Every year before COP, the same question surfaces: what is the one thing Africa needs from this summit?
Ahead of COP31, the answer emerging from a World Resources Institute Africa webinar was clear: Africa must move beyond asking what it can receive from global climate negotiations and focus on what it can bring. With geopolitical tensions, energy disruptions and climate shocks exposing vulnerabilities across African economies, speakers argued that the continent must use the summit to advance practical solutions that strengthen energy security, protect food systems and mobilise climate finance.
Keep up with the latest headlines on WhatsApp | LinkedIn
Olufunso Somorin, Regional Principal Officer for Climate Change and Green Growth at the African Development Bank, said these challenges were interconnected, warning that simultaneous disruptions to energy, food and economic systems could undermine the continent's development gains. He described them as a triangle of reality - when one is hit, the others strain, and when all three are hit, the development gains of recent years are at risk.
"COP of today, it is now a trade forum. It is now a marketplace."
He said that Africa needed to rethink its approach to global climate negotiations and strengthen its position as a partner in shaping climate solutions rather than simply seeking assistance. His answer was what he called a "reinvented agency". Africa, he said, must move "away from this idea of Africa that needs to be helped, to an Africa that needs to be partnered with."
He also questioned the pace of the process itself, asking that after 30 COPs, how many more does it take to get things done?
That means understanding what COP has become. "COP of today, it is now a trade forum. It is now a marketplace. And what you get out of a marketplace is largely based on who you are and what you bring to the marketplace," he said.
Energy security was one of the key issues at COP31, with the prevailing situation of geopolitical tensions and disruptions to the global energy supply underpinning the risks of being dependent on external energy sources. Africa has significant renewable energy potential. However, the challenge remains translating these resources into reliable and affordable electricity that can support economic growth, businesses, and industrial development.
Yasmin Abdulwassie, Senior Manager for Climate in Africa at the Children's Investment Fund Foundation, said high financing costs and limited public budgets remained major obstacles to scaling up renewable energy investments. "The challenge is really translating that potential into affordable, reliable energy that can be replicated and scaled," she said.
She said philanthropy can help by funding project preparation, policy reform and investment pipelines, so that transition pathways are country-led. She pointed to South Africa's Just Energy Transition Partnership. The initiative, she said, initially announced with $8.5 billion, had grown to more than $14 billion, proof that investors back credible country platforms.
She also highlighted Senegal's Renewable Energy Investment Facility as another emerging example of efforts to attract investment and support the country's energy transition. "So that type of catalytic role that philanthropy plays is not just about unlocking finance, but helping countries turn lasting financing possibilities for economic reform," said Abdulwassie.
Somorin said that achieving universal energy access would require stronger partnerships that connect national ambitions with clear financing strategies. He cited Mission 300, which aims to connect 300 million people in sub-Saharan Africa to electricity by 2030, as an example of how shared targets and country-specific strategies can accelerate progress.
He said 37 African countries had developed national energy compacts outlining their strategies for expanding electricity access, helping attract investment from development finance institutions, the World Bank, the African Development Bank and philanthropic organisations. He said the initiative demonstrated the importance of having a collective goal while agreeing on practical steps to achieve it.
"It is a new way of defining partnership where you have a collective goal, but you also have a shared discussion on the how. How do we get there? What do we need to do differently?" he said.
Beyond energy security, COP31 is urged to give greater attention to adaptation, particularly ensuring that climate finance reaches countries and communities most vulnerable to climate change.
Abdulwassie said that the climate summit should move adaptation commitments toward "real, measurable outcomes," particularly in food systems, water and livelihood infrastructure. She set out three priorities. The first is a credible financing pathway. Countries have committed to tripling adaptation finance by 2035, but Abdulwassie said the detail is missing. "How are we going to do it? How will progress be measured?" she asked, adding that these questions need answers at COP31 and at every milestone after it.
The second is better indicators, and here she pointed to the Belém-Addis vision, a two-year process that runs toward COP32 in Ethiopia. Current metrics, she said, tend to count activities, such as how many farmers completed climate-smart agriculture training. She argued the measure should be whether a farmer's livelihood "stays intact or improves despite climate shocks," and that credible results of that kind are what attract further financing.
The third is matching national adaptation plans with investment plans. She cited a Malawi initiative, backed by philanthropy and led by the African Climate Foundation, in which more than 20 of the country's priority adaptation proposals have been matched with potential investors. The aim, she said, is to give adaptation the same investable pipelines that mitigation projects increasingly have.
The challenge of mobilising climate finance for adaptation was also highlighted by Somorin, who said African countries needed to rethink how adaptation projects are financed and how their economic value is presented to investors.
"Adaptation is very complex," Somorin said, and the sector has made it harder by lumping everything together as "climate action." He said that adaptation remains more difficult to finance than mitigation because projects often lack the clear financial returns that attract private investors.
Put all climate projects in one finance basket, he said, and about nine in ten that emerge would be mitigation projects. They are simply easier to finance and attract capital more readily. Africa also faces a structural handicap. In every other region, he said, private capital drives climate action. Africa is the only place where public money leads.
His first proposed fix is to stop treating the two as separate. "You use mitigation finance to drive adaptation goals," he said. He gave an example of a solar-powered irrigation scheme in a semi-arid region that cuts emissions through clean energy, but it also lets farmers grow and earn all year round, which is an adaptation result. The more deliberately adaptation is built into mitigation projects, he said, the more capital will reach it.
"I argue that you use mitigation finance to drive adaptation goals," he said.
Somorin also called for a change in how investors assess adaptation projects, arguing that their wider economic benefits should be recognised alongside their immediate financial returns.
He said financiers needed to understand the distinction between financial viability and economic viability, particularly where investments generate long-term benefits that may not immediately translate into revenue. Somorin said the task is to help financiers see that the economic value is real and can be monetized, either now or later, as new markets emerge to turn it into financial returns.
Africa has documented 11 financial instruments for mitigation projects but, at best, three for adaptation. Expanding these financing options, he said, would let more resources flow and would bring non-traditional investors into the adaptation space.
Philanthropy can help unlock larger investments
While development finance institutions have a role in mobilising investment for climate action, Abdulwassie said philanthropic capital could help address some of the structural barriers preventing African countries from accessing climate finance. "Philanthropy alone, we know, cannot close that gap," she said. However, she identified three areas where it could have a catalytic impact: strengthening national institutions, developing country-led investment platforms, and building stronger partnerships across the climate finance ecosystem.
The first is institutional capacity. Where African institutions don't exist, or need strengthening, she said, philanthropic money is best spent building them. That leads to country ownership and brings "the local voice, the local agenda" to the table, alongside partners such as the African Development Bank. She pointed again to South Africa's Just Energy Transition Partnership, where philanthropic partners and multilaterals helped the government negotiate what international financing would look like. She also made a pointed aside: more grants should go directly to countries to help scale such efforts.
The second is building investment platforms with countries rather than for them. Philanthropy can provide technical expertise, convene partners and help design financing mechanisms and instruments. The models must be contextual, she said, because every country's energy pathway, food system and growth path is different.
The third is strengthening the wider ecosystem of African climate leadership. She cited philanthropic support for the first two Africa Climate Summits, the resulting Nairobi and Addis Ababa declarations, and efforts to give African countries a collective voice through the African Union during South Africa's G20 presidency.
The stakes, she said, are high: climate finance flowing into Africa is less than 2% of what is needed, nowhere near the continent's needs. Without African leadership in these rooms, she argued, the finance ambitions cannot be met.
"Bringing in that collective voice because I believe that ensures that African leadership is there to shape African priorities," she said.
Somorin said his experience working with country platforms at the African Development Bank had shown that strong national leadership was essential to their success.
He outlined three factors that can help these platforms move beyond coordination. First, governments need clearly defined climate goals and realistic objectives that reflect their national capabilities, political circumstances, and development priorities.
"Nothing substitutes for strong leadership," he said. He named the difference it makes by comparing Rwanda with Niger. Clear, well-structured country goals matter, he said, but so does honesty about capability. Countries that are still asking partners to help train their people, when they should be implementing, are not ready to move. Goals also have to fit a country's political and socioeconomic realities. He said, "You cannot ignore" even when they seem unrelated to climate.
Second, countries must understand the strengths of their development partners, including multilateral institutions, philanthropic organisations and NGOs, and bring them together around clearly allocated responsibilities.
Third, governments must demonstrate their own commitment by contributing resources to the initiatives they want partners to support. Somorin said that countries which tell partners they need support for 80% of a project because they will supply 20% make faster progress than those that put in nothing and ask for everything. A government that commits a set share of its budget over five years, and assigns people to learn and deliver, finds it much easier to leverage what others bring.