In the mountainous regions of Phoenix, Arizona, a 10-year-old boy collapses during a family hike as temperatures soar to 113°F (45°C). In the sweltering streets of Karachi, Pakistan, toddlers suffer heatstroke inside homes without cooling. In Nairobi, Kenya, floods wash away classrooms and futures alike, while children in Norfolk, England, endure the emotional turmoil of displacement as coastal erosion claims their homes. These scenarios are not isolated tragedies. They are globally interconnected symptoms of a single, escalating crisis that is profoundly reshaping the landscape of childhood. Its name is climate change.

Despite being the least responsible for climate change, children bear its impacts more acutely than any other population. Yet, their evident vulnerability is less prioritized in climate policy and discourse. This neglect can be understood through the lens of framing. Terms like climate and health or climate and energy are common collocations in policy discussions, while the pairing of climate change and childhood development appears less frequently. Although aspects of childhood are subsumed under these broader categories, such framing obscures children’s unique developmental, emotional, and physiological vulnerability.

This obscurity is dangerous for three key reasons: (a) it prevents us from fully grasping the extent to which the future of our youngest generation is at risk; (b) it hinders the creation of targeted strategies that respond to the intersection of climate change and childhood development across micro, meso, and macro levels; and (c) it risks stifling critical knowledge that could inform cross-sector solutions and galvanize meaningful advocacy.

In light of these risks, it becomes clear that any climate adaptation effort that excludes children is not only incomplete, it is a failure to an entire generation. This calls for a reexamination of current approaches to climate adaptation, prioritizing children in the discourse. To meaningfully inform this call, I draw upon academic research and global reports on the implications of climate change for children, to identify current protective measures, alongside persistent barriers to sustainability, and propose child-oriented solutions to combat a warming world. The aim is to catalyze child-focused actions that lead to lasting change.

How does climate change affect young children today?

According to the 2024 State of the World’s Children report by UNICEF, children today are navigating a more unpredictable and hazardous environment than any previous generation. Their growing vulnerability stems from the world’s failure to stay on track to reach net-zero emissions by 2050. Empirical studies show that as climate destabilization intensifies, biodiversity collapses, and pollution spreads, children face a wide spectrum of health risks that may affect their lifelong well-being.

Zhiwei Xu of Queensland University of Technology, Australia, outlines multiple pathways leading to these health risks. They include increased air pollution, more frequent and severe weather-related disasters, intensified heat waves, reduced water quality and availability, food insecurity, and heightened exposure to toxic substances. The adverse effects of these on children include elevated risks of mental health disorders, malnutrition, infectious diseases, allergic conditions, and respiratory illnesses.

Laura Anderko of Georgetown University, Washington, corroborates Xu’s findings and expands them by identifying additional risks such as low birth weight and the spread of vector-borne diseases linked to rising sea levels and elevated carbon dioxide levels. These outcomes are unlikely to shift, as UNICEF projects that by 2050, over two billion children will face escalating climate impacts, including more frequent and intense heatwaves.

Beyond its health consequences, climate change also produces far-reaching social impacts that directly or indirectly affect children’s well-being. One particularly troubling phenomenon is climate gentrification—a process in which wealthier individuals or developers displace lower-income communities by acquiring land that is less vulnerable to climate risks. As a relatively new and evolving concept in both scholarship and practice, climate gentrification is interpreted variably, with some developers viewing it as redevelopment.

However, as emphasized in an insightful study by Mia Matteucci of Colorado College, Colorado Springs, this perspective overlooks the harmful social consequences that often accompany such change. Unlike inclusive redevelopment that strengthens existing communities, climate gentrification frequently leads to rising housing costs, forced evictions, and the erosion of long-standing neighborhood ties—particularly among low-income families.

For children, such disruptions are particularly destabilizing, as housing insecurity, school displacement, and loss of social networks are linked to developmental and emotional instability. Moreover, families pushed into more climate-vulnerable areas due to affordability constraints may face compounded risks, intensifying social and environmental inequities across generations. The health and social disruptions of climate change highlight the urgent need for targeted and systemic responses that protect children.

Are current measures sufficiently protecting young children?

Current efforts to protect children from climate change focus on strengthening essential services, reducing emissions, advancing climate education, and supporting child-centered disaster responses. Key actions include climate-resilient infrastructure in schools and health centers, integrating child health data into risk assessments, and safeguarding access to clean water, nutrition, and mental health care during crises. 

UNICEF, for example, incorporated drone training and early warning systems into disaster risk reduction (DRR) in Mozambique after Cyclone Idai. Similarly, WHO has worked to embed child health in climate policies and generate evidence on climate-related risks to children’s well-being. While these efforts are commendable and increasingly child-focused, gaps remain in coordinating and scaling long-term resilience strategies due to:

1. Limited integration of child-specific needs in national climate planning and emergency preparedness, driven by adult-centric frameworks.

2. Insufficient funding and political will to elevate early childhood in broader climate adaptation agendas.

3. Fragmented data systems that obscure children’s vulnerabilities across ages, sectors, and regions.

4. Minimal inclusion of children, caregivers, and early childhood experts in policy design processes.

5. Short-term, donor-driven funding that undermines sustained, community-based resilience building.

New steps: centering children in climate action

As climate risks intensify, safeguarding children requires more than reactive measures; it calls for integrative strategies that elevate their needs, voices, and rights within climate action frameworks. Some key considerations for achieving this include:

1. Building collaborative platforms that bring together early childhood experts, climate scientists, educators, 

and community leaders to inform policy and action.

2. Developing open-access tools to translate research on children’s climate experiences into actionable, evidence-based interventions.

3. Creating child-specific metrics that capture developmental and educational impacts within climate risk assessments.

4. Engaging children, especially those from frontline communities, in climate decision-making using age-appropriate approaches.

5. Securing long-term funding to support cross-sector research connecting early childhood development with climate risks.