Dual challenges, shared wins: unlocking climate financing for nutrition.

BACKGROUND: The intertwined challenges of climate change and malnutrition amplify each other, with climate change exacerbating malnutrition, particularly in vulnerable populations; and food systems significantly contributing to emissions and environmental degradation. Addressing these issues together offers opportunities for shared gains, yet funding streams for these sectors remain siloed and misaligned. OBJECTIVE: This study developed a scoring methodology to assess the compatibility of climate funds with financing nutrition-related actions where synergies align with climate funds' primary goals, referred to as the "scope for nutrition integration". METHODS: Using the Climate Funds Update database, 18 active climate funds were systematically reviewed and rated based on their potential for financing nutrition-related activities. The study included a descriptive characterization of funds to identify entry points and understand their geographic reach, size, and focus. The scoring methodology considered four criteria: mandate alignment with nutrition objectives, flexibility in funding structure, visibility of nutrition action, and publicly available precedents for nutrition-related projects. RESULTS: Out of the 18 climate funds analyzed, 12 had strong scope for nutrition integration, 3 had some scope, and 3 had limited scope. Many of these funds offer promising opportunities given their large financing availability. Most funds' descriptive characterization revealed a focus on equity and inclusion, representing important entry points for integrating nutrition-related activities even in funds with seemingly less integration potential. Climate funds with comprehensive climate action approaches combining mitigation, adaptation, and resilience exhibited the strongest alignment with nutrition integration potential. Mitigation funds were the most limited in their scope for financing nutrition-related activities, but important untapped opportunities exist for nutrition-smart climate mitigation. A case study of the Green Climate Fund's investment in Burundi highlights how climate finance can support both climate adaptation and improved nutrition outcomes, emphasizing the need for purposeful, evidence-based integration of nutrition. CONCLUSIONS: This paper provides a practical framework for identifying opportunities to integrate nutrition-related activities within climate financing, aiming to enhance resilience, strengthen adaptation efforts, and advance climate mitigation goals through a nutrition lens. By doing so, global stakeholders can address the dual crises of climate change and malnutrition, driving transformative outcomes for people and the planet.