
Leadership Falters As Climate Costs Soar And Time To Act Runs Out
CHARLEVOIX, CANADA - JUNE 9: In this photo provided by the German Government Press Office (BPA), ... More German Chancellor Angela Merkel deliberates with US president Donald Trump on the sidelines of the official agenda on the second day of the G7 summit on June 9, 2018 in Charlevoix, Canada. Also pictured are (L-R) Larry Kudlow, director of the US National Economic Council, Theresa May, UK prime minister, Emmanuel Macron, French president, Angela Merkel, Yasutoshi Nishimura, Japanese deputy chief cabinet secretary, Shinzo Abe, Japan prime minister, Kazuyuki Yamazaki, Japanese senior deputy minister for foreign affairs, John Bolton, US national security adviser, and Donald Trump. Canada are hosting the leaders of the UK, Italy, the US, France, Germany and Japan for the two day summit. (Photo by Jesco Denzel /Bundesregierung via Getty Images)
London Climate Action Week is set to start, showcasing what urgent, inclusive climate action looks like when cities, financiers, and citizens unite. But the energy and innovation on display in London are being overshadowed by growing inaction from global leaders. Just days after the G7 failed to deliver any meaningful policy progress, and as the EU backpedals on its green regulation agenda, a troubling gap is emerging between local ambition and failures of international leadership.
This retreat is happening at the worst possible moment. Climate damage costs are skyrocketing, climate science is sounding red alerts, and economic evidence points to a clear win: green investment can grow economies, create jobs, and protect communities. The world's most powerful leaders are not just missing an opportunity, they are magnifying a crisis. To grasp its scale, we need to look at the growing economic cost of inaction.
The Price Of Delay And The Need For Leadership
Bloomberg Intelligence has estimated that in the year to May 2025, the U.S. incurred close to $1 trillion (or around 3% of GDP) in direct climate-related costs from floods, wildfires, infrastructure damage, and insurance losses.
Globally, heatwaves, droughts, and extreme weather are disrupting supply chains, inflating food prices, and undermining financial stability. Insurers have seen annual catastrophe losses surge tenfold since the 1980s. Premiums have skyrocketed, and coverage has shrunk, especially in wildfire and storm prone regions, exacerbating economic disruption and housing unaffordability.
At the same time, the European Union appears to be shelving the Green Claims Directive, retreating under political pressure precisely when markets are demanding clear, consistent regulation to guide sustainable investment. This uncertainty discourages capital and undermines momentum.
These setbacks comes as the OECD's 2025 Green Growth report shows that climate action could unlock $7.4 trillion per year in investment and job creation if scaled by 2030. Yet rather than harnessing this opportunity, many leaders are hesitating. Nowhere is this hesitancy more evident than in the recent action, or inaction, of the G7, whose decisions ripple far beyond their border
G7 Paralysis And The Global Ripple Effect
The G7's latest Chair's Summary reaffirms familiar goals, like limiting warming to 1.5°C but offered no timelines, targets, or tools to achieve it. 'Once again, the G7 chose safe, business-as-usual declarations over the bold, future-proof action we urgently need,' said Daniela Fernandez, CEO of Sustainable Ocean Alliance.
'The G7's latest climate commitments reflect a deeper issue,' added Ibrahim AlHusseini, managing partner of climate investor FullCycle. 'Global leaders are increasingly distracted by immediate geopolitical crises, and climate, still perceived as a medium to long-term risk, has slipped down the agenda. But this is a dangerous miscalculation.'
He added: 'Delay is not neutral, it's an accelerant of future instability,' with direct consequences for supply chains, migration, and global financial systems.
And it's not just experts calling for change. According to the 2024 People's Climate Vote, 80% of people globally want their countries to strengthen climate commitments, and over two-thirds support a fast transition from fossil fuels. Other surveys echoes this: 89% of people across 125 countries support stronger government action, yet many mistakenly believe they are in the minority. This public mandate for bold climate action stands in sharp contrast to the political hesitancy now on display.
As political will may be stalling, another sector is responding. What was once viewed as an environmental issue is now a pressing financial risk.
Climate Risk Becomes Financial Risk
Inaction is not just costly, it is destabilizing. The financial consequences are already unfolding across insurance markets and beyond. "We have already seen residential and commercial insurance premiums rise and availability drop in recent years, in response to growing insurer losses," warns Tom Sabetelli-Goodyer, vice-president of climate risk at FIS. They are early signs of a broader, systemic threat. As climate impacts intensify, they are cascading through the financial system, affecting asset valuations, credit risk, and the stability of entire markets.
Regulators around the world have begun to integrate climate risk into their frameworks, but last week, the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, the global standard-setter for financial regulation, added its voice with a new framework for the voluntary disclosure of climate-related financial risks. While non-binding, the guidance marks a significant step and reinforces a clear message: climate risk is no longer just environmental, it's financial. As Julia Symon, head of research and advocacy at Finance Watch put it: 'Without clear, consistent data, supervisors are flying blind, unaware of the real risks building up on balance sheets.'
The Climate Clock Is Ticking
Scientific indicators confirm the urgency and the danger of delay. The 2024 Indicators of Global Climate Change report shows that the average global temperature from 2015 to 2024 reached 1.24°C above pre-industrial levels, with human activity responsible for nearly all of it.
In 2024 alone, global temperatures spiked to 1.52°C, temporarily crossing the critical 1.5°C threshold. More troubling still, human-induced warming is accelerating at an unprecedented rate of 0.27°C per decade, the fastest rate ever recorded.
At current emissions levels, the remaining carbon budget for staying below 1.5°C could be fully exhausted within just two to five years, depending on assumptions. Scientists also point to a growing Earth energy imbalance and early signs of amplifying climate feedback loops, such as ocean heat uptake and ice melt, which could further lock in extreme changes.
The window for keeping global heating within safe limits is narrowing quickly. Yet even as time runs short, the economic case for prompt action continues to strengthen. Green growth offers a rare convergence of climate responsibility and financial return.
Green Growth: A Trillion-Dollar Opportunity
The OECD Green Growth report emphasizes that investing in clean energy and green infrastructure is not just responsible, its smart economics. Clean energy investment now outpaces fossil fuels, and 90% of global GDP is covered by net-zero targets. The report outlines how aligning financial systems with climate goals could unlock $7.4 trillion annually in investment by 2030.
'Green growth is an approach that seeks to harmonize economic growth with environmental sustainability and helps to deliver broader development benefits,' explains Jennifer Baumwoll, head of climate strategies and policy at UNDP.
Far from hindering development, the green transition can generate resilient jobs, improve productivity, and enhance long-term competitiveness. In short, the report argues that climate action is not a cost but a catalyst for growth.
Countries like Mongolia and Lao PDR are already demonstrating what this looks like in practice. In Mongolia, a green finance strategy, backed by the Central Bank and a new SDG-aligned taxonomy, has mobilized $120 million in climate-aligned investment, including the country's first green bond. Green lending is targeted to grow from 2% to 10% of all bank lending by 2030.
Meanwhile, Lao PDR is advancing a national circular economy roadmap to reduce waste and resource use while unlocking economic opportunity. If fully implemented, it could create 1.6 million jobs and add $16 billion to GDP by 2050.
These pragmatic, investment-ready models of climate action deliver real development gains. Their progress underscores a growing global divide: while emerging economies embrace opportunity, many developed nations are falling behind, precisely when their leadership is most needed.
A Shrinking Window And Defining Test Of Leadership
2025 marks a critical juncture. Countries are expected to submit new national climate plans (NDCs 3.0) ahead of COP30 in Belém this November. Yet as of late June 2025, four months after the February deadline, only a small fraction had done so. Intended to reflect increased ambition following the Global Stocktake, most submissions remain overdue, and the ambition gap continues to widen.
The UN expects a surge of last-minute filings, but tardiness isn't the only concern. Most existing plans fall short of aligning with the 1.5°C target, and the policy frameworks to deliver them at scale are still lacking. The challenge is not technical though but political.
Instead of advancing, many major economies are retreating, weakening targets, delaying regulations, and rolling back commitments just as the case for bold action becomes stronger.
Evidence shows that a well-managed transition can boost growth, reduce inequality, and build resilience. Yet that potential is being squandered. What's needed now is not just political courage, but real leadership, capable of driving structural reform and aligning finance with planetary boundaries.
Decisive action today isn't only about avoiding catastrophe, it's about exercising leadership that can shape a more stable, equitable, and liveable world. The responsibility lies with those in power to act—not later, but now.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Watchdog finds ‘rampant abuse' of remote work among federal employees during Biden administration
A U.S. government watchdog found 'rampant abuse' of work-from-home policies by federal workers, according to a new report released on Friday. The Inspector General of the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), which oversees the federal workforce, found 'compliance failures and weak internal oversight' as the root cause of the problem. The report focused on procedures that allowed employees to work remotely, rather than whether they were effectively performing their jobs. The report sampled badging data, timesheet, and remote-work agreements of dozens of federal employees in 2024, during President Joe Biden's administration, following a 2023 request from Republican Senator Joni Ernst of Iowa, who took issue with telework policies. 'Under the previous administration, OPMʼs telework and remote work policies were mismanaged and oversight was virtually nonexistent,' OPM Acting Director Chuck Ezell said in a statement. 'That era of telework abuse is over,' Ezell declared. 'At President Trumpʼs direction, OPM has restored in-person operations to ensure federal employees are working for the taxpayers.' On the first day of his second term, President Donald Trump signed an executive order directing federal agencies and departments to 'take all necessary steps to terminate remote work arrangements' and require employees to return to the office on a full-time basis. Federal employees were required to return on March 3; therefore, the findings and recommendations of the OPM report, which aimed to develop written procedures detailing internal controls concerning remote work, are now considered closed, according to the executive summary. OPM is the chief human resources agency and personnel policy manager for the federal government's 2.8 million employees. President Trump has claimed that many federal workers took on second jobs while still being paid by the federal government, or were not fulfilling their duties when working remotely. There was a dramatic increase in working from home during the Covid-19 pandemic in the first Trump administration. Based on a small sample of timesheets, the report found that 58.1 percent of the sampled employees failed to meet the minimum requirements for in-office work in 2024. According to OPM's inspector general, three in ten (29.7%) telework agreements had lapsed, 21 percent of those sampled had discrepancies in their paperwork, and 15 percent did not have any approved agreements on file. The report did not investigate why this was the case, but suggested that possible reasons included 'weak or missing management controls,' 'negligence or carelessness,' and 'intentional fraud or abuse.' Under the order signed by President Trump mandating a return to in-office work, limited exemptions are allowed as determined by departmental heads. Similarly, new internal controls and compliance reviews have been set for employees who continue to telework. When workers were summoned back into their offices five days per week in March, many were met with less-than-desirable conditions, from cramped workspaces to dirty bathrooms. In addition to the return to the office, the Trump administration also sought to cut costs by reducing space and staff. Multiple federal employees across various agencies and departments told news outlets at the time that they found themselves working elbow-to-elbow as staff consolidated into smaller workspaces. Understaffed cleaning crews are reportedly struggling to keep up with the demand for tidy spaces, resulting in dirty bathrooms with no paper towels. Some staff were asked to bring their own toilet paper or help out by taking their trash home, a federal employee told USA Today.


CNBC
31 minutes ago
- CNBC
B-2 bombers moving to Guam amid Middle East tensions, U.S. officials say
The United States is moving B-2 bombers to the Pacific island of Guam, two U.S. officials told Reuters on Saturday, as President Donald Trump weighs whether the U.S. should take part in Israel's strikes against Iran. It was unclear whether the bomber deployment is tied to Middle East tensions. The B-2 can be equipped to carry America's 30,000-pound GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator, designed to destroy targets deep underground. That is the weapon that experts say could be used to strike Iran's nuclear program, including Fordow. The officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity, declined to disclose any further details. One official said no forward orders had been given yet to move the bombers beyond Guam. They did not say how many B-2 bombers are being moved. The Pentagon did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Experts and officials are closely watching to see whether the B-2 bombers will move forward to a U.S.-British military base on the Indian Ocean island of Diego Garcia. Experts say that Diego Garcia is in an ideal position to operate in the Middle East. The United States had B-2 bombers on Diego Garcia up until last month, when they were replaced with B-52 bombers. Israel said on Saturday it had killed a veteran Iranian commander during attacks by both sides in the more than week-long air war, while Tehran said it would not negotiate over its nuclear program while under threat. Israel says Iran was on the verge of developing nuclear weapons, while Iran says its atomic program is only for peaceful purposes. Trump has said he would take up to two weeks to decide whether the United States should enter the conflict on Israel's side, enough time "to see whether or not people come to their senses," he said. Reuters was first to report this week the movement of a large number of tanker aircraft to Europe and other military assets to the Middle East, including the deployment of more fighter jets. An aircraft carrier in the Indo-Pacific is also heading to the Middle East.


Bloomberg
33 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
B-2 Bombers Have Departed the US as Trump Weighs Iran Strike
By Updated on Save B-2 stealth bombers have taken off from the US and are headed over the Pacific, multiple news outlets reported, as President Donald Trump weighs American involvement in the war between Israel and Iran. The moves, picked up by flight tracking services on Saturday, indicate that the administration is getting the Air Force bombers in position if needed for a strike on Iran, the Wall Street Journal reported. The planes, accompanied by refueling tankers, may be on their way to a base in Guam, according to the report.