Climate Finance and Agricultural Resilience to Climate Shocks in Africa: Evidence from Climate-Sensitive Economies
This article examines the persistent gap between climate finance available to African countries and the adaptation measures required to strengthen agricultural resilience to climate shocks. The article highlights the economic and social impacts of climate change particularly in economies dependent on rain-fed agriculture.
Africa’s contribution to green-house gas emissions remains minimal yet it remains unevenly vulnerable to climate change, particularly through agriculture. Although climate finance is an important instrument to address climate-induced shocks, a significant portion of the climate finance is directed towards mitigation, while adaptation needs in climate-sensitive economies are substantial, evident in the Climate Finance in Africa report. Africa’s complexities are highly characterised by prolonged droughts and extreme rainfall patterns which threatens livelihood, impedes economic growth and risks reversing development progress. Moreover, rising sea levels evident in coastal areas such as Somalia, Nigeria and East Africa pose danger to farming and fishing livelihoods. If a farmer faces persistent drought challenges, how much security does a solar-energy investment provide to avoid the losses of tomorrow’s yield?
Table 1: Mitigation and adaptation finance needs in African NDCs, per sub-region (% share)
Subregion | % share mitigation | % share adaptation | % share cross-cutting |
Central Africa | 70% | 30% | -- |
East Africa | 57% | 22% | 21% |
Northern Africa | 22% | 29% | 57% |
Southern Africa | 75% | 25% | -- |
West Africa | 77% | 14% | 9% |
Source: United Nations Development Programme, 2024
Table 1 above reveals that investments in mitigation measures take a substantial portion of climate finance compared to adaptation measures, suggesting that African economies are heavily inclined towards promoting a low-carbon continent (UNDP, 2024). This motivates the question as to whether climate-finance resources are sufficiently expended towards building resilience before the shock occurs or after the damage has already occurred.
Over the past decade, it has been evident that agriculture-sensitive economies are prone to heat stress and irregular precipitation which reduced crop yields such as maize and sorghum by 5-10% (UNDP, 2024). Given the continent’s heavy reliance on agriculture and its significant contribution to GDP, climate change is projected to reduce crop yields by 5% to 17% by 2050. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) defines climate finance as funding drawn from local, international, private or public sources to support climate change adaptation and mitigation efforts. Mitigation measures aim to prevent impact of climate change by reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The major strategies of mitigation include decarbonisation from fossil fuels to renewable energy sources, energy efficiency and carbon reduction. Additionally, adaptation measures aim at reducing the vulnerability to climate effects. Adaptation measures include building resilient infrastructure, promoting drought-resistant crops, early warning systems improvement, irrigation and agricultural insurance.
For Africa, the distinction between the two measures to address climate change is crucial because many economies are experiencing adverse effects of climate shocks, while their adaptive capacity remains limited. Economic theory suggest that climate shocks can adversely impact agricultural productivity through rising temperatures, floods, prolonged droughts and erratic rainfall patterns. These climatic shocks adversely affect crop yields, particularly in economies that are heavily dependent of rain-fed agriculture. A reduction in crop yield can result in food shortages, placing an upward pressure on food prices, thus increasing the risk of food insecurity in an economy (Marmai et al., 2022).
In economies with limited adaptive capacity and high dependence on agriculture, this in turn places additional pressure to the local government on already constrained fiscal resources to increase expenditure on agricultural support, social protection and climate-resilient infrastructure address food insecurity, thus straining the government budget. Countries such as Chad and Niger experienced significant economic losses from declining crop yields and livestock health, with the former incurring deaths of people and livestock of approximately 340 and 60000 respectively, loss of 25 000 hectares of crops, thus threatening future harvest (IMF, 2025). Therefore, agricultural resilience to climate shocks is both an environmental concern, economic and fiscal policy issue. Countries where climate-induced droughts are prominent such as Kenya and Somalia have seen a significant rise in food aid reliance (IMF, 2025).
A vast amount of literature exists on climate finance expended towards mitigation, particularly on environmental outcomes pertaining to energy transition, reforestation and sustainable transport, whereas adaptation measures aimed at reducing vulnerability and strengthening resilience in agriculture, water management and disaster preparedness has limited empirical evidence (Zoungrana et al, 2026). Climate finance must be scaled up significantly towards adaptation strategies particularly at a time when SSA economies are characterised by high debt levels, fiscal constraints, urgent need for revenue mobilization and public investment spending efficiencies.
For some reasons, mitigation projects are preferred because they produce financial return on investment, particularly in decarbonisation projects such that there is vast amount of funding ranging from public to private sector (IMF,2024). The Zero Carbon Analytics report states that the SSA region requires USD 51 billion in adaptation finance annually, whereas flows to the region reached at approximately USD 12.9 billion in 2023, falling short of the annual targeted budget. The shortfall is particularly concerning given the region’s dependence on rain-fed agriculture, which exposes agricultural production, rural livelihoods and food security to increasing rainfall variability, droughts and rising temperatures. Recurrence of climate shocks threaten not only agricultural output but also household incomes, economic stability and broader development prospects. Therefore, strengthening agricultural resilience should be regarded as both an environmental, economic and development priority.
Structural Blocks to Adaptation Funding
Public finance remains the basis of adaptation efforts, with measured finance flows dominated by the public sector (IMF, 2024). These include grants from governments, development finance institutions (DFIs) and multi-lateral climate funds such as the Green Climate Fund (GCF), Global Environment Facility (GEF) etc.
Composition of Sub-Saharan Africa Adaptation Finance in 2024
The chart above shows the composition of adaptation finance for SSA in 2024. The chart reveals that 97% of all adaptation funding comes from the public institutions. Financial instruments such as grants constitutes 40% of the total funding with sources such as multilateral DFIs, governments and bilateral DFIs. The public project debt comprises of concessional and non-concessional accounting for 57% of the total funding. Private sector contribution remains minimal accounting for only 3% of the region’s adaptation funding. The major challenge is scaling up private sector participation in adaptation finance as public funding is constrained.
To address the barriers to investments, adaptation needs to be reframed from a risk exposure perspective to a viable investment opportunity by exploring synergies between viable projects and incorporating adaptation and resilience consideration across all investment processes. Without adequate investment in adaptation, climate shocks may intensify agricultural productivity losses, deepen rural vulnerability and undermine food security and economic development. Addressing the climate adaptation finance gap requires strengthening institutional and financial systems through which adaptation funds are mobilised, promoting equitable allocation of climate finance towards mitigation and adaptation efforts. Such measures include the following:
Consolidating public-private partnerships including policymakers, businesses, local communities and financial institutions. More efforts should be made to standardize adaptation definitions such that stakeholders investing in adaptation projects assess the effectiveness, sustainability and financial returns on investment projects. This encourages knowledge sharing among economies and promotes the development of local expertise in planning and financing adaptation. Financial institutions should be motivated to include adaptation considerations into their investment portfolios. This includes expanding green financial instruments, climate resilient funds and mixed financial instruments. To scale up the green bond markets in economies, policy makers and financial institutions should develop climate bond frameworks that align with international tax laws. (IMF, 2025).
African countries vulnerability to immediate effects of climate change including droughts, floods and food insecurity requires considerable investments in resilience. This underscores the need for equitable distribution of climate finance between mitigation and adaptation. Effective mitigation measures can limit the need for adaption in future, while successful implementation of adaption measures can help economies adapt to changes that are inevitable, while alleviating further emissions through practices such as forest management and climate-smart agricultural practices. Promoting policies that support a balanced approach and setting clear objectives of adaptation strategies can help to unlock private capital for adaptation projects. Investors prefer economies with clearly defined adaptation objectives, as policy predictability and strong institutional frameworks are crucial to reduce investment risk. South Africa’s Just Energy Transition Investment Plan mobilized climate finance through structured governance procedures and clearly defined investment channels (IMF, 2025).
African countries should aim to integrate adaptation into national and sectional planning. This ensures that adaptation strategies are incorporated in development plans, sectoral policies and infrastructure projects while promoting climate resilience. Moreover, with the support of external financial institutions such as the World Bank, IMF, outlining the climate risks and benefits of adaptation projects not only perceive adaptation finance as a tool for risk mitigation, but also as a driver for sustainable development.
Adoption of climate-smart agricultural practices and other resilience strategies remain uneven due to structural and institutional barriers (IMF, 2025). Strengthening institutional frameworks is vital for attracting and managing climate finance. Eliminating operational efficiencies at the institutional level not only ensures that allocation of finance addresses the economies critical challenges such as agricultural resilience, infrastructure development, but promotes macroeconomic stability. Many financial institutions in Africa suffer from insufficient risk assessment models for green projects, which potentially obstructs climate financing efforts. Therefore, unlocking Africa’s green finance potential requires strengthening institutional capacity, corporate governance and aligning local regulations with international best practices will assist economies bridge the gap between climate financing and building resilience in agriculture-sensitive economies. Examples of successful initiatives include Kenya’s Green Bond program which promotes investment in sustainable agriculture, climate resilience and renewable energy, South Africa’s Renewable Energy Independent Power Producer Procurement Programme (REIPPPP), which scales up green financing and promotes transition to low-carbon energy systems.
In conclusion, building agricultural resilience is important to safeguarding the productive capacity of rain-fed economies in Africa. Without adequate investment in adaptation, climate shocks may intensify agricultural productivity losses, undermine food security and economic development. Moreover, addressing the adaptation-finance gap requires not only mobilising more capital, but also transforming financial and institutional systems to promote agricultural resilience as the basis for long-tern economic stability and sustainable development.
References
Gautam et al. (2024) Unlocking Adaptation Finance in Emerging Market and Developing Economies. IMF Staff Climate Notes, 2024/007. Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund.
Gemayel et al. (2025) Laying the ground for scaling up climate finance in Sub-Saharan Africa. IMF Working Paper. Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund. Available at: [Laying the Ground for Scaling up Climate Finance in Sub-Saharan Africa] (Accessed: 15 October 2026).
Marmai, N., Franco Villoria, M. and Guerzoni, M. (2022) ‘How the Black Swan damages the harvest: extreme weather events and the fragility of agriculture in developing countries’, PLOS ONE, 17(2), article e0261839. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0261839.
United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) (2024) Climate finance in Africa: An overview of climate finance flows, challenges and opportunities. September. Available at: [44101-doc-Climate_Finance_in_Africa_Report.pdf] (Accessed: 15 October 2026).
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) (2020) Introduction to climate finance. Available at: https://unfccc.int/ (Accessed: 15 October 2026).
Watson, C., Schalatek, L. and Evéquoz, A. (2026) Climate finance regional briefing: Sub-Saharan Africa. Climate Finance Fundamentals 7. Heinrich Böll Stiftung (hbs) and Overseas Development Institute (ODI).
Zoungrana, H., N’guessan, C.F.J. and Combary, O.S. (2026) Climate finance for adaptation in Sub-Saharan Africa: assessing sources and instruments. [Cogent Economics & Finance]. Available at: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17565529.2026.2662079 (Accessed: 15 October 2026).
Comments