
Leadership Falters As Climate Costs Soar And Time To Act Runs Out
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


CNN
5 minutes ago
- CNN
Ranger fired for hanging transgender flag in Yosemite and park visitors may face prosecution
LGBTQ issues Donald Trump Diversity and equityFacebookTweetLink Follow A Yosemite National Park ranger was fired after hanging a pride flag from El Capitan while some visitors face potential prosecution for alleged violations of protest restrictions that have been tightened under President Donald Trump. Shannon 'SJ' Joslin, a ranger and biologist who studies bats, said they hung a 66-foot wide transgender pride flag on the famous climbing wall that looms over the California park's main thoroughfare for about two hours on May 20 before taking it down voluntarily. A termination letter they received last week accused Joslin of 'failing to demonstrate acceptable conduct' in their capacity as a biologist and cited the May incident. 'I was really hurting because there were a lot of policies coming from the current administration that target trans people, and I'm nonbinary,' Joslin, 35, told The Associated Press, adding that hanging the flag was a way to 'tell myself … that we're all safe in national parks.' Joslin said their firing sends the opposite message: 'If you're a federal worker and you have any kind of identity that doesn't agree with this current administration, then you must be silent, or you will be eliminated.' Park officials on Tuesday said they were working with the US Justice Department to pursue visitors and workers who violated restrictions on demonstrations at the park that had more than 4 million visitors last year. The agencies 'are pursuing administrative action against several Yosemite National Park employees and possible criminal charges against several park visitors who are alleged to have violated federal laws and regulations related to demonstrations,' National Park Service spokesperson Rachel Pawlitz said. Joslin said a group of seven climbers including two other park rangers hung the flag. The other rangers are on administrative leave pending an investigation, Joslin said. Flags have long been displayed from El Capitan without consequences, said Joanna Citron Day, a former federal attorney who is now with the advocacy group Public Employees For Environmental Responsibility. She said the group is representing Joslin, but there is no pending legal case. On May 21, a day after the flag display, Acting Superintendent Ray McPadden signed a rule prohibiting people from hanging banners, flags or signs larger than 15 square feet in park areas designated as 'wilderness' or 'potential wilderness.' That covers 94% of the park, according to Yosemite's website. Parks officials said the new restriction on demonstrations was needed to preserve Yosemite's wilderness and protect climbers. 'We take the protection of the park's resources and the experience of our visitors very seriously, and will not tolerate violations of laws and regulations that impact those resources and experiences,' Pawlitz said. It followed a widely publicized instance in February of demonstrators hanging an upside down American flag on El Capitan in the wake of the firing of National Park Service employees by the Trump administration. Among the small group of climbers who helped hang the flag was Pattie Gonia, an environmentalist and drag queen who uses the performance art to raise awareness of conservation issues. For the past five years, Gonia has helped throw a Pride event in Yosemite for park employees and their allies. She said they hung the transgender flag on the granite monolith to drive home the point that being transgender is natural. Trump has limited access to gender-affirming medical treatments, banned trans women from competing in women's sports, removed trans people from the military and changed the federal definition of sex to exclude the concept of gender identity. Gonia called the firing unjust. Joslin said they hung the flag in their free time, as a private citizen. 'SJ is a respected pillar within the Yosemite community, a tireless volunteer who consistently goes above and beyond,' Gonia said. Jayson O'Neill with the advocacy group Save Our Parks said Joslin's firing appears aimed at intimidating park employees about expressing their views as the Trump administration pursues broad cuts to the federal workforce. Since Trump took office, the National Park Service has lost approximately 2,500 employees from a workforce that had about 10,000 people, Wade said. The Republican president is proposing a $900 million cut to the agency's budget next year. Pawlitz said numerous visitors complained about unauthorized demonstrations on El Capitan earlier in the year. Many parks have designated 'First Amendment areas' where groups 25 or fewer people can protest without a permit. Yosemite has several First Amendment areas, including one in Yosemite Valley, where El Capitan is located. Park service rules on demonstrations have been around for decades and withstood several court challenges, said Bill Wade, executive director of the Association of National Park Rangers. He was not aware of any changes in how those rules are enforced under Trump.


CNN
6 minutes ago
- CNN
Analysis: Trump's new warnings about mail-in voting are the most sinister yet
Donald Trump Congressional news January 6th Election securityFacebookTweetLink Follow President Donald Trump has often shown how far he'll go to try to flout the will of voters. That's what makes his new renewed obsession with mail-in ballots so sinister. Trump falsely claimed in a Truth Social post Monday that voting by mail is a 'scam' that allows Democrats to cheat. He promised an executive order to also target another safe election tool — voting machines — and inaccurately claimed he had the authority to dictate how elections are run before the 2026 midterms. Incredibly, he appears to have been partly acting on the advice of Russian President Vladimir Putin, an authoritarian who destroyed Russia's post-Soviet Union democracy and who interfered in the 2016 election that Trump won. Trump's fixation on mail-in voting is not new. His suspicion was sent into overdrive after he lost the presidency in 2020 in an election that saw an expansion of mail-in ballots to help keep voters safe during the Covid-19 pandemic. The president sensed the danger to his hopes of a consecutive second term from a high turnout as early as the second quarter of 2020. He falsely claimed in interviews and on social media that foreign states could interfere in mail-in voting and that postal balloting would allow fraud. In June of that year, he predicted the 'Election disaster of our time' and a 'RIGGED ELECTION' on Twitter. At the time, his warnings were seen as an odd quirk and were not supported by many senior Republicans. They also frustrated GOP strategists who were urging their voters to use mail-in ballots during the health emergency, especially since Democratic voters were traditionally more likely to use postal voting. But in retrospect, and following the experience of Trump's refusal to accept the result of the 2020 election, his comments look more alarming: They heralded a historic attempt to overturn the result of a free and fair presidential election. And they mean his newest remarks on the topic should be taken seriously. Taken together with more recent attempts to sway future elections, they raise alarm bells about the midterms and the next presidential election. Since Trump lacks the Constitutional power to dictate election rules in the states, he may also be laying the groundwork to claim a Republican loss in the midterm elections — often a rite of passage for incumbent presidents — is illegitimate. Since returning to power, Trump has escalated his attempts to use executive power and the visibility of his office to tilt the midterms toward Republicans and to undermine democracy more generally. Trump ordered Texas Republicans to initiate an unprecedented midterm redistricting drive to net five new GOP seats by 2026, which could be critical given the current tiny Republican House majority. The move set off a similar move by Gov. Gavin Newsom to draw new Democratic seats in California, which may trigger a nationwide partisan redistricting wave that could further damage democracy. The president has also rewarded those who did his dirty work in attacking elections, granting hundreds of pardons and commutations to supporters who were convicted and jailed for the assault on the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, an attempt to overturn President Joe Biden's election win the previous November. Trump's supporters have shown a similar disregard for the right of voters in each state to choose their leaders, even those who fiercely resisted federal power in previous capacities. In June, Homeland Security Secretary and former South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem explained the deployment of National Guard troops and active-duty US Marines to Los Angeles amid protests against Trump's immigration policies. She said they planned to stay to 'liberate this city from the socialist and burdensome leadership' of its elected Democratic representatives. In the event, the soldiers did nothing of the sort and mostly just guarded federal properties, but the deployments and her rhetoric were in keeping with Trump's authoritarian turn. More recently, Trump has sent military reservists and federal agents into the streets of Washington, DC, as part of an anti-crime crackdown. He's now importing National Guard members from Republican states in a show of force over a city that has repeatedly and overwhelmingly voted to reject him in national elections. There are concerns this could be a template he will later apply to Democratic cities in the states. With all this in mind, the possibility of an attempt by Trump to block or delegitimize the rights of states — including those that return mostly Democratic delegations — to run their own elections must be taken seriously. Trump vented about mail-in voting during an Oval Office appearance with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky on Monday. 'Mail-in ballots are corrupt. Mail-in ballots, you can never have a real democracy with mail-in ballots,' the president said, firing off a torrent of falsehoods about voter fraud. His latest tirade against mail-in voting may have been sown by Putin, an enemy of the United States, during their summit meeting in Alaska last week. 'You know, Vladimir Putin said something — one of the most interesting things. He said, 'Your election was rigged because you have mail-in voting.' He said, 'It's impossible to have mail-in voting and have honest elections,' Trump told Sean Hannity on Fox News immediately after the summit. Trump said Putin told him that he won the 2020 by 'so much' and that there would have been no war in Ukraine had Trump held office in 2022. 'And he said, 'And you lost it because of mail-in voting.' … Vladimir Putin, smart guy, said you can't have an honest election with mail-in voting.' It took only two days for Trump to launch an early-morning online tirade against mail-in voting and to initiate a new attempt to halt it in the United States. Still, Trump's capacity to do more than try to discredit mail-in voting is questionable. There is no official role for presidents in administering federal elections — a point driven home in several of the criminal indictments he faced for his role in seeking to overturn the 2020 election. The Constitution states that 'the times, places and manner of holding elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each state by the legislature thereof.' It does allow Congress to at any time alter regulations on the times and manner of elections. This is one potential route for Republicans to change state election laws. But since they lack 60 votes in the Senate, they'd have to outlaw the filibuster to do so, an unlikely scenario since this could open the way to untamed Democratic power the next time their rivals control the chamber. Still, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt signaled Tuesday that Trump intended to go beyond an executive order. 'I'm sure there will be many discussions with our friends on Capitol Hill. And also our friends in state legislatures across the country, to ensure that we're protecting the integrity of the vote for the American people,' Leavitt said. 'I think Republicans generally, and the president generally, wants to make it easier for Americans to vote and harder for people to cheat in our elections,' she said — even though mail-in voting is one of the easiest ways to cast a ballot. 'And it's quite mind-boggling that the Democrat Party could stand in opposition to common sense.' Multiple studies by academic institutions, think tanks and vote protection organizations have shown that mail-in voting is secure. CNN's Daniel Dale produced a comprehensive new fact check debunking the president's claims that Democrats use mail-in voting to cheat and that the states 'must do' what the federal government and president tell them to do. The latter claim, incidentally, is a fundamental misunderstanding of the character of a federal republic. Dale notes that in general in US elections, 'there has generally been a tiny quantity of ballot fraud representing a minuscule percentage of votes cast.' Any attempt by Trump to change voting methods by executive fiat would immediately trigger court challenges. And it's not clear that Republican-led state legislatures would all fall into line, since Republicans have been catching up to Democrats in the share of early voting in person and by mail. Democrats are already signaling they will resist the president's latest salvo against mail-in voting and as a rallying call. Arizona's Secretary of State Adrian Fontes, a Democrat, pointed out on X Tuesday that more than 80% of the state's voters cast mail-in ballots and implied that previous warnings about Republican attempts to take over elections were coming true. 'I've been warning about this for years. The canary is dead,' he wrote. And Katie Porter, a candidate for the Democratic gubernatorial nomination in California, is already fundraising off Trump's remarks. 'Donald Trump is trying to steal the 2026 midterm election in plain sight,' she wrote in a mailing Tuesday. That may be getting ahead of where things currently are. But the warning signs are there, not least following Trump's joke during his meeting with Zelensky on Monday when his visitor said elections are suspended in Ukraine for the duration of the war — as the law stipulates. 'You say during the war, you can't have elections? So, let me just say, three-and-a-half years from now — so you mean if we happen to be in a war with somebody, no more elections? Oh, that's good,' Trump said. Coming from any other president, his quip might have been funnier.


CNBC
6 minutes ago
- CNBC
European markets head for negative open as sentiment shifts; UK inflation data ahead
LONDON — European stocks are expected to open lower on Wednesday as global market sentiment wavered. The U.K.'s FTSE index is seen opening 0.18% lower, Germany's DAX 0.6% lower, France's CAC 40 down 0.56% and Italy's FTSE MIB 0.56% lower. Regional bourses traded higher on Tuesday as global markets reacted broadly positively to the outcome of talks between U.S. President Donald Trump, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and European leaders at the White House on Monday. Defense stocks were among the worst performers in the index, however. On the data front, the U.K. inflation print for July will be published at 7 a.m. London time. Economists polled by Reuters had anticipated inflation would reach 3.7% in the twelve months to July, after it picked up to a hotter than expected 3.6% in June. Earnings come from Alcon and Geberit and Sweden's Riksbank publishes its latest monetary policy decision. Globally, Asia-Pacific markets fell overnight, tracking Wall Street declines in Tuesday's trading session. S&P 500 futures were near flat overnight ahead of the release of the Federal Reserve's July meeting minutes. At the time, policymakers once more held steady on interest rates, but Fed Governors Christopher Waller and Michelle Bowman dissented, marking the first time two voting Fed officials have done so since 1993. Traders are also focusing on key speeches from Fed officials when they convene in Jackson Hole, Wyoming, for the Fed's annual economic symposium on Thursday. Investors are awaiting clues from Fed Chair Jerome Powell as to what will happen at the central bank's remaining policy meetings this year. The Fed funds futures market is indicating an 84.9% chance for a quarter-point rate cut at the Fed's next policy meeting in September, according to CME's FedWatch tool.