Le ministère de l’Éducation nationale a lancé, ce mardi, un appel à la communauté éducative. Dans un communiqué officiel, le ministère invite les jeunes enseignants […]
L’article 50 000 $ à gagner : le ministère invite élèves et enseignants à participer au prix de l’UNESCO (Détails) est apparu en premier sur .
Fini le temps de l’ultra-tolérance chez Air Algérie. Réputée depuis des années pour la générosité de sa politique de bagages, la compagnie nationale serre la […]
L’article Air Algérie durcit les règles sur les bagages : ce qui est désormais interdit à bord est apparu en premier sur .
Le Chili extrait chaque année près d’un quart du cuivre mondial et domine le marché du lithium avec des réserves parmi les plus vastes de […]
L’article 1ᵉʳ producteur de cuivre, géant du lithium : l’Algérie s’allie à une puissance mondiale des mines est apparu en premier sur .
Climate-induced Loss and Damage (L&D) is becoming a defining challenge for global climate governance, especially in West Africa, where adaptation limits are increasingly surpassed. Yet, the literature has largely overlooked how national governments in Africa conceptualize, operationalize, and govern L&D. Existing studies tend to focus on international finance debates or localized impacts, leaving a gap in understanding the national policy frameworks shaping L&D responses. This paper addresses this gap through a comparative analysis of five West African countries, Burkina Faso, Ghana, Nigeria, Senegal, and Sierra Leone, structured around four thematic dimensions: conceptual clarity, scope and depth of losses, policy integration, and institutional readiness.
Drawing on more than 60 official policy documents, including National Adaptation Plans, disaster frameworks, and climate legislation, the study applies an interpretive scoring framework and proposes a three-stage typology of L&D policy engagement (Nascent, Emerging, Integrated). The results show that Senegal and Ghana fall into the Emerging category, with partial recognition of L&D concepts but limited institutionalization in formal policy architecture. Nigeria, Burkina Faso, and Sierra Leone remain Nascent, where L&D is either subsumed under adaptation and humanitarian action or only referenced anecdotally. No country has yet reached the Integrated stage. Across all five cases, economic losses in agriculture and infrastructure are frequently reported, while non-economic losses such as displacement, cultural erosion, and psychological harm remain weakly specified. Institutional arrangements for L&D are fragmented in national frameworks, suggesting uneven preparedness for engagement with emerging international L&D governance mechanisms, including the Santiago Network and the Fund for responding to Loss and Damage.
The findings suggest that the absence of formal L&D strategies in many national policy documents may limit the visibility of irreversible climate impacts and complicate future claims-making in international arenas. By advancing a systematic baseline of how L&D is framed in national policies and introducing a heuristic typology for cross-country comparison, this study contributes conceptually, empirically, and policy-relevantly to debates on climate justice and the evolving governance of L&D in the Global South.
Key policy insights:
- Non-economic losses remain under-recognized in national climate policies, limiting justice-oriented approaches to L&D governance.
- Stronger integration of L&D across adaptation, disaster risk reduction, and development planning is needed to improve policy coherence and institutional coordination.
- Establishing dedicated L&D focal points, clearer institutional mandates, and links to existing risk-financing instruments could strengthen national engagement with emerging global L&D mechanisms.
- Embedding L&D more explicitly within NDCs, NAPs, and related reporting frameworks could improve strategic positioning within the FRLD and Santiago Network processes.
Climate-induced Loss and Damage (L&D) is becoming a defining challenge for global climate governance, especially in West Africa, where adaptation limits are increasingly surpassed. Yet, the literature has largely overlooked how national governments in Africa conceptualize, operationalize, and govern L&D. Existing studies tend to focus on international finance debates or localized impacts, leaving a gap in understanding the national policy frameworks shaping L&D responses. This paper addresses this gap through a comparative analysis of five West African countries, Burkina Faso, Ghana, Nigeria, Senegal, and Sierra Leone, structured around four thematic dimensions: conceptual clarity, scope and depth of losses, policy integration, and institutional readiness.
Drawing on more than 60 official policy documents, including National Adaptation Plans, disaster frameworks, and climate legislation, the study applies an interpretive scoring framework and proposes a three-stage typology of L&D policy engagement (Nascent, Emerging, Integrated). The results show that Senegal and Ghana fall into the Emerging category, with partial recognition of L&D concepts but limited institutionalization in formal policy architecture. Nigeria, Burkina Faso, and Sierra Leone remain Nascent, where L&D is either subsumed under adaptation and humanitarian action or only referenced anecdotally. No country has yet reached the Integrated stage. Across all five cases, economic losses in agriculture and infrastructure are frequently reported, while non-economic losses such as displacement, cultural erosion, and psychological harm remain weakly specified. Institutional arrangements for L&D are fragmented in national frameworks, suggesting uneven preparedness for engagement with emerging international L&D governance mechanisms, including the Santiago Network and the Fund for responding to Loss and Damage.
The findings suggest that the absence of formal L&D strategies in many national policy documents may limit the visibility of irreversible climate impacts and complicate future claims-making in international arenas. By advancing a systematic baseline of how L&D is framed in national policies and introducing a heuristic typology for cross-country comparison, this study contributes conceptually, empirically, and policy-relevantly to debates on climate justice and the evolving governance of L&D in the Global South.
Key policy insights:
- Non-economic losses remain under-recognized in national climate policies, limiting justice-oriented approaches to L&D governance.
- Stronger integration of L&D across adaptation, disaster risk reduction, and development planning is needed to improve policy coherence and institutional coordination.
- Establishing dedicated L&D focal points, clearer institutional mandates, and links to existing risk-financing instruments could strengthen national engagement with emerging global L&D mechanisms.
- Embedding L&D more explicitly within NDCs, NAPs, and related reporting frameworks could improve strategic positioning within the FRLD and Santiago Network processes.
Climate-induced Loss and Damage (L&D) is becoming a defining challenge for global climate governance, especially in West Africa, where adaptation limits are increasingly surpassed. Yet, the literature has largely overlooked how national governments in Africa conceptualize, operationalize, and govern L&D. Existing studies tend to focus on international finance debates or localized impacts, leaving a gap in understanding the national policy frameworks shaping L&D responses. This paper addresses this gap through a comparative analysis of five West African countries, Burkina Faso, Ghana, Nigeria, Senegal, and Sierra Leone, structured around four thematic dimensions: conceptual clarity, scope and depth of losses, policy integration, and institutional readiness.
Drawing on more than 60 official policy documents, including National Adaptation Plans, disaster frameworks, and climate legislation, the study applies an interpretive scoring framework and proposes a three-stage typology of L&D policy engagement (Nascent, Emerging, Integrated). The results show that Senegal and Ghana fall into the Emerging category, with partial recognition of L&D concepts but limited institutionalization in formal policy architecture. Nigeria, Burkina Faso, and Sierra Leone remain Nascent, where L&D is either subsumed under adaptation and humanitarian action or only referenced anecdotally. No country has yet reached the Integrated stage. Across all five cases, economic losses in agriculture and infrastructure are frequently reported, while non-economic losses such as displacement, cultural erosion, and psychological harm remain weakly specified. Institutional arrangements for L&D are fragmented in national frameworks, suggesting uneven preparedness for engagement with emerging international L&D governance mechanisms, including the Santiago Network and the Fund for responding to Loss and Damage.
The findings suggest that the absence of formal L&D strategies in many national policy documents may limit the visibility of irreversible climate impacts and complicate future claims-making in international arenas. By advancing a systematic baseline of how L&D is framed in national policies and introducing a heuristic typology for cross-country comparison, this study contributes conceptually, empirically, and policy-relevantly to debates on climate justice and the evolving governance of L&D in the Global South.
Key policy insights:
- Non-economic losses remain under-recognized in national climate policies, limiting justice-oriented approaches to L&D governance.
- Stronger integration of L&D across adaptation, disaster risk reduction, and development planning is needed to improve policy coherence and institutional coordination.
- Establishing dedicated L&D focal points, clearer institutional mandates, and links to existing risk-financing instruments could strengthen national engagement with emerging global L&D mechanisms.
- Embedding L&D more explicitly within NDCs, NAPs, and related reporting frameworks could improve strategic positioning within the FRLD and Santiago Network processes.
L’été approche, et avec lui la ruée vers les devises. Billets d’avion réservés, séjours à l’étranger planifiés, départs des étudiants vers les universités européennes… chaque […]
L’article Le dinar perd encore du terrain face à l’euro : voici le taux de change ce 10 juin est apparu en premier sur .
The Zarafshan River, outside the venue of the Eighth Global Environment Facility Assembly in Uzbekistan, is central to a USD 30 million GEF-funded initiative, the Central Asia Water and Land Nexus Programme (CAWLN). Credit: IISD/ENB/Danny Skilton
By Kizito Makoye
SAMARKAND, Uzbekistan, Jun 10 2026 (IPS)
As ministers, diplomats and development officials assembled in Samarkand Congress Centre for a ceremonial family photograph, the mood carried unusual symbolism. Behind the smiles and formalities stood a region confronting a harder reality: rivers are shrinking, soils are tiring, temperatures are rising, and the old ways of managing land and water are no longer working.
For decades, Central Asia’s countries have wrestled with environmental pressures separately – water ministries worrying about irrigation, ministries of agriculture chasing production targets, and conservation agencies protecting fragmented ecosystems. But climate change is dissolving those bureaucratic boundaries.
At the Eighth Global Environment Facility (GEF) Assembly in Uzbekistan held from May 30 to June 6, 2026, the five Central Asian countries officially launched implementation of the Central Asia Water and Land Nexus Programme (CAWLN) – a USD 30 million GEF-funded initiative implemented by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and designed to manage water, land, biodiversity and food systems as one interconnected system.
Supporters say the initiative could become one of the world’s most closely watched experiments in transboundary climate adaptation.
“We all know Central Asia faces increasing environmental pressures linked to land degradation, water scarcity, biodiversity loss, and climate change,” said Yerland Nysanbaev Minister of Ecology and Natural Resources of Kazakhstan, during the high-level roundtable. “But in response to that, the countries have come together to jointly address these environmental issues.”
Senior government representatives and development partners pose for a group photograph during the official launch of the Central Asia Water–Land Nexus Programme at the Eighth GEF Assembly in Samarkand, Uzbekistan. The initiative brings together the five Central Asian countries – Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan – to strengthen regional cooperation on water security, ecosystem restoration and climate resilience through integrated land and water management. Credit: Kizito Makoye/IPS
Stretching from Kazakhstan’s grasslands to Tajikistan’s mountains and Uzbekistan’s irrigated plains, Central Asia depends on shared river systems and fragile ecosystems that sustain more than 60 million people. Yet the region is warming faster than the global average, glaciers are retreating, drought cycles are intensifying and water competition is growing.
Demand for water has become one of the region’s defining vulnerabilities.
Nearly half of Central Asia already suffers from land degradation, generating economic losses estimated at USD 6 billion annually. At the same time, growing populations and changing consumption patterns continue to place additional pressure on limited natural resources.
Katrina Schneeberger, State Secretary and Director of Switzerland’s Federal Office for the Environment, delivers remarks during the official launch of the Central Asia Water–Land Nexus Programme at the Eighth Global Environment Facility Assembly in Samarkand, Uzbekistan. Credit: Kizito Makoye/IPS
The project seeks to confront those pressures through what officials repeatedly described as a “nexus approach”.
For Switzerland – one of the programme’s strongest supporters – the initiative represents years of regional engagement finally converging into a broader vision.
Addressing ministers and delegates, Katrina Schneeberger, State Secretary and Director of Switzerland’s Federal Office for the Environment, described the programme as a model for the type of environmental cooperation increasingly needed in a warming world.
“It focuses on countries in need, it fosters the integration across environmental topics, and it supports cross-border cooperation,” she said.
Schneeberger argued that environmental policymaking has too often treated ecosystems as disconnected pieces.
“For too long, environmental topics like desertification or water have been tackled separately,” she said. “But in the end, water and land issues are connected.”
Her explanation was simple but powerful.
“Well-managed land will require less water, and properly managed freshwater sources will allow for sustainable and productive agriculture.”
Switzerland’s support for integrated environmental programmes in Central Asia stretches back decades, including transboundary initiatives under the Blue Peace Central Asia framework and previous regional land management programmes.
But officials say the new programme marks a shift in scale and ambition.
At its core, CAWLN seeks to move from managing sectors individually to managing entire landscapes and river systems.
FAO Deputy Director-General Godfrey Magwenzi speaking about the interconnection of climate change, biodiversity loss, water stress, land degradation, and food security across landscapes, river basins, and economies in Central Asia. Credit: Kizito Makoye/IPS
FAO Deputy Director-General Godfrey Magwenzi framed the challenge in global terms.
“Climate change, biodiversity loss, water stress, land degradation, and food security are interconnected across landscapes, river basins, and economies in Central Asia,” he told delegates.
“Integration and cooperation matter to tackle transborder risks, to help countries act together on the drivers of vulnerability, and to accelerate progress towards the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.”
Magwenzi noted that since 2009, FAO has helped countries in the region mobilise nearly USD 77 million in GEF financing.
One previous regional initiative restored integrated management across 2.8 million hectares of drought-prone and salt-affected landscapes while avoiding nearly nine million tonnes of emissions and strengthening resilience for millions of farmers.
The new initiative is built around three major levers.
First, strengthening transboundary governance by creating mechanisms for policy coordination and knowledge sharing.
Second, supporting integrated action directly on landscapes – from farms and forests to river basins.
Third, improving evidence-based decisions using satellite monitoring, geographic information systems and integrated data platforms.
Officials say technology will become central to implementation.
Earth observation systems will track water use, land degradation and ecosystem health, while decision-support tools will help governments translate environmental data into practical action.
Those tools may prove critical.
River Zarafshon near Panjakent, Sughd Region, Tajikistan. Credit: Petar Milošević/Wikipedia
The region’s future is closely tied to two rivers – the Amu Darya and Syr Darya.
Flowing from Central Asia’s mountains toward the Aral Sea basin, these rivers connect countries, economies and millions of livelihoods.
The programme combines four national projects with basin-wide interventions and regional coordination mechanisms.
National projects will address priorities ranging from biodiversity conservation and pasture management in Kazakhstan to agro-woodland restoration in Kyrgyzstan, climate-resilient agriculture in Turkmenistan and ecosystem restoration in Uzbekistan.
Regional components will focus on integrated water management across the Amu Darya, Zarafshon, Panj, Syr Darya and Narin river basins.
Together, supporters hope these investments will restore more than one million hectares of land, avoid millions of tonnes of carbon emissions and improve livelihoods for nearly half a million people.
Francesca Carabini, who leads transboundary cooperation work under the UNECE Water Convention, reminded participants that Central Asia’s experiments with nexus governance are already shaping global practice.
One of the earliest river basins assessed under the Water-Energy-Ecosystem Nexus framework was the Syr Darya.
During a separate press briefing, FAO climate and environment chief Kaveh Zahedi argued that agriculture, often blamed for environmental degradation, must become part of the solution.
“The way we produce food and support farmers is directly connected to the health of our climate,” he said.
“It’s directly connected to the health of our soil and land. And it’s directly connected to our water and ecosystems.”
Zahedi cited alarming global trends.
In 2024 alone, more than 96 million people faced acute food insecurity linked partly to weather extremes intensified by climate change, while more than 700 million people continue to live with hunger.
Yet agriculture also offers opportunity.
“Done right, food and farming can deliver up to one-third of the emissions reductions needed while also protecting nature.”
Responding to IPS questions about balancing biodiversity and economic needs, Zahedi rejected the notion that environmental protection and livelihoods must compete.
“The sustainable use of biodiversity is very much at the heart, including sustainable agriculture,” he said.
“It’s not just about protection of biodiversity – it is about conservation, regeneration, and sustainable use of biodiversity.”
He added: “You don’t need to tell a farmer how important it is to have healthy soils.”
Projects such as agroforestry and landscape restoration, he argued, improve resilience while protecting incomes.
At the Assembly’s closing ceremony, GEF Interim CEO Claude Gascon had offered perhaps the clearest political message of the gathering.
“Today marks an important moment for Central Asia and for the global environment as we enter the sprint towards 2030,” he said.
“The five countries in the region have once again joined environmental forces.”
Gascon described the programme as evidence that countries increasingly recognise that “water and land issues are interlinked and are best tackled together rather than in isolation.”
He called the shift toward “whole-of-government and whole-of-society approaches” essential for the next phase of environmental action.
Outside the venue, Samarkand’s summer heat offered its own reminder of what is at stake.
The city perched along the Zarafshan River – one of Central Asia’s historic lifelines and a place where questions of water, agriculture and survival have shaped civilisation for centuries.
Today, climate change is forcing those questions back to the centre.
Whether the Central Asia Water and Land Nexus Programme succeeds will depend not only on funding or policy but also on whether countries can sustain cooperation across borders long after the conference banners come down.
Note: This feature is published with the support of the GEF. IPS is solely responsible for the editorial content, and it does not necessarily reflect the views of the GEF.
IPS UN Bureau Report
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
Related Articles
Spécialisée dans la desserte des sites pétroliers et gaziers, la compagnie privée Air Express Algeria vient d’être inscrite sur la liste noire de l’Union européenne. […]
L’article Cette compagnie aérienne algérienne interdite de vol dans l’UE : voici pourquoi est apparu en premier sur .
Vous pensiez l’été définitivement installé ? La trêve aura été de très courte durée. Dès ce mercredi, l’ONM lance une alerte jaune aux pluies et […]
L’article Alerte météo en Algérie : pluies et orages sur de nombreuses wilayas ces 10 et 11 juin est apparu en premier sur .