Global agreements on climate change—such as the UNFCCC, the Kyoto Protocol, and the Paris Agreement—recognize both the vulnerability of certain populations and broader human rights obligations of participating countries. Environmental hazards affect everyone in society. However, pre-existing discrimination, exclusion, and marginalization can amplify harms and risks for specific groups, including LGBT people.
A new report by the Williams Institute at UCLA School of Law finds that these agreements reflect existing patterns of inequality, shaping which populations are recognized as vulnerable and therefore prioritized in policymaking, planning, and resource distribution. While 85% of countries participating in the Paris Agreement include at least one mention of community vulnerability in their five-year climate action plans (known as Nationally Determined Contributions or NDCs), groups not explicitly named in the agreement are rarely recognized. Only 8% of countries mention LGBT and gender-diverse communities, which the agreement does not explicitly include.
“Aid policies that exclude LGBT people and families can have a devastating impact on their health and well-being,” said study author Victor Madrigal-Borloz, Distinguished Visiting Scholar at the Williams Institute and UN Independent Expert on SOGI from 2018 to 2023. “Exclusion limits access to life-saving information, interrupts essential health care, increases housing insecurity, disrupts education, and creates a barrier to jobs and recovery. These vulnerabilities heighten the risk of displacement and violence during emergencies, especially for transgender people without legal recognition.”
Latin America and the Caribbean lead regionally in LGBT inclusion in NDCs, with 24% of countries recognizing LGBT people or gender diversity. In Eastern Europe, no countries explicitly mention LGBT individuals.
Despite widespread exclusion from global climate change efforts, some LGBT-inclusive practices are beginning to appear. A small number of countries have started recognizing LGBT communities within their National Adaptation Plans, country-specific climate strategies. For example, Bangladesh has begun to include LGBT individuals in adaptation plans, ensuring their participation, access to healthcare, and gender-responsive budgeting.
The report provides recommendations to address the exclusion: better data collection on LGBT populations, explicit recognition of LGBT people in NDCs, and nondiscrimination protections in housing and relocation protocols. It also urges that access to HIV and gender-affirming health care be guaranteed during emergencies, and that resources be directed to LGBT communities in climate planning and response.
“Failing to include LGBT individuals in climate plans is not only a policy gap and a breach of international human rights law. It also highlights the systemic vulnerabilities that LGBT people face every day worldwide, which climate change will worsen,” said Madrigal-Borloz.