In 2019, a group of law students in the Pacific began asking whether governments could be held accountable under international law for their response to climate change. Six years later, in July 2025, the International Court of Justice issued an advisory opinion clarifying states’ climate obligations and responsibilities towards future generations. Young people had helped bring climate change before the world’s highest court.
Yet the money tells a different story. Between 2019 and 2021, youth-led climate justice initiatives received just 0.76% of mitigation-focused funding from some of the world’s largest climate foundations.
The contradiction is stark. Young people can influence international debates and national politics, yet struggle to secure the resources to turn their ideas into action. They are invited to conferences, consulted on policies and celebrated in public campaigns. But how much influence do they have over budgets, institutions and the decisions that determine where climate finance goes?
For Bangladesh, this is more than a question of representation. Generation Z played a defining role in reshaping Dhaka’s political landscape. As the country prepares for COP31, the challenge is to turn that civic influence into lasting institutional change.
Participation must lead to influence
Young people have spent years securing recognition within the UN climate process. YOUNGO, the official constituency for children and youth, gained full status in 2011. COP27 encouraged countries to include youth negotiators in national delegations, while COP28 established the Presidency Youth Climate Champion. At COP30 in Belém, youth consultations engaged thousands of participants.
These are worthwhile steps, but access does not guarantee influence. A conference badge cannot tell us whether young people changed a negotiating position, shaped a policy or influenced a budget. Travel costs, visa restrictions and limited observer places further disadvantage young people from least developed countries, small island developing states and climate-vulnerable communities.
The goal should be to connect participation with decisions, funding and measurable results.
Bangladesh has a foundation on which to build. Its National Adaptation Plan for 2023–2050 provides a long-term framework for climate resilience. Its NDC 3.0, submitted in 2025, includes child-sensitive targets for maintaining essential services during climate shocks. UNICEF has identified it as the first NDC globally to include youth in its measurement, reporting, and verification process.
The International Centre for Climate Change and Development (ICCCAD) at Independent University, Bangladesh, has also demonstrated what practical support can achieve. Between 2023 and 2026, its SIDA-supported CAP-RES project trained 100 youth fellows and funded 57 youth-led climate sub-projects, which together directly reached 47,795 people, nearly half of them women. Such experience shows the value of combining training, mentoring and funding with community-level action.
Still, engagement remains fragmented and often dependent on individual projects and donor support. Opportunities are concentrated in urban centres, while young people from coastal areas, haors, chars and hill districts face greater barriers. Indigenous youth, young women and persons with disabilities need more equitable access. The agenda must also extend beyond adaptation to clean energy, mitigation and green skills, which will shape future employment.
Why climate finance misses young people
The problem is not simply a shortage of money. It is also how funding is designed and distributed.
A review of 100 youth-focused climate finance initiatives by the Commonwealth Secretariat and YOUNGO, launched at COP28, found that funding was generally disbursed in small amounts and information about beneficiaries was often inadequate.
Young applicants may lack established financial systems, organisational experience or evidence of results. Funders, however, also impose complex application requirements and short funding periods that can exclude smaller organisations. Conventional lenders may consider early-stage youth enterprises too risky.
Not every climate initiative should be expected to generate revenue. Community adaptation, disaster preparedness and climate research deliver public benefits that may not produce commercial returns. They need grants and public funding, not debt. Concessional loans, guarantees and blended finance have a role where youth-led enterprises have credible business models and realistic repayment prospects.
International commitments provide an opportunity, but access remains a concern. At COP29, developed countries committed to take the lead in mobilising at least US$300 billion annually for developing countries by 2035, within a broader call to scale climate finance to US$1.3 trillion a year. COP30 called for adaptation finance to increase at least threefold by 2035.
For least developed countries, the terms matter as much as the headline figures. The Fund for Responding to Loss and Damage, for example, had around US$250 million available for its first call for proposals, against requests estimated at US$2 billion to US$3 billion.
Least developed countries have also committed, through the LDC Initiative for Effective Adaptation and Resilience, to channel 70% of climate finance to local-level action by 2030. Youth-led initiatives should be part of this effort, supported by accessible funding channels and proportionate accountability requirements.
Turning commitments into action
Bangladesh does not need an entirely new climate finance system. It needs to make existing institutions more accessible and accountable.
First, the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change should formalise youth representation in NDC 3.0 monitoring, National Adaptation Plan reviews, local climate planning and official COP delegations. Selection should be transparent and geographically representative. Institutions should report annually on which youth recommendations were adopted and explain why others were not.
Second, national financing institutions should establish accessible funding windows. Bangladesh Bank could assess how its young entrepreneurs and green finance mechanisms might support viable youth-led climate enterprises. The Bangladesh Climate Change Trust Fund, Palli Karma-Sahayak Foundation and Infrastructure Development Company Limited should create dedicated funding windows or explicitly include eligible youth-led initiatives in existing programmes.
Third, funding must match purpose. Grants should support research, community adaptation, disaster preparedness and early-stage testing. Repayable finance should be reserved for enterprises with credible cash flows. Mentoring, financial-management support and safeguards against excessive debt should accompany funding, with clear pathways for successful pilots to access further grants, public programmes or investment.
Fourth, the Finance Division and environment ministry should introduce a youth marker in annual climate budget reporting. Development partners and national financing institutions should distinguish commitments from actual disbursements. A regularly updated national mapping of youth climate organisations would help identify funding gaps and measure progress.
Fifth, international climate funds should strengthen Enhanced Direct Access, giving accredited National Implementing Entities the resources and authority to establish locally managed youth grant mechanisms. Simplified procedures should be balanced with appropriate technical support and financial oversight.
Finally, Bangladesh and the LDCs Group should use COP31 to press for an adequately resourced Action for Climate Empowerment plan that strengthens young people’s influence over climate decisions. They should also advocate for more accessible finance for locally led climate action and loss and damage, linked to clear national responsibilities and follow-up.
The opportunity in Antalya
Representation without funding leaves young people unable to act. Funding without transparent selection can reinforce existing inequalities. Both require institutions that explain how youth contributions influence decisions and what funded initiatives achieve.
Ahead of COP31 in Antalya this November, Bangladesh has an opportunity to move beyond expressions of support towards measurable commitments: Formal youth representation, accessible financing and transparent reporting. Its experience in climate planning and locally led adaptation gives it a credible basis for making that case.
Generation Z, which helped bring climate change before the world’s highest court in the Pacific and played a defining role in reshaping Dhaka’s political landscape, does not need another pavilion or another invitation to speak. It needs the authority to influence policy, the resources to put ideas into practice, and the means to hold decision-makers accountable.
Giving young people a genuine share of responsibility is not a symbolic gesture. It is a practical investment in those who will live longest with the consequences of decisions made today.
------------------------------------------------------------
Arif M Faisal is the Director of ICCCAD at IUB. The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of any affiliated organization