outcomes aligned with the Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA).

7. Loss and damage are already occurring

• Agrifood systems are the most frequently cited sector for climate-related loss and damage, appearing in nearly half of NAPs.
• These losses are mostly observed rather than projected, indicating that limits to adaptation are already being reached.

Conclusion

National Adaptation Plans are powerful entry points for accelerating climate-resilient agrifood systems. However, stronger climate science, better alignment between risks and actions, inclusive approaches, robust financing, and effective implementation systems are urgently needed. Moving from planning to action is essential to safeguard food security, livelihoods, and sustainable development.

Read More…………