The United Kingdom used the UN Security Council’s 6 November 2025 session on climate and security to set out three strands of work: stronger analytics and early warning, mainstreaming climate risk across UN operations, and expanded finance for resilience and peace. The statement was delivered in New York by Ambassador Archie Young and published by the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office the same day.
The UK assessment reiterated that climate change is accelerating, with extreme weather and slow‑onset impacts undermining food and water security, displacing people and intensifying tensions. It also underlined the reverse effect: violent conflict destroys infrastructure, weakens institutions and diverts resources away from adaptation and resilience, with women and children disproportionately affected.
On analytics, the UK highlighted backing for the UN’s Complex Risk Analytics Fund (CRAF’d). Administered by the UN Multi‑Partner Trust Fund Office, CRAF’d finances collaborative, standards‑based data work so that risk information translates into anticipatory, preventive and recovery action in fragile settings. The fund was announced in 2021 with a stated aim of pooling US$15–25 million a year and complements wider data efforts in the international system.
Operationally, the UK called for systematic climate risk assessment and environmental stewardship across UN field presences, particularly peacekeeping. The Climate Security Mechanism (CSM) - a joint initiative of DPPA, UNDP, UNEP and DPO established in 2018 - supports UN entities with technical advice, field deployment of climate, peace and security expertise, knowledge management and training to embed climate‑security analysis in planning and delivery.
The statement welcomed steps already taken by some missions, including the use of renewable energy to reduce fuel demand and local pollution while improving operational resilience. In practice, integrating climate risk into mission concepts, logistics and community engagement is likely to shape site selection, power supply, water management and contingency planning, aligning security objectives with long‑term stability goals.
On finance, the UK pointed to results from its International Climate Finance since 2011, noting support for 137 million people to cope with climate impacts, improved access to clean energy for 89 million people and strengthened resilience for 33 million people, alongside technical assistance. The UK framed these outcomes as contributions to addressing drivers of conflict.
For policy teams inside the UN, this approach signals earlier use of climate‑conflict risk screens in mission planning and Security Council briefings, more consistent deployment of climate‑security advisers, and closer collaboration between political, development and environmental pillars. The CSM’s current programme phase is geared to scaling good practice and expanding services across the system.
For funders and implementing partners, CRAF’d provides a pooled route to close priority data gaps in fragile contexts, align standards and produce decision‑ready risk analytics that support anticipatory action. The fund’s design also complements the World Bank’s Global Data Facility, reducing fragmentation across humanitarian, development and peace actors.
Two constraints remain clear from UN documentation: climate‑security integration requires mandate space and sustained resources, and the CSM is structured to be catalytic rather than to replace operational programmes at scale. Delivery therefore depends on missions, Country Teams and donors translating analysis into funded, context‑specific activity.