Climate change has become one of the most widely discussed issues in Nepal, featuring prominently in political debates, policy dialogues, and civic discussions across the country. Yet, despite the growing attention, the severity of its current impacts and the alarming risks it poses for the future are still not being addressed with the urgency and scale they demand. While several policies and plans have been developed, they are often treated as routine administrative requirements rather than as transformative instruments capable of driving systemic change through mobilizing national and international finance, technology, and capacity. As a result, climate change concerns remain inadequately mainstreamed into national and subnational development processes, and the benefits of climate actions rarely reach the most vulnerable and marginalized populations.
Climate-induced disasters continue to threaten infrastructure and livelihoods every year, with losses estimated to reach up to 2 percent of GDP annually. While investment in climate adaptation is rightly recognized as a national priority, it must move beyond short-term responses to hazards and instead focus on addressing the underlying vulnerabilities and root causes of climate risks that undermine development, livelihoods, and the country’s long-term prosperity. At the same time, balancing environmental protection with development in the face of growing climate threats has become a populist agenda, yet it remains insufficiently internalized in policy decisions and everyday development practice.
Climate actions in Nepal continue to face significant coordination challenges, constrained by limited institutional capacity, inadequate resources, institutional mismatches, and overlapping policy provisions. Although roles and responsibilities for climate governance have been assigned to the three tiers of government under the federal system, their full potential remains underutilized. Decision-making authority and financial resources continue to be largely centralized, despite policy commitments to channel international climate finance to provincial and local levels. At the international level, Nepal has actively advanced mountain and climate change agendas; however, these efforts often lack continuity and strategic alignment due to gaps in institutional capacity and long-term planning at both political and technical levels. Encouragingly, climate change has now become a prominent agenda in the election manifestos of most political parties. With the formation of a more stable and capable government, this is an opportune moment to address long-pending structural and policy gaps through wise and forward-looking solutions.
First, Nepal urgently needs a well-functioning and efficient organizational structure capable of providing strong national leadership and effective coordination across sectors and tiers of government. Such a structure must ensure full ownership and participation of sectoral ministries of the federal government, subnational governments, civil society, and the private sector. Equally important is the revision of policies to clarify institutional responsibilities and provide a clear roadmap for advancing climate actions—adaptation, mitigation, loss and damage, and carbon financing—in a balanced and integrated manner. A strong institutional structure is also essential to maximize access to climate finance and ensure its effective utilization. This need was recognized earlier, and in 2023, the National Council for Environmental Protection and Climate Change Management formed a taskforce that recommended policy and structural reforms aligned with federal governance principles, international practices, and emerging climate challenges. However, the report has yet to be formally reviewed or publicly discussed. Moving forward, establishing a firm organizational setup that can provide leadership at both national and international levels must be treated as a national priority, recognizing climate change as an issue that concerns the whole of society and the nation.
Second, Nepal’s capacity and position in international climate diplomacy must be strengthened to promote the country’s leadership on global advocacy related to biodiversity loss, glacial retreat, and air pollution, alongside Nepal’s longstanding mountain and climate agenda. The absence of a permanent and capable negotiation team—comprising both technical experts and policymakers—remains a major limitation. Although Nepal participates in many global climate forums, these engagements are often event-based rather than guided by a long-term strategic vision toward climate justice. A national position paper for global climate advocacy, with clearly defined priorities, strategies, and negotiation positions, is urgently needed to strengthen Nepal’s voice in international climate negotiations.
Third, accessing climate finance and ensuring its effective utilization remains one of Nepal’s most urgent yet underutilized opportunities. Nepal’s National Adaptation Plan (2021–2050) estimates a requirement of approximately USD 47.4 billion to implement 64 priority programmes by 2050. Similarly, the Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC 3.0) estimates mitigation costs of approximately USD 73.74 billion until 2035, with about 85 percent expected to come from international climate finance and support. The financial requirements to address loss and damage—covering both economic and non-economic losses—are likely to be even higher. However, progress in accessing climate finance remains limited, and the performance of climate-financed projects has been uneven due to weak technical capacity, institutional gaps, and limited accountability. At the same time, as global climate finance increasingly prioritizes mitigation over adaptation—particularly in least developed countries—Nepal’s diplomatic capacity to secure adaptation financing remains both important and challenging.
Monitoring and documentation of climate finance received through bilateral, multilateral, and direct funding channels remain weak, particularly in tracking investments for resilient livelihoods, infrastructure, and development. Furthermore, Nepal lacks clarity in negotiating financial conditions, especially regarding the balance between grants and concessional loans for adaptation, mitigation, and loss and damage. The formulation of a comprehensive national climate finance strategy and implementation plan is therefore an urgent necessity.
Fourth, greater clarity is needed on the implementation modalities of climate actions. This includes defining institutional roles and strengthening existing government mechanisms rather than creating parallel project structures that operate in isolation. Climate actions must be fully integrated into ongoing development programmes across all levels of government, with meaningful participation from civil society and the private sector. Subnational climate action is not merely about implementing isolated projects within different jurisdictions; it requires designing context-specific and locally led plans across communities, ecosystems, landscapes, watersheds, and river basins to enhance long-term resilience. Effective implementation of climate actions can strengthen resilient livelihoods and improve the security of resource-poor and vulnerable populations.
As Nepal accelerates infrastructure development and economic growth, balancing development priorities with climate resilience has become not only necessary but inevitable. Climate-responsive development must be embedded into national and subnational planning processes so that investments are resilient, sustainable, and capable of leveraging international climate finance. The challenge is no longer about recognizing climate change as a risk—it is about transforming commitments into coordinated, accountable, and sustained action.
