Climate change is a global problem, but its causes and impacts are not equally shared. Countries such as Nepal have contributed relatively little to the greenhouse gases that are warming our planet. Yet these countries can face serious consequences from climate change, including floods, landslides, droughts, extreme rainfall, changing water availability, and risks associated with melting glaciers. This raises an important question: Is it fair for countries that contributed very little to climate change to bear such a large share of its consequences? This question is at the heart of climate justice. Climate justice recognizes that countries have contributed differently to climate change and have varying levels of resources to address its impacts. It therefore asks countries with greater historical responsibility and greater financial and technological capacity to play an important role in global climate action. However, climate justice should mean more than providing money after a disaster has already happened. It should also mean investing in the research, science, and technology needed to prevent future damage and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
When a major flood destroys roads, bridges, houses, and water systems, financial assistance is clearly necessary. Communities need to rebuild their homes and livelihoods, and governments need resources to restore damaged infrastructure. This type of support must remain an important part of climate justice. The problem is that climate change is continuing. If the world mainly focuses on paying for damage after disasters, vulnerable countries may find themselves in a repeated cycle: Disaster → Damage → Funding → Reconstruction → Another disaster. We therefore need to ask whether some of that investment should also help break this cycle. The scale of the problem is already enormous. According to the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP), developing countries may need around US$310–365 billion every year by 2035 to adapt to climate change. International public adaptation finance to developing countries was only about US$26 billion in 2023. In other words, estimated future needs are many times greater than current international public funding. Simply rebuilding what climate change destroys will not be enough.
Imagine that a flood destroys a bridge. The immediate response is obvious: help rebuild the bridge. But what happens next? Climate funding could also support research to understand why flooding is becoming more severe, improve rainfall and river monitoring, develop better early-warning systems, and help engineers design bridges that can withstand future conditions. That means climate finance would not only replace what was lost. It would make communities better prepared for what comes next. The same idea applies to many other climate problems. Instead of only compensating farmers after droughts, research can help develop crops and farming practices that perform better under changing climate conditions. Instead of rebuilding only settlements damaged by floods, better forecasting and early-warning systems can help communities prepare in advance. Instead of continuously paying for the consequences of greenhouse gas emissions, investment in cleaner technologies can help reduce those emissions in the first place.This is where research and technology become part of climate justice.
When people hear the words "climate finance," they may imagine solar panels, dams, electric vehicles, flood barriers, or other large infrastructure. But a laboratory can also be climate infrastructure. So can a university research center. So can a weather-monitoring station. And so can the education of a young scientist or engineer. For countries such as Nepal, investment in climate research could support areas including renewable energy, hydropower, energy storage, electric transportation, low-carbon construction, sustainable agriculture, forest management, waste management, and technologies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Research is equally important for adapting to climate change. Nepal, for example, can benefit from stronger research on glaciers, floods, landslides, water resources, agriculture, biodiversity, and climate-resilient infrastructure. These are not simply academic subjects. They affect people's homes, food, water, energy, and livelihoods.
There is another important issue. Supporting developing countries with technology should not simply mean that wealthy countries manufacture equipment and poorer countries buy or receive it. Countries need the knowledge to understand, operate, repair, improve, and eventually develop technologies themselves. The United Nations climate system already recognizes the importance of this idea. The UNFCCC Technology Mechanism supports developing countries in accessing and using technologies that can reduce greenhouse gas emissions and increase resilience to climate change. Climate technologies can include renewable energy, drought-resistant crops, early-warning systems, and knowledge and training. This distinction is extremely important. Giving a country a technology can solve one problem. Giving that country the scientific capacity to understand, improve, and develop technology can help solve problems for generations.
Countries that contribute relatively little to global greenhouse gas emissions should not be seen only as victims of climate change or recipients of climate aid. They can also be part of developing solutions. Nepal has unique mountains, rivers, forests, ecosystems and climatic conditions. Scientists working within the country have direct opportunities to study these environments and develop locally appropriate solutions. Imagine stronger research centers in Nepal working on Himalayan climate change, glacier monitoring, floods and landslides, hydropower, renewable energy, greenhouse-gas emissions, sustainable agriculture, and climate-resilient infrastructure. Imagine international climate programs in which Nepali researchers participate not only as local assistants or data collectors but also lead research projects and develop technologies. Such investment would leave something valuable behind even after a particular climate project ended: knowledge, laboratories, trained scientists, engineers, institutions, and technologies.
Supporting countries affected by climate change is essential, but it cannot replace reducing greenhouse gas emissions that cause the problem. If global emissions continue at high levels, the cost of adapting to climate change will continue to increase. UNEP itself emphasizes that insufficient action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions contributes to increasing adaptation needs and costs. Therefore, climate justice should work in both directions. High-emitting and industrialized economies need to continue reducing their own emissions while international cooperation helps developing countries move toward cleaner development. Research can play a major role in this transition. We still need better, more affordable renewable energy systems, batteries and energy storage, cleaner industries, low-carbon construction materials, improved public transportation, methane-reduction technologies, and many other solutions. The benefits of these technologies should then be shared internationally rather than remaining available only to countries that can afford expensive research programs. International climate policy is increasingly recognizing this need. Under the UN climate process, the Technology Mechanism was established to accelerate the development and transfer of climate technologies, particularly for developing countries. More recently, the Belém Technology Implementation Program, adopted at COP30, strengthened international attention to supporting the technology priorities identified by developing countries.
Perhaps we therefore need to think differently about what successful climate finance looks like. After a climate disaster, we often ask: How much money was provided? But we should also ask: What remains after that money has been spent? Did it create better climate monitoring? Did it train scientists? Did it improve a university or laboratory? Did it produce new knowledge? Did it help develop a cleaner technology? Did it help a community prepare for the next disaster? Did it reduce greenhouse gas emissions? If the answer to these questions is yes, climate finance has achieved something beyond short-term recovery. It has helped build climate capability.
Climate justice should continue to provide financial support for communities and countries suffering climate-related losses. People who lose homes, livelihoods, and infrastructure cannot simply be told to wait for future technologies. But compensation alone is not enough. A fair climate response should operate on several fronts at the same time: help communities recover from unavoidable losses, help vulnerable countries prepare for future climate impacts, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and invest in the research and technologies needed to develop better solutions. For countries such as Nepal, this means climate funding should not only arrive after a road has collapsed, a flood has destroyed a settlement, or a landslide has damaged infrastructure. Some of that investment should arrive before the disaster—in universities, laboratories, monitoring systems, researchers, engineers, innovation centers, and new technologies. Climate justice should not simply help vulnerable countries recover from climate change. It should give them the scientific and technological capacity to help solve it.
United Nations Environment Program (UNEP). (2025). Adaptation Gap Report 2025: Running on Empty. United Nations Environment Program.
UNEP Adaptation Gap Report 2025, United Nations Environment Program (UNEP). (2025). Slow climate adaptation threatens lives and economies. United Nations Environment Program.
UNEP – Adaptation Finance and Developing Countries, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). (n.d.). What is technology development and transfer? UN Climate Change.
UNFCCC – Technology Development and Transfer, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). (n.d.). Accelerating technology development and transfer through the joint work program of the Technology Mechanism (2023–2027). UN Climate Change.
UNFCCC – Technology Mechanism Joint Work Program, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). (2026). A new era for climate technology to support developing countries: The Belém Technology Implementation Program. UN Climate Change.