India: As devastating floods hit Nepal, the long-delayed approval of a Green Climate Fund project has raised questions about whether international climate finance is moving fast enough for communities facing escalating Himalayan risks

Is climate aid reaching those who need it?

The devastating Bhote Koshi flood in Nepal on August 26 has brought renewed attention to a problem that goes beyond the immediate disaster: whether international climate finance is reaching vulnerable Himalayan communities quickly enough to prepare for rapidly changing climate risks.

Friends of the Earth Asia Pacific has criticised the Green Climate Fund (GCF) for taking seven years to approve a project intended to reduce the risks posed by Glacial Lake Outburst Floods (GLOFs) in Nepal.

What is the project about?

According to the organisation, the project entered the GCF pipeline in 2018 but was approved only in July 2025. The project was designed to protect communities, infrastructure and ecosystems from GLOF risks, including through measures such as early-warning systems.

The criticism comes at a time when Nepal is confronting increasingly dangerous hazards linked to its changing Himalayan environment.

Why does a seven-year delay matter?

Climate adaptation is different from many conventional development projects because the risks it addresses are changing while projects are being planned and approved.

A glacial lake can grow as glaciers retreat. Mountain slopes can become unstable. Extreme rainfall can trigger landslides and floods. In some situations, several of these processes can interact, producing sudden and destructive flooding downstream.

That makes early warning and preparedness particularly important.

Friends of the Earth Asia Pacific said the seven-year wait was unacceptable given the rapidly escalating risks facing Himalayan communities.

“The project was in the GCF pipeline in 2018 but only got approved in July 2025,” said Meena Raman, climate justice spokesperson for Friends of the Earth Asia Pacific, according to the organisation.

She argued that had the project been approved earlier, early-warning systems and other measures could potentially have been put in place to reduce the impacts of disasters.

The organisation’s criticism is not evidence that the delayed GCF project would have prevented the August 26 Bhote Koshi disaster. The circumstances surrounding that flood need to be assessed separately. But the disaster has exposed the larger challenge: adaptation measures have to be in place before a hazard strikes.

The GLOF risk is growing

A GLOF occurs when water stored in a glacial lake is suddenly released, producing a powerful flood downstream. Such lakes can develop or expand as glaciers retreat.

For communities living below unstable glaciers and glacial lakes, the warning time can be extremely short. This makes monitoring systems, communication networks and evacuation plans crucial components of climate adaptation.

The GCF describes itself as the world’s largest dedicated multilateral climate fund. Established under the UN climate framework, it finances projects in developing countries aimed at reducing emissions and adapting to climate change.

But the Nepal case has prompted Friends of the Earth Asia Pacific to question whether the Fund is delivering adaptation finance at the speed and scale required by communities on the frontline of the climate crisis.

The organisation is calling for the GCF and developed-country governments involved in international climate finance to accelerate funding for adaptation, disaster preparedness and resilience in vulnerable countries.

What about loss and damage?

There is another layer to the Nepal disaster: what happens after a climate-related catastrophe?

Friends of the Earth Asia Pacific has urged the Fund for Responding to Loss and Damage (FRLD) to provide financial assistance for rescue, recovery and reconstruction following the Bhote Koshi disaster.

This is distinct from adaptation finance. Adaptation seeks to reduce risks before disasters occur, while loss-and-damage finance is intended to help countries deal with the impacts that cannot be avoided or adequately prevented.

Financial aid crucial

The Nepal case therefore illustrates both sides of the climate-finance challenge: money must arrive before disasters to build resilience, and it must also be available afterwards when communities suffer losses.

As Prakash Dahal of Friends of the Earth Nepal put it, the warnings have come from the mountains, rivers, scientists and people themselves.

The central question now is whether the international climate-finance system can respond before the next warning becomes another disaster.