In 2022, AIGCC’s working group consulted stakeholders and identified seven key investor expectations on the national adaptation planning process. These expectations include basing adaptation planning on scenario analysis and ensuring corporate disclosure of physical risks. AIGCC have now subsequently analysed the adaptation plans of nine Asian markets and their alignment with the initial 7 investor expectations and 12 sub-expectations. The analysis is housed in an interactive online dashboard that will be periodically updated as countries release new information or policies. The work provides investors clarity on how national adaptation plans align with private sector needs, identifies areas where collaboration can be strengthened, and highlights critical financing gaps to enable effective capital mobilisation toward adaptation. In doing so, AIGCC equips investors and policymakers with insights that relate to a transparent and actionable adaptation plan, aligning with real-world financial and physical risks. The full report can be found here.
Key Takeaways for Board Directors:
Boards of directors can expect heightened levels of engagement from both regulatory bodies and stakeholders on their adaption and resilience status and strategies. Directors should take steps to prepare for the increasing scrutiny from stakeholders as well as progress initiatives which make a meaningful impact on the resilience of their assets. Some examples of areas where directors can be on the front foot include:
- Identification of physical risks within the company’s assets and outlining a consistent, national view of physical risk within domestic operations and transboundary supply chains. AIGCC highlight a number or government and regulatory body resources that are available in certain countries (eg. Japan’s Climate Change Adaptation Information Platform (A-PLAT) ; Hong Kong’s HKMA) which directors can draw on to provide data support to quantify physical risks under different scenarios
- Identify and engage with government bodies at the national or local levels, as well as advisory groups established to support the planning and implementation of national adaptation plans (NAPs) or other climate initiatives.
- Investigate the availability of funding channels and taxonomies that are already in place to support adaptation initiatives. For example, AIGCC highlight that Indonesia and China have begun to outline action plans and implemented pilot initiatives:
- China has commenced city-level climate finance pilots across the country, establishing climate investment and financing project databases that enable public and private institutions to list adaptation project information and financing needs.
- Indonesia’s Fiscal Policy Agency under the Ministry of Finance has outlined actions to enhance regulatory frameworks to facilitate private-sector engagement and finance in adaptation planning and implementation.
- The National Institute of Urban Affairs in India and the World Resources Institute have entered a Memorandum of Understanding to establish a Project Preparation Facility that provides cities with technical assistance for developing and implementing adaption and resilience projects.
- Support initiatives which provide technical assistance to cities in developing and implementing climate-resilience projects, including climate risk assessments, feasibility studies, and the development of bankable project concepts. Through collaboration, directors may work across funding sources to help secure the necessary investments for project execution.
- Boards should recognise adaptation as a capital allocation priority. As private finance becomes increasingly necessary to build climate resilience, directors must evaluate whether enabling environments — such as policy support, accessible risk data, or effective public-private coordination — exist within their company’s sector. If these conditions are absent, boards should proactively engage and advocate for stronger government support and better institutional frameworks, particularly in emerging markets where adaptation needs are most urgent.
Why are national adaptation plans necessary?
The UN Environment Programme’s 2024 Emissions Gap Report underscores that the world is falling behind on meeting the climate goals established in the 2015 Paris Agreement, highlighting the ever pressing need to develop an adaptation plan. While keeping global warming below 1.5°C is still within reach, it demands steep emissions cuts —42% by 2030 and 57% by 2035 — to remain on course. According to recent economic modelling by the Network for Greening the Financial System (NGFS), if the current global climate trajectory persists, physical climate risks could shrink Asia’s gross domestic product by around 14% by mid-century.
Encouragingly, according to AIGCC’s latest 2025 findings, 75% of Asian investors now recognise that climate is a material financial risk. However, despite growing policy action and substantial investment in low-carbon technologies around Asia, funding for adaptation and resilience remains insufficient – according to the Asian Development Bank, it is estimated that only USD34 billion has been mobilised in the Asia-Pacific region in 2021 to 2022 – with a USD187-359 billion gap between what is allocated to adaptation per year and what is needed.
The National Adaptation Plan (NAP) process was introduced by Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in 2011 to support countries in conducting medium- and long-term adaptation planning. The NAP process helps countries identify and address their climate adaptation priorities, while building the systems and capabilities needed to integrate adaptation into national development planning, decision-making, and budgeting. It serves as a core mechanism for achieving the adaptation goals outlined in the 2015 Paris Agreement.
Investor expectations
In 2022, the AIGCC’s working group developed a set of seven investor expectations for national adaptation planning (NAP), grounded in extensive stakeholder consultation. These expectations aim to address the importance of building climate resilience, as well as the needs of investors seeking to manage physical climate risks and allocate capital effectively.
The seven investor expectations outlined on page 11 of the Financing Asia’s National Adaptation Plans report focus on the following areas:
- Outlining a consistent, national view of physical climate risk
- Basing NAPs on scenario analysis
- Identifying and prioritising vulnerable systems, groups and communities
- Ensuring corporate disclosure of physical risks
- Engaging with the private sector and financial institutions
- Inclusion of interregional effects and international cooperation on adaptation
- Including action-oriented points on implementation and financing strategies
To evaluate how national plans align with these expectations, AIGCC analysed the adaptation strategies of nine Asian markets – China, Hong Kong SAR, India, Indonesia, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Singapore, and Thailand – to assess their alignment with the seven investor expectations and sub-expectations, the assessment was made publicly available via an interactive online dashboard, which is periodically updated to reflect new developments in adaptation policies.
Amidst a mixed bag of results, several markets have implemented promising examples of best practices, particularly in collaborative initiatives such as:
- Japan’s Climate Risk Industry-Government-Academia Collaboration Network and A-PLAT data platform which aims to build partnerships across stakeholders to enhance risk information accessibility and exchange.
- China’s localised climate finance pilots which aim to mobilise financing for various adaptation projects initiated from the bottom-up by public and private institutions.
The analysis also identified significant gaps which should be addressed, including:
- The lack of accessible information on physical climate risks and its impacts on sectors.
- The lack of quantification of risk and vulnerabilities at sectoral or sub-national levels that prevent a comprehensive view of risks.
- Insufficient information about investor and private-sector consultations and channels.
- Unclear adaptation project pipelines and financing pathways to mobilise private capital in adaptation planning.
Further details on each country’s status regarding NAP submission to the UNFCC in each Asian market can be found in Table 1 (page 18), while a comparison and assessment framework of each market’s alignment with the investor expectations is provided in the assessment framework on page 19 of the Financing Asia’s National Adaptation Plans report.
Recommendations for policy makers and investors
AIGCC highlight several recommendations for policymakers and investors. For policy makers they recommend the following near-term actions:
- Enhance accessibility and clarity of NAP documentation, planning and implementation processes.
- Engage early with investors and integrate investor roles in NAP development and planning.
- Develop a visible pipeline of adaptation projects and establish policy mechanisms and instruments to mobilise private investment.
- Expand and communicate climate scenario and risk analysis.
They recommend the following actions for asset managers and owners:
- Advocate for regulatory frameworks and tools to enable investment in resilience.
- Build capacity on adaptation and resilience and integrate physical risk into portfolio strategies
Improving the detail and utility of corporate physical risk disclosures — aligned with ISSB standards — can support better scenario analysis through tools such as the NGFS Scenarios. Regional collaboration through platforms can help build interregional climate risk models and harmonise metrics, giving countries a clearer picture of shared risks. Ultimately, joint action between policymakers and investors, supported by innovation in finance and policy, is essential to scale up funding for adaptation. This approach reframes adaptation as a driver of value creation and a strategic opportunity for transformative change.