Can Floods and Heatwaves Be Tracked by "Numbers"? — Can the New Global Climate Adaptation Measures Save the Field?

Turning "Adaptation" into a "Measurable Policy" — The "Belém Indicators" Decided at COP30 and Their Significance for Africa

When it comes to climate change measures, the reduction of greenhouse gases (mitigation) tends to take center stage. However, adaptation—addressing the already occurring damages such as floods, droughts, heatwaves, coastal erosion, crop damage, and climate-induced migration—is also at the forefront of protecting lives and livelihoods. A longstanding challenge has been the lack of a **"universal metric to discuss whether adaptation has progressed"** globally.

According to an article introduced by Phys.org in January 2026, at COP30 in 2025 (Belém, Brazil), countries agreed on a new framework to track adaptation progress—**the "Belém Adaptation Indicators."** The aim is simple: to ensure that countries are not just "thinking they are adapting," but that the world as a whole is genuinely increasing its adaptive capacity, using a common language to assess this.

What Exactly Are the "Belém Indicators"?

The Phys.org article describes the Belém Indicators as **approximately 60 "simple measurement items."** They focus on areas directly linked to "everyday life," such as water security, food systems, health, housing, early warning systems, ecosystems, and local economies. The key point is the approach of assessing whether communities are actually becoming safer and more resilient to damage, rather than just focusing on the preparation of plans and policy documents.

Meanwhile, the UNFCCC decision document (dated November 2025) organizes the adopted indicators as **"Belém Adaptation Indicators in the annex", emphasizing that they are voluntary and non-prescriptive. More importantly, it is clearly stated that the indicators "do not create new financial obligations or liabilities (such as compensation)"**.

Note on "60" or "59": While Phys.org introduces them as 60, many official and explanatory documents related to COP30 refer to 59 (with decision documents and multiple explanations adopting 59). The difference may arise from how they are counted (treatment of integrated or composite indicators), so this article treats them as "approximately 60 (59 in official documents)."

Why It Matters for Africa: Facing Both "Severity of Damage" and "Invisibility"

The Phys.org article assumes that Africa is facing particularly severe climate impacts globally, citing large-scale evacuations due to floods and the pressure on health, food, and energy from record high temperatures in the Sahel region. Simultaneously, it notes the accumulation of local initiatives such as community-led early warnings, nature-based adaptation, savings groups among residents, and agricultural innovations.

This is where the "indicators" come into play. Previously, even if adaptation was discussed as a "good thing," it was challenging to explain internationally which areas were progressing and which were being left behind. Furthermore, in Africa, when discussed at the national average level, disparities between urban and rural areas, income groups, and vulnerable positions (gender, disability, indigenous peoples, etc.) become invisible. Phys.org positions the indicators as a means to highlight "equity," preventing the most at-risk people from becoming invisible.

However, It Is Not a "Perfect Measure": The Challenges of Data Shortages and "Ambiguity"

While the adoption is a step forward, significant challenges remain. The Phys.org article notes that some aspects were "weakened" during the final stages of negotiations, leading to broader and more ambiguous indicators. Additionally, many African countries lack regular data collection systems, making it difficult to track annual damage from floods and droughts, regional risk assessments, and whether funds are truly reaching residents.

This concern is echoed in other analyses. Carbon Brief reports that the final document emphasizes that **"the indicators do not create new financial obligations,"** and that Panama, the EU, Canada, and others criticized the agreement as hasty. It also mentions that some negotiators modified the indicators, potentially making them less usable.

The Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI) also points out that the framework built by experts was "diluted" in political negotiations, shifting the focus from technical expertise to a country-led political process, which could prolong implementation.

The Two Years from "Belém to Addis": COP32 as a Litmus Test

The decision at COP30 is not the end. The UNFCCC document establishes a two-year process called the **"Belém–Addis Vision on Adaptation"** to make the Belém Indicators operational, advancing technical work on methodologies and metadata improvements.

The summary of COP30 results by Japan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs also notes that while indicators related to the Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA) were adopted, "full agreement was not reached," with discussions continuing in subsequent years, and that the **two-year "Belém–Addis Vision"** will consider future implementation. Furthermore, COP32 is scheduled to be held in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, from November 8 to 19, 2027, highlighting Africa as the "main battleground for implementation."

How It Affects the Ground in Industry, Food, and Water: Connecting Research and Funding

In response to the question, "Are the indicators just on paper?" CGIAR presents an intriguing point. While the compromise at COP30 was cautious and political, the inclusion of multiple indicators directly related to food and agriculture suggests that adaptation has become a central topic rather than a peripheral theme. It further emphasizes that data, methodologies, and funding and capacity support are essential, as "indicators alone do not lead to action."

The International Water Management Institute (IWMI) also notes that COP30 has shifted from being "emission-centric" to focusing on resilience and water, viewing the adoption of indicators and adaptation funding (with expansion goals until 2035) as a set. In cross-cutting areas like water and sanitation, indicators may advance conversations on "implementation and funding."

Reactions on Social Media: Simultaneous Welcome and Caution (Examples Confirmed Within Public Scope)

While the agreement is highly specialized, social media reflects a mix of expectations for "visualizing adaptation" and caution that "without funding and methodologies, it will be futile." Below are summaries of publicly searchable posts that do not compromise the original intent (posts may be reinterpreted with context or follow-up reports).

• "Tracking Adaptation Progress Is a Step Forward"
  The Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative (OPHI) on X has posted about COP30 selecting the Belém Indicators, suggesting that it will help countries track adaptation progress.

• "Want to Advance Africa's Adaptation Discussions"
  Power Shift Africa on X mentions the adoption of 59 Belém Indicators and the Belém–Addis process, suggesting a push for Africa's adaptation agenda.

• "Indicators Are the 'Entry Point for Implementation.' But Many Unresolved Questions Remain"
  CGIAR's commentary views the 59 indicators and the two-year Belém–Addis process as a "compromise," clearly stating concerns about opposition, methodological gaps, and the absence of binding financial commitments. Similar sentiments ("indicators are good, but methods and funding come first") are prominent on social media.

• "The Disclaimer of 'No New Obligations' Seems Hollow"
  Carbon Brief reports that while the agreement document emphasizes "no new financial obligations," criticism erupted that "adaptation won't move without funding," with objections that it was hasty. The sentiment that there are "too many disclaimers" is common on social media.
  
  
  

Future Focus: Ensuring It Doesn't End with Just "Measuring"

Whether the Belém Indicators truly hold significance depends on the following three points.

1. Data and On-Site Capability: A system is needed that does not disadvantage countries with data shortages (simple collection, phased introduction, incorporation of regional community insights).

2. Transparency of Funding: Without a design to track "where adaptation funding has reached," indicators may become "reporting for the sake of reporting."

3. Ensuring Africa Becomes a "Designer" Rather Than a "Recipient": Since COP32 will be held in Addis, the region most familiar with on-the-ground diversity is in a position to determine the practical applicability of the indicators.

Adaptation takes time to yield results. Therefore, those who control "what and how to measure" from this moment will lead future discussions on funding allocation and priorities. The Belém Indicators could either become a "framework for monitoring" or a "weapon to prove their success" for Africa. The two years from Belém to Addis are a critical juncture.