UN Indonesia Solar power is widely used on the islands of Java, Madura, and Bali. Credit: UN News

By Delia Paul
MELBOURNE, Australia, Aug 10 2026 (IPS)

In much of the Asia-Pacific region, energy is a success story. Electricity access has greatly increased and the use of clean cooking fuels is now widespread. The region has kept pace with the rest of the world in adopting renewable energy. Many countries have made energy efficiency gains; the Republic of Korea is one of those in the lead worldwide. Progress has continued even in the face of recent energy crises sparked by the war in Ukraine and conflict over the Strait of Hormuz.

Yet, this year’s High Level Political Forum on sustainable development (IHLPF) in New York— a yearly event to review progress on the global Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) —sounded some warning bells.

With SDG 7 on energy, the international community agreed to ensure universal access to affordable, reliable and modern energy services. Clean cooking fuels are part of that transition. SDG 7 also set targets to increase substantially the share of renewable energy in the global energy mix, and double the rate of improvement in energy efficiency. On all these measures, Asia-Pacific countries have done well. This year’s HLPF, however, raised some important questions.

Firstly, success is a matter of definition. In 2010, Central and South Asian countries accounted for 36 per cent of the world’s electricity-access deficit; by 2024, that proportion had shrunk to just 3 per cent, a turnaround that the UN’s latest report of progress on SDG 7 attributes to rapid grid expansion, regional power market integration, and rising incomes. That achievement is nuanced, however, when we consider the livelihood dimension, where many countries still face challenges especially in rural areas.

Vijay Modi, a professor at Columbia University and director of its Laboratory for Sustainable Energy Solutions, addressing HLPF delegates on the first day of the talks, noted that access is not the same as affordability. Affordable energy is needed, for example, to run the water pumps for farm irrigation, and to light shops that may want to extend their opening hours — aspects of electricity access that are missed, if focusing only on household-level energy services.

Secondly, generalised statistics can mask the true scale of the challenge that still remains. The share of people using clean fuels and technologies for cooking has nearly doubled across most of Asia since 2010. Central, South, East and Southeast Asian countries have done especially well: India alone is responsible for about 40 percent of the worldwide reduction in the clean-cooking access deficit, China for roughly 30 percent, and Indonesia for about 10 percent.

In terms of percentage points, this all looks great. In terms of absolute numbers, though, India still has the largest numbers of people without access to electricity services and clean cooking fuels; China ranks third in the world; Indonesia ranks 16th. These are countries with large populations, where a percentage point gained in access represents many more people than a percentage point gained in a smaller country. While their progress should be applauded, the challenge is far from over.

Third is the question of financing. From 2023 to 2024, international financial flows for clean energy fell in Central, South, East and Southeast Asia. That is a troubling trend, given that much remains to be done. The role of public utilities remains crucial.

In the 1990s and 2000s, Cambodia’s state utility, Electricité du Cambodge, transformed the fragmented, war-torn nation’s power grid into a unified network, partnering with independent power producers, using foreign investment to build transmission lines and power stations, and prioritising electricity connections and financing for low-income households. Such success is not a given.

Damilola Ogunbiyi, Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Sustainable Energy for All and Co-Chair of UN-Energy, reminded the HLPF that in Africa, some utilities have not achieved viability and are facing bankruptcy. “It’s about finance, at the end of the day,” she said, while highlighting that renewable energy is the least-cost pathway to meeting energy needs worldwide.

The current geopolitical situation only strengthens the case for increasing uptake of renewables and decreasing reliance on traditional fossil fuels, said Francesco La Camera, Director-General of the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA). This process, he noted, could be accelerated through mini-grids, peak time management (strategies to reduce and shift electricity consumption away from peak demand times), and removal of trade barriers to renewable energy technologies. Some of this is already happening in Asia, but with just four years to go until the 2030 deadline for achieving the SDGs, UN monitoring shows that progress is insufficient.

Globally, four structural trends are holding back progress. They are explained in the 2026 UN report, “Tracking SDG 7: The Energy Progress Report.” Progress on reducing energy intensity has mainly been achieved in industry, and is now slowing. Energy efficiency standards don’t necessarily match the technology available in the marketplace. Demand for air conditioning has increased, pushing up electricity demand. Growth in electricity demand now outstrips the supply of renewable energy that is actually available. Tackling just one of these barriers — let’s say energy intensity, for example — would require tripling the rate of progress in the next four years.

For now, the UN has launched a new work programme to accelerate action leading up to the 2030 deadline for the SDGs. On the current rate of progress, the world will probably not meet all the SDG 7 targets. But, given the energy gains already made in this region, Asia-Pacific countries may do better than others.

Dr Delia Paul is an associate of the International Institute for Sustainable Development, and is affiliated with Monash University’s Global Peace and Security research hub in Australia.

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

Credit: L. Patron/UN University (UNU)

By Victor Bernard and Delia Paul
BANGKOK / MELBOURNE, Dec 16 2021 (IPS)

Amid several disappointments of the 2021 UN climate conference in Glasgow, one sign of hope was the agreement on financing for adaptation to climate change. Developed countries agreed to double adaptation finance for poorer nations by 2025, from 2019 levels.

This rapid increase—if promises are kept—could mean many different things: infrastructure upgrades in vulnerable coastal zones, tree planting to counter rising temperatures, technology and training for underfunded civil servants, and more.

Adaptation finance has been low in comparison to financing for mitigation efforts, so this outcome from Glasgow is welcome. But if this is to benefit those most in need and protect them from violations, countries and international aid donors must adopt a human rights-based approach to adaptation.

Such an approach is not only about civil and political rights (such as voting rights or freedom of assembly), but also about social, economic and cultural rights to nutritious food, water and sanitation, education, and access to health care, to name just a few that are internationally recognized.

Now, the impacts of climate change gravely threaten governments’ ability to fulfil their commitments.

Countries in the Asia-Pacific region, including Southeast Asia and small island states, are among the world’s most vulnerable to climate impacts. Their coastal cities, long coastlines, and many small islands are features that expose large populations to both fast and slow-onset changes in the global environment.

The low-lying archipelago, Tuvalu, in the Pacific Ocean is reclaiming land as it fights the effects of climate change. Credit: UNDP Tuvalu

Communities forced to relocate due to climate-induced changes, such as sea-level rise, may have a poorer standard of living in their new place. Women in water-scarce regions may spend longer hours than before looking for freshwater sources.

Disasters and extreme weather events are already preventing children from having full access to education. During the pandemic lockdowns, for example, children without access to computers at home could not benefit from online learning.

The promise of financing for adaptation is a huge opportunity to make a difference for the world’s poorest, who are often the most exposed to climate risk. But governments so far have not adopted a systematic approach to integrating human rights in their adaptation planning.

The 2015 Paris Agreement on climate was the first international environmental treaty to explicitly mention States’ human rights obligations. The Agreement also makes implicit references to rights-related issues such as gender equality, public participation, and access to information.

The recent Glasgow conference finalised the ‘Paris Rulebook’ operationalizing the 2015 Agreement, which features human rights language under its Article 6. The new commitment to double adaptation financing is an opportunity to bring these commitments into practice.

Ahead of the Glasgow climate conference, the Raoul Wallenberg Institute of Human Rights and Humanitarian Law and the Stockholm Environment Institute jointly investigated the extent to which countries have integrated human rights concerns in their National Adaptation Plans (NAPs).

NAPs are a country-led process under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). They are an expression of a country’s intent and strategy for fulfilling their commitments on adaptation.

Our research reviewed 15 NAPs that were available in English, out of the 24 submitted before COP 26. Fiji’s plan explicitly adopted human rights language, while Brazil’s plan strongly articulated the rights to water and the rights of Indigenous peoples. But overall, human rights are generally absent in the NAPs that we reviewed, or are addressed in an unsystematic way.

Intentionally adopting a rights-based process for NAPs means two things.

First, it ensures that adaptation funds do indeed benefit the most vulnerable people and communities through efforts to alleviate the impacts of climate change.

Second, it sets the scene for a truly inclusive and accessible planning process, in which disadvantaged groups are able to have their voices heard and are included in decision making about the future we share.

States are sometimes hesitant to adopt a rights-based approach, viewing this exercise as politically too challenging. But implementing human rights need not be a ‘blame game.’ It is possible to institute adaptation processes that celebrate everyone’s inherent dignity and everyone’s equal and inalienable rights.

Such a process can be helped through the use of tools, guidance, and awareness-raising initiatives. RWI is currently working on guidance for integrating human rights concerns in the NAPs. This will also look beyond NAPs to provide guidance for program implementation, supporting the policy-to-practice process.

At the 2015 climate talks in Paris, countries promised that climate finance would not fall below $100 billion a year. This figure has so far not been met. In 2019 around $79.6 billion in climate finance went to developing countries, and just 25% was for adaptation.

Boosting adaptation finance should mean that the world’s poorest countries have additional resources to do what they urgently need.

Climate change threatens access to resources, and increases the gap between the haves and have-nots in society. NAPs are an opportunity to counter this threat by adopting effective, inclusive and equitable approaches to adaptation.

The promise of Glasgow could help protect human rights in our rapidly-warming world.

Victor Bernard is a Thai citizen and programme officer at the Raoul Wallenberg Institute, based in Bangkok. Delia Paul is a Malaysian citizen and human geography researcher at Monash University in Melbourne.

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau