Global Climate Risk Index through Vulnerability and Access to Finance – Earth State ranks 188 countries

Supported by the Rockefeller Foundation, researchers at Columbia Climate School have unveiled a new index that draws national vulnerability with natural and man-induced hazards vulnerability with the ability to obtain financing to pay for prevention, recovery and reconstruction actions. The interactive dashboard for the Climate Finance (CLIF) Vulnerability Index shows current and future exposures to 188 countries and identifies 65 countries with the highest risk or “red region”. Two-thirds of these countries are in Africa.

The goal of the index is to promote more comprehensive risk assessment criteria, helping agencies target resources to mitigate vulnerability and reach communities facing disaster and financial risks more effectively.

“Climate shocks are becoming more frequent and intense, but many countries facing the highest threat are also subject to heavy debts, limiting their access to financial markets,” said Jeff Schlegelmilch, director of the National Disaster Preparation Center for Columbia Climate School, who led the development of the index. “Traditional aid models based on per capita GDP or income levels do not capture the unique risks of climate exposure, as well as limited capital use to manage these risks.”

Schlegelmilch said the CLIF Vulnerability Index provides a novel, more realistic picture of risk, including access to financing to address climate vulnerability.

By 2050, heat waves, floods and other extreme events caused by the warm world could result in $14.5 million in deaths and $12.5 trillion in global economic losses, according to the World Economic Forum. The UN Environmental Program also estimates that the annual adaptation financing gap could reach as high as $387 billion per year. The World Bank calculates that without substantial investment, climate change could be as high as 132 million people into poverty by 2030. Meanwhile, high borrowing costs and limited financial opportunities have put many countries in a cycle of climate disaster response and recovery without real mitigation of climate mitigation and adaptation.

“As governments around the world prepare for the fourth international financing conference next week, the gap between the development goals and the financing needed has never been greater,” said Eric Pelofsky, vice president of global economic recovery at the Rockefeller Foundation. “The CLIF Vulnerability Index initiated an important dialogue on data that should promote scarce resources to vulnerable countries facing huge challenges. By using the index, donors and funders can prioritize support for countries with a potential disaster.”

The index integrates data on debt sustainability, financial integration and complexity, as well as governance considerations that affect lending conditions related to vulnerability assessments, related to cyclones, floods, droughts, earthquakes, conflicts and other hazards.

“Donors interested in funding climate adaptation and resilience, want to see the greatest impact of their contribution,” said Gautam Jain, co-creator of the index. “The index could help donors choose between two countries that are facing similar climate disaster risks based on the areas where their funds can develop further, as the index explicitly includes a separate dimension covering the capacity for each country to obtain financing.”

Users can filter index results through the “optimistic” and “pessimistic” scenarios of the “2050 or 2080 timeline”. The four options choose different levels of emissions, population growth and international cooperation in climate mitigation and adaptation. Of the 65 countries that appeared in the red zone, 47 were still in the category in all four cases.

Other key findings

• More than 2 billion people live in red zone countries where the risk of major harm and/or disasters is high, while the risk of access to finance is decreasing. Almost all 65 countries in the red region are low- and middle-income countries as defined by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), and many are home to some of the fastest-growing populations in the world.
• Forty-three red regions are located in sub-Saharan Africa. They account for nearly 1.2 billion people. The population across the continent is expected to more than double by 2070, while 21 countries are at high risk of debt trouble or debt trouble. The highest ranking African countries in the four climate scenarios include Angola, Burundi, Gambia, Guinea-Peso, Eritrea, Lesotho, Malawi, South Sudan, Sudan, Sudan and Zambia.
• Six Asian Pacific countries emerge in the Red Region, with homes of more than 520 million people: Bangladesh, Kiribati, Myanmar, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. According to the World Meteorological Organization, Asia is the most disaster-breaking region in the world, with climate and water-related hazards.
• The Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) region has eight red region countries with residences of over 100 million people: Belize, Bolivia, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras and Venezuela. According to the Inter-American Development Bank, the LAC region is vulnerable to climate change and requires investment of $470 million to $1.3 trillion to achieve the Paris Agreement goals.
• Ukraine and Cyprus are two red regions in Europe, with a total of 39 million people.. Cyprus appears in 2050 optimism, 2050 pessimism and 2080 pessimism scenarios. Ukraine appears in optimism in 2050 and optimism in 2080.
• Of all four climate scenarios, eight of the 10 countries that are most suitable for response are members of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). They are Denmark, Estonia, Japan, Norway, South Korea, Switzerland, Sweden and the United States. China also ranks in the top 10 of all four climate scenarios. Thailand ranks in the top 10 in the optimistic scenarios of 2050 and 2080, while the United Arab Emirates took over this in the pessimistic scenarios of 2050 and 2080.

###

About Columbia Climate School
To address the urgent challenges facing our planet, the Columbia Climate School was founded in 2020 to educate future climate leaders, support groundbreaking research and develop fundamental solutions. The National Center for Disaster Preparation (NCDP) of Columbia University’s Columbia Climate School is committed to understanding and improving the capacity to prepare, cope and rehabilitate. NCDP focuses on preparation for governmental and non-governmental systems. The complexity of population recovery; the power of community participation; and the risk of human vulnerability.

See the index here: To read the Technical Methodology Report, visit:

About Rockefeller Foundation
The Rockefeller Foundation is a groundbreaking philanthropy built on partnerships across the boundaries of science, technology and innovation, enabling individuals, families and communities to thrive. We bet big to promote human well-being. Today, we focus on promoting human opportunities and reverse the climate crisis by changing systems in food, health, energy and finance. For more information, sign up for our newsletter at www.rockefellerfoundation.org/subscribe and follow us at x @rockefellerfdn and linkedin @the-rockefeller-foundation.

Media Contact:
Columbia Climate School Francesco Fiondella: [email protected]

Jessica Kosmider and Javier Romualdo Perez, Rockefeller Foundation: [email protected]