Assessments

Somalia’s NDC received a total score of 11 points out of a possible 12, reflecting very strong integration of food systems into climate action in the NDC. Please see the full assessment here.

The NDC includes actions related to some stages of the food system—production, food loss, food processing, food distribution, and food consumption—but lacks measures related to food waste.

These actions address contextually important issues—namely, food insecurity and nutrition, food loss and waste reduction, and climate-resilient food production. The NDC also details actions to reduce food-system deforestation and food-production emissions.

All important synergistic topics assessed under the methodology are referenced in Somalia’s NDC, showing strong consideration of the interlinkages between food systems and other issues. Nothing in Somalia’s NDC was noted as maladaptive.

In terms of equity and inclusiveness, the NDC’s conditional target contributes equitably toward a 1.5°C pathway. The NDC also includes policies for just transitions and considers the needs of marginalized and/or vulnerable groups. The NDC development process was inclusive, in that it involved engagement with a wide range of government and other stakeholders.

Belize’s NDC received a total score of 7 points out of a possible 12, reflecting medium integration of food systems into climate action in the NDC. Please see the full assessment here.

The NDC includes actions related to some stages of the food system—production, food processing, food distribution, and food waste—but lacks measures related to food loss and food consumption.

It details several actions aimed at addressing contextually important issues—namely, food insecurity and malnutrition, food-production emissions, food loss and waste reduction, and climate-resilient food production. The NDC includes action to reduce fossil fuel use more broadly, which could be expected to reduce use in parts of the food system. Additionally, the NDC sets forth actions to reduce deforestation and increase use of renewable energy. Although Belize has high-impact dietary patterns, the NDC does not address this.

The NDC discusses several important synergies (nutrition, human rights, biodiversity, gender, and small-scale producers), but other critical ones, including animal health and human health, are not discussed. The NDC’s approach to increasing irrigation was assessed as maladaptive.

In terms of equity and inclusiveness, the NDC includes policies for just transitions and considers the needs of marginalized and/or vulnerable groups. Belize’s NDC was not assessed for equitable 1.5°C alignment because the emissions-reduction target lacked sufficient clarity. The NDC development process was inclusive, in that it involved engagement with a wide range of government and other stakeholders.

Kenya’s NDC received a total score of 10 points out of a possible 12, reflecting strong integrations of climate action on food into the NDC. Please see the full assessment here.

Kenya’s NDC includes actions related to all stages of the food system.

These actions address contextually important issues, namely food insecurity and malnutrition, food loss and waste reduction, and climate-resilient food production. Additionally, the NDC includes actions to reduce food-system deforestation and increase use of renewable energy in the food system.

All important synergistic topics assessed under the methodology were referenced in Kenya’s NDC, showing strong consideration of the interlinkages between food systems and other issues. However, policies regarding converting land for agriculture and expanding fishing were assessed as maladaptive.

Considering equity and inclusiveness, the NDC’s conditional target contributes equitably toward a 1.5°C pathway. The NDC also includes policies for just transition and considers the needs of marginalized and/or vulnerable groups. The NDC development process was inclusive in involving engagement with a wide range of government and other stakeholders.

Switzerland’s NDC received a total score of 11 points out of a possible 12, reflecting very strong integration of food systems into climate action in the NDC. Please see the full assessment here.

Switzerland’s NDC includes actions related to all stages of the food system.

These actions address contextually important issues—namely, food-production emissions, reducing food-system fossil fuel use, food loss and waste reduction, and climate-resilient food production. Notably, Switzerland’s NDC includes several policies shifting high-impact dietary patterns to lower-impact (e.g., more plant-based) consumption. The NDC also details actions to reduce food-system deforestation and increase food-system use of renewable energy.

The NDC discusses many important synergies (nutrition, animal health, human health, biodiversity, and small-scale producers), but other critical ones, including human rights and gender, are not discussed. Nothing in Switzerland’s NDC was noted as maladaptive.

In terms of equity and inclusiveness, the NDC includes concrete policies for just transitions and finance for developing countries. It also considers the needs of marginalized and/or vulnerable groups. However, the NDC’s mitigation ambition does not meet expectations for equitable 1.5°C alignment. The NDC development process was inclusive, in that it involved engagement with a wide range of government and other stakeholders.

The UAE’s NDC received a total score of 8.5 points out of a possible 12, reflecting strong integration of food systems into climate action in the NDC. Please see the full assessment here.

The NDC includes actions related to some stages of the food system—production, food loss, food processing, food distribution, and food waste—but lacks measures related to food consumption.

It details some actions aimed at addressing contextually important issues, such as food-production emissions, food loss and waste reduction, and climate-resilient food production. The NDC includes actions to reduce fossil fuel use more broadly, which could be expected to reduce use in parts of the food system. Additionally, the NDC sets forth actions to reduce deforestation and increase use of renewable energy in the food system. Although the UAE has high-impact dietary patterns, the NDC does not address this.

All important synergistic topics assessed under the methodology are referenced in the UAE’s NDC, showing strong consideration of the interlinkages between food systems and other issues. Nothing in the UAE’s NDC was noted as maladaptive.

In terms of equity and inclusiveness, the NDC includes concrete policies for just transitions and finance for developing countries. It also considers the needs of marginalized and/or vulnerable groups. However, the NDC’s mitigation ambition does not meet expectations for equitable 1.5°C alignment. The NDC development process was inclusive, in that it involved engagement with a wide range of government and other stakeholders.

The UK’s NDC received a total score of 8.5 points out of a possible 12, reflecting strong integration of food systems into climate action in the NDC. Please see the full assessment here.

The UK’s NDC includes actions related to all stages of the food system.

The NDC details several actions aimed at addressing contextually important issues, such as food-production emissions, reducing food-system fossil fuel use, food loss and waste reduction, and climate-resilient food production. It also includes plans to reduce food-system deforestation and actions to reduce fossil fuel use more broadly, which could be expected to reduce use in parts of the food system. Although the UK has high-impact dietary patterns, its NDC does not include action to shift to lower-impact diets.

All important synergistic topics assessed under the methodology are referenced in the UK’s NDC, showing strong consideration of the interlinkages between food systems and other issues. However, as a high-income country, policies encouraging increased fish consumption and expanding seafood and sheep exports were assessed as maladaptive.

In terms of equity and inclusiveness, the NDC sets forth concrete policies for just transitions and finance for developing countries, and it considers the needs of marginalized and/or vulnerable groups. However, the NDC’s mitigation ambition does not meet expectations for equitable 1.5°C alignment. The NDC development process was inclusive, in that it involved engagement with a wide range of government and other stakeholders.

Brazil’s NDC received a total score of 6 points out of a possible 12, reflecting weak integration of food systems into climate action in the NDC. Please see the full assessment here.

Brazil’s NDC includes actions related to some stages of the food system—production, food loss, and food consumption—but lacks measures related to food processing, food distribution, and food waste.

The NDC details several actions aimed at addressing contextually important issues, such as food insecurity and malnutrition, food-production emissions, reducing food-system fossil fuel use, reducing agricultural deforestation, food loss and waste reduction, and climate-resilient food production. It also includes actions to reduce fossil fuel use more broadly, which could be expected to reduce use in parts of the food system. Although Brazil has high-impact dietary patterns, the NDC does not address this.

It discusses some important synergies (nutrition, biodiversity, and small-scale producers), but other critical ones, including animal health and welfare, human health, human rights, and gender, are not discussed. A number of policies in the NDC were noted as maladaptive: increasing biofuel production, increasing agricultural irrigation, increasing the number of cattle slaughtered through intensive cattle finishing, and support for using pastureland recovery to support overconsumption of animal proteins. Several other plans were also concerning.

In terms of equity and inclusiveness, the NDC considers the needs of marginalized and/or vulnerable groups and includes broad references to just transitions in new policy development but not concrete policies. Additionally, the NDC’s mitigation ambition does not meet expectations for equitable 1.5°C alignment. Positively, the NDC development process was inclusive, in that it involved engagement with a wide range of government and other stakeholders.

New Zealand’s NDC received a total score of 5 points out of a possible 12, reflecting weak integrations of climate action on food into the NDC. Please see the full assessment here.

New Zealand’s NDC includes actions related to some stages of the food system—production, food loss, and food waste—but lacks measures related to food processing, distribution, and consumption.

The NDC includes some actions aimed at addressing contextually important issues, including food-production emissions and climate-resilient food production. It also includes actions to reduce fossil fuels that could be expected to reduce use in parts of the food system. Although New Zealand has high-impact dietary patterns, the NDC does not address this.

Some important synergies are discussed (specifically animal health and biodiversity), but other critical ones, including human rights and nutrition, are not. The NDC’s approach to accounting for “biogenic” methane was noted as maladaptation.

In terms of equity and inclusiveness, the NDC does include concrete policies for just transition. However, the NDC’s mitigation ambition does not meet expectations for equitable 1.5°C alignment, and finance for developing countries is not included in the NDC. Additionally, while the NDC specifically considers the needs of some marginalized and/or vulnerable groups (specifically Indigenous Peoples and youth), it does not do so for women. Positively, the NDC development process was inclusive in involving engagement with a wide range of government and other stakeholders.