Introduction

Agrifood systems underpin global economies, societies, and ecosystems but contribute significantly to environmental damage, generating a third of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, notably methane and nitrous oxide, along with deforestation, biodiversity loss, and freshwater depletion. These systems are vulnerable to climate-related impacts such as extreme weather, affecting productivity and supply chains. Current climate finance to agrifood systems is deeply insufficient, amounting to USD 28.5 billion annually in 2019/20, representing less than 5% of total global climate finance.

Scope and methodology

The report adopts a comprehensive agrifood systems approach beyond traditional agriculture, forestry, and other land use (AFOLU), including non-food products, stakeholders, and economic and ecological dimensions from production to disposal. Two methodologies assess finance gaps: a “top-down” global scenario analysis estimating necessary climate finance aligned with a 1.5°C pathway, and a “bottom-up” approach analysing country-specific finance needs expressed in Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs).

Top-down results

Global agrifood systems require approximately USD 1.1 trillion annually (2024–2030) to align with a 1.5°C scenario. This represents a forty-fold increase over current finance flows. Key sectors include policy and budget support (USD 467.5 billion, 41%), crop and livestock systems (USD 316.7 billion, 28%), biodiversity and ecosystems (USD 188 billion, 16%), forestry (USD 116.8 billion, 10%), sustainable food and diets (USD 52.8 billion, 5%), and fisheries (USD 5.3 billion, <1%). Recommended actions include repurposing agricultural subsidies (currently USD 851 billion annually with negative environmental impacts) towards climate-positive initiatives and prioritising adaptation measures such as climate-smart agriculture and sustainable practices in crop and livestock management.

Bottom-up results

Countries collectively report USD 201.5 billion annually (2024–2030) in climate finance needs for agrifood systems in their NDCs, significantly below the top-down estimates. Agrifood finance needs primarily emerge from developing regions, notably sub-Saharan Africa (35% of regional total), Latin America and the Caribbean (33%), and Europe and Central Asia (35%). Ecosystems and biodiversity (26%), forestry (23%), and crop systems (23%) dominate sectoral needs. Adaptation and mitigation needs are roughly equal globally, though mitigation actions are better quantified. Approximately 65% of reported finance is conditional upon international sources, highlighting reliance on external funding, particularly in climate-vulnerable regions like the Middle East and North Africa (74%) and East Asia and the Pacific (73%). Recommended measures include clearer prioritisation and integration of climate considerations into national finance strategies.

The triple gap

Analysis identifies three key gaps impeding agrifood transition: planning, finance, and data. The planning gap, evidenced by significant underestimation of finance needs in national NDCs (bottom-up) compared to global top-down scenarios, requires aligning domestic ambitions with global targets and enhancing private sector engagement. The finance gap indicates an urgent need to upscale annual climate finance from USD 28.5 billion to USD 1.1 trillion by 2030, necessitating innovative financing mechanisms, targeted policy reforms, and increased public-private partnerships. The data gap arises from inconsistent reporting and limited granularity in both global scenarios and national NDCs, recommending improved standardisation, clearer definitions, and robust country-specific data collection to better quantify needs and monitor progress effectively.

Recommendations

To bridge the triple gap, governments and international bodies should align national ambitions with global climate targets, increase domestic finance commitments, and foster private sector engagement. Policymakers need sector-specific investment plans, incorporating a climate lens into existing financial flows, especially agricultural subsidies. Enhanced data collection, clear definitions, and standardised reporting methods are essential for accurately quantifying needs and directing finance effectively.