The loss and damage architecture under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) is beginning to deliver. The institutions are operational; technical support is being provided; and countries are integrating loss and damage into their policies. But this progress falls short of the scale and pace needed to address the loss and damage devastating communities. Whether the architecture succeeds rests on what Parties are willing to put behind it. 

Commonly understood as the unavoidable impacts of climate change that mitigation and adaptation efforts fail to prevent, loss and damage is worsening. Are Parties prepared to address it? 

Progress tempered by rising demand 

Loss and damage, driven by rapid-onset events or slow-onset processes, is typically categorized as economic or non-economic. Since the concept of loss and damage was first introduced to international negotiations in 1991, Parties to the UNFCCC and Paris Agreement have gradually established the institutions to address it.   

• The Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage (WIM) is delivering on its mandate to enhance knowledge and strengthen coordination and action by publishing resources on loss and damage through its five expert groups. In September, the Executive Committee (ExCom) endorsed a decision that provides voluntary guidelines for Parties reporting on loss and damage in the Biennial Transparency Reports (BTRs)—a longstanding priority for climate-vulnerable countries. The next step is ensuring Parties have the capacity building and technical-support necessary to implement these guidelines to track, monitor, and report on loss and damage nationally.   

• The Santiago Network for Loss and Damage contributes to the implementation of the WIM by delivering tailored technical assistance to particularly climate-vulnerable developing countries. At its recent meeting in October, the Advisory Board (SNAB) endorsed terms of reference for the regular report on loss and damage that Parties requested at COP30. This first-of-a-kind report will highlight lessons learned and implementation challenges, and could inform national and regional loss and damage policies within the next few years. The SNAB also reported a 100 percent increase in technical assistance requests in the last six months. While this increase demonstrates the scale of Parties’ need, limited capacity and funding through 2028 risk jeoporadizing the SNAB’s ability to fulfill requests in the near future.

• The Fund for responding to Loss and Damage (FRLD) is dedicated to assisting particularly climate-vulnerable developing countries in responding to economic and non-economic loss and damage. The Board launched its first phase of funding – USD $250 million through the Barbados Implementation Modalities (BIM) in 2025. It received 176 funding requests from 119 countries over six months, totaling USD $2.8 billion. Despite the Board’s decision to increase the funds available through the BIM to USD $342 million, requests far exceed what is available. The FRLD does not yet have the funding necessary to address loss and damage impacts, and the Board postponed approvals to December. 

While the loss and damage architecture under the UNFCCC is advancing in response to demonstrated need, progress remains uneven and demand continues to outpace available support. 

A stark warning from Nepal 

At the end of August 2026, a glacial collapse on the Nepal-Tibet border triggered catastrophic landslides and flooding that killed at least 1,400 people with thousands still missing. Fossil fuel pollution was found to have contributed to the disaster, despite the fact that Nepal is responsible for less than 0.1 percent of current greenhouse gas emissions.  

Loss and damage is particularly acute in the climate-vulnerable communities least responsible for climate change.  

Within days of the disaster, the Nepali government requested the Board of the FRLD take a special decision to respond swiftly to the landslides and flooding. The Board convened its first extraordinary meeting today and adopted a decision to provisionally set aside USD $20 million, the maximum a Party can receive under the BIM, plus USD $1.6 million in oversight fees for Nepal’s administration of the funds.  

Following today’s decision, Nepal will have to submit a proposal to access the funding for the Board to consider at its December meeting. Yet USD $20 million would only cover 0.7 percent of damage to infrastructure and other economic losses caused by the landslides and flooding. 

This funding request is piloting how the FRLD responds to urgent requests outside of the BIM’s typical funding cycle and may inform how the FRLD’s rapid disbursement funding and long-term modalities are developed at the Board’s next meetings.  

Attention may fade, but this funding request marks the beginning of what will be years-long efforts to rebuild in this region.  

The widening reach of loss and damage 

While loss and damage is often discussed in the context of climate-vulnerable developing countries, in reality, climate-related losses affect countries at every income level. 

In her 2026 State of the Union Address to the European Commission last month, President Ursula von der Leyen announced the creation of the Climate Insurance Alliance to expand coverage for “losses” incurred by extreme weather in the European Union following this summer’s disastrous heatwaves. This “summer of truth,” as von der Leyen called it, led to 660,000 hectares burned, roughly 12 million tons of crops lost, and more than 35,000 excess deaths across the continent. 

Loss and damage is happening everywhere. We are currently approaching the strongest El Niño on record and are entering an era of climate overshoot where extreme climate disasters will become more and more likely. Loss and damage will become an increasingly familiar part of our daily lives globally.  

The responsibility lies with Parties 

Ultimately, the pace of action in the UNFCCC does not meet the rate or intensity of loss and damage, especially not for what is yet to come.  

The architecture is there: the FRLD is accepting financial contributions and developing disbursement plans; the WIM ExCom and SNAB are producing resources and delivering technical assistance; and Parties are integrating loss and damage into national and regional policies. 

But the UNFCCC is only as strong as the commitments and contributions of the Parties within it.  

It is up to Parties to answer the question of whether we are prepared to address loss and damage. Are they willing to provide the financial support, technical assistance, and political pressure needed to address this global threat at scale?