Climate change is no longer a distant threat – it is intensifying disasters today. Storms are stronger, floods more damaging, heatwaves longer and deadlier, and droughts and wildfires are reshaping landscapes and livelihoods. Sea-level rise is amplifying coastal erosion and flooding, while for urban populations risks are exacerbated by the heat-island effect and air pollution. This year’s Green Technology Book is concerned with climate-induced disasters. Although these cannot be precisely defined, we adhere to the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDDR) definition of a disaster as being a major disruption to economic, material and human conditions, including societal functions.
More than four in five disasters recorded worldwide have been driven by climate and weather extremes
To put this into numbers, over the past two decades, more than four in five disasters recorded worldwide have been driven by climate and weather extremes (
Disasters have also become more frequent. Fewer than 50 disasters were recorded in 1950, but since 2000, the world has faced 300 to 500 climate-related disasters every year (
Climate change spares no one, striking wealthy and poor communities alike. Climate-related disasters have affected billions of people and caused trillions of dollars in economic losses. Yet its harshest impacts fall on the most vulnerable. Those living in informal settlements, low-income rural areas or undergoing protracted displacement, bear the greatest burden, having fewer safety nets and less resilient infrastructure. These events not only destroy lives and assets; they exacerbate food insecurity, strain health systems and destabilize fragile economies.
This rapidly changing situation is outstripping the capacity of traditional disaster management. Historical baselines no longer predict future risks reliably, and formerly “once-in-a-century” events now occur much more frequently. This volatility creates an urgent need for new technologies, tools and approaches. Technologies that can improve forecasting, accelerate response, rapidly protect infrastructure, and ensure aid reaches those who need it most are more essential than ever.
Historical baselines no longer predict future risks reliably, and formerly “once-in-a-century” events now occur much more frequently.
The good news is that these technologies are available across all disaster contexts globally, and are reshaping how societies anticipate, endure and recover from disasters in a changing climate. From satellites that forecast cyclones and heatwaves, to artificial intelligence (AI) systems that direct relief supplies, to modular shelters, innovation is moving disaster management from reactive crisis response toward anticipatory resilience. Yet, technology alone is not a silver bullet. Its potential can only be realized when well adapted to the local context and combined with inclusive design, ethical safeguards and accountability to the most vulnerable.
Technology and the Sendai Framework for disaster risk reduction and response
The Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030 highlights the central role of technology across all phases of disaster management. Its emphasis is strongest on risk reduction, promoting hazard monitoring and forecasting systems, early warning technologies, robust data platforms, and geospatial tools that enable governments to anticipate and mitigate risks before they escalate (
However, several of the Sendai Framework’s priorities also directly inform disaster response technologies. The Framework stresses the need for resilient communications infrastructure to ensure continuity during a disaster, real-time monitoring and data systems to guide emergency operations, and earth observation and modelling tools for making rapid impact assessments. It underscores the importance of technology transfer and capacity building, so that even in disaster contexts personnel can operate such systems. Although the Framework is not response-oriented by design, it does establish a foundation for understanding how technologies can enable faster and better coordinated and informed disaster response.
The Framework’s Target G aims to increase the availability and accessibility of early warning systems and disaster risk information. Since 2015, many countries have expanded their multi-hazard early warning system (MHEWS) coverage, with 113 countries reporting having such a system in 2023, up from 54 in 2015. Figure 1.1 shows the number of countries reporting the existence of an MHEWS from 2015 to 2023. Progress has also been made in risk information, with 103 countries producing assessments, but only 69 make this information accessible. And gaps remain in the least developed countries (LDCs) and Small Island Developing States (SIDS), where many systems still do not reach or are not trusted by vulnerable communities. Figure 1.2 shows the number of LDCs, landlocked developing countries (LLDCs) and SIDS reporting the existence of a MHEWS. Access to MHEWSs remains limited, with only 49 percent of LDCs, 63 percent of LLDCs, and 38 percent of SIDS having coverage, underscoring the urgent need to close resilience gaps (
Box 1.1 highlights the heightened disaster risks faced by LDCs, LLDCs, and SIDS, and the key technological and financial challenges they encounter in effective disaster risk reduction.
LDCs, LLDCs and SIDS face disproportionate disaster risks. Between 2014 and 2023, annual disaster mortality rates averaged 1.97 per 100,000 in LDCs and 2.43 in LLDCs, compared with 0.79 globally. Moreover, LLDCs reported 3,126 disaster-affected people per 100,000 of the population – 54 percent above the global average. Economically, LDCs accounted for 10.4 percent of global disaster losses, despite accounting for only 1.06 percent of global GDP, and LLDCs 5.6 percent of losses, with 1 percent of GDP.
SIDS face acute technology challenges in disaster risk reduction, needing stronger monitoring and forecasting systems, expanded observation networks, resilient telecommunications, and better data tools. Progress is hindered by limited financing, high costs and rapid equipment obsolescence. Gaps persist in digitization, down-scaled climate data, risk mapping, and applying forecasts to sectors like agriculture, water and urban planning. Reliable early warning systems are vital as climate change continues to drive more severe weather. Additional barriers include donor dependence, procurement delays, poor asset maintenance, reliance on regional hubs, connectivity issues, equipment upkeep in remote areas, and staff shortages. To align with the Sendai Framework, SIDS must secure sustainable financing, build local data and technology capacity, and strengthen resilient, interoperable systems for communication and early warning. Source: (
Financing disaster response and resilience
Recent reports by the UNDRR and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) make clear that the financial impacts of disasters are growing (both direct and indirect damage). Whereas annual direct losses averaged USD 70–80 billion between 1970 and 2000, this figure surged to USD 180–200 billion per year from 2001 to 2020. Current disaster reporting significantly underestimates the full economic, social and environmental costs; and when indirect impacts like human displacement, ecosystem loss, and climate-related risks are included, total disaster losses exceed the reported figures (
Much of disaster management and recovery expenditure is dispersed across multiple national ministries and agencies, making it difficult to capture a complete, aggregated picture. Funding for response and proactive response technologies (e.g., early warning, impact assessment), is often ad hoc, reactive and not well-prepared (
Whk annual direct losses averaged USD 70–80 billion between 1970 and 2000, this figure surged to USD 180–200 billion per year from 2001 to 2020
International and multilateral mechanisms, such as the World Bank’s Immediate Response Mechanism, allows countries to access up to 5 percent of their undisbursed investment project balances following a crisis, facilitating rapid funding for emergency response. The United Nations Central Emergency Response Fund (CERF) was established by the UN General Assembly to deliver fast funding for crises worldwide, providing relief for emergencies not to have received sufficient funding through other channels. And the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) Disaster Response Emergency Fund (DREF) is a central fund that releases funds rapidly for immediate disaster response, with requests approved within 24 hours and disbursed in under 72 hours.
Philanthropic and private-sector contributions, such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, provide essential funding for immediate relief (shelter, food, water, medical care and cash-for-work), with the Center for Disaster Philanthropy reporting USD 1.7 billion in total given for disaster relief in 2022 (
Catastrophe Bonds (Cat Bonds) are issued to countries in order to transfer disaster risk to international capital markets. When a disaster occurs, the funds are used for response and recovery. Catastrophe bonds and other mechanisms are increasingly capable of integrating advanced risk modelling using Earth observation data and big data analytics.
At a national level, a major disaster can significantly strain public finances. Technology can play a critical role in supporting public financial management by improving risk assessment and forecasting, and allowing governments to evaluate fiscal exposure, select cost-effective risk reduction measures and leverage insurance, reinsurance and capital markets (
Investing in future resilience: financing disaster risk reduction
Research shows disaster losses far exceed the costs of disaster risk reduction (DRR), with resilience investments yielding large returns that can be up to 300 percent for droughts, 1,200 percent for storms in sub-Saharan Africa, and 100–900 percent for certain climate adaptation measures. Yet financing remains very low. Between 2019–2023, only 1 percent of total official development assistance (ODA) was classified as DRR, and disaster prevention/preparedness made up just 3.3 percent of humanitarian aid (down from 3.6 percent in 2015–2018) (
Between 2018 and 2022, global climate adaptation finance increasingly supported disaster risk reduction, with cross-sectoral projects that included policy support, capacity building and disaster management accounting for 36 percent of flows (
Households and venture capital (VC) also contribute to disaster-related adaptation. Households invest USD 48–61 billion annually in products such as flood infrastructure, resilient building materials and cooling systems, while at least USD 6.3 billion is spent in VC investments (mainly in agriculture, forestry, and other land use) (
In 2024, over 300 million people required humanitarian assistance, a figure expected to climb to 340 million in 2025. Yet global response funding was insufficient and just USD 22.6 billion of the USD 49 billion required was met (
Humanitarian disaster risk finance is evolving rapidly, with increasing numbers and types of mechanisms available. Global mechanisms have historically dominated, with pooled funds providing predictable grants and loans when disasters struck, including global pooled funds (approximately USD 1 billion), the World Bank’s International Development Association Catastrophe Risk Window (approximately USD 2.5 billion), USAID’s Bill Emerson Humanitarian Trust (USD 280 million) and the World Food Programme’s Global Commodity Management Facility (USD 950 million) (
In 2024, over 300 million people required humanitarian assistance, a figure expected to climb to 340 million in 2025
At the national level, sovereign disaster risk finance is evolving beyond traditional contingency funds. Governments are implementing insurance through regional pools or private partnerships, and credit lines like the World Bank Catastrophe Deferred Drawdown Option. United Nations country-based pooled funds provide rapid financing in a protracted crisis, while networks such as the Start Network enable non-governmental organizations to coordinate risk analysis, undertake contingency planning, and disburse locally led funds. Local and community-level mechanisms are expanding, though more slowly than global mechanisms, and remain underrepresented both in terms of scale as well as visibility.
Many mechanisms now have either hard, that is, objective triggers based on hazard forecasts or indices and soft ones based on declarations or requests. These enable earlier action. Forecast-based procurement and supply chain finance are also being used, such as ordering or pre-positioning food ahead of an anticipated crisis. Most mechanisms trigger relatively modest payouts (tens or hundreds of thousands of US dollars) most frequently, whereas larger sums are reserved for crises that are more severe and less frequent. Pre-arranged finance typically covers only a small proportion (2–3 percent) of total needs in a major disaster.
Humanitarian disaster risk finance falls into two broad categories. Some mechanisms are hazard-specific, covering floods, droughts or storms, or else linked to food security early warning systems such as FEWS NET or Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC). Others are more open, covering either multiple or all hazards (
Best practice involves risk-layering. This entails combining cheaper sources, like budget reserves or contingency funds, for frequent, small-scale risks with more expensive tools, like insurance and parametric risk transfers for rare, large-scale shocks (
Drought has the highest number of mechanisms that involve pre-arranged finance
With regard to financial and insurance mechanisms, uptake in vulnerable countries is low due to barriers such as cost, risk, lack of data and limited regulatory and institutional capacities (
The role of emerging technologies
In previous editions of the Green Technology Book, we increasingly emphasized how climate technologies often bridge the divide between adaptation and mitigation. In this 2025 edition, technologies for disaster response are almost exclusively directly related to adaptation. This is hardly surprising since disasters are the direct consequence of climate change, which we have not been able to mitigate and hence avoid. They encapsulate the extreme effects of climate change, and therefore require very different responses to prevent human suffering, infrastructure loss, and economic and ecosystem damage. Here the focus is mainly on those technologies that address the immediate impact of disasters on human populations, though also included are some technologies that target preparedness and resilience building. All, however, are related to climate change adaptation rather than mitigation.
Technologies for disaster response are almost exclusively directly related to adaptation
The digital transformation – driven by explosive growth in big data, advanced analytics and AI, and widespread internet and smartphone use – offers major opportunities for disaster and climate risk management (
Earth observation has become cheaper and more precise, with high-resolution satellites, LiDAR and radar providing detailed, near-real-time imaging, while drones (i.e., unmanned arial vehicles (UAVs)) are significantly expanding coverage. Street-level imagery, affordable cameras and crowdsourced data fill gaps in mapping infrastructure, while connected devices and 5 G networks generate large amounts of sensor data. Social media provides real-time updates during disasters. These data sources are increasingly analyzed through cloud computing, big data analytics, AI, and machine learning, which enable descriptive and predictive insights. The spread of broadband, smartphones and mobile apps is transforming disaster communication, making information more accessible, timely and interactive. Together, these innovations are reshaping disaster preparedness, response, and financial risk management (
Emerging technologies are enhancing how hazards, exposure and vulnerabilities are measured and understood. Traditional historical data, field surveys and engineering studies have often struggled to capture evolving threats, changing land use and structural resilience, especially in areas with data gaps (
Emerging technologies are enhancing how hazards, exposure and vulnerabilities are measured and understood
These technologies also accelerate the generation of disaster impact assessments and improve emergency response. Cloud-based mobile applications allow rapid, field-level damage reporting. High-resolution satellite imagery, supplemented by drones, street-level imagery, connected sensors and crowdsourced data, provides near-real-time assessments of affected areas, infrastructure and power disruption. Advanced analytics and AI detect changes in imagery, map impacts quickly, and process social media posts, so as to identify those in need of rescue. Integrated platforms now combine multiple data sources to deliver comprehensive assessments that improve preparedness, response and recovery (
Patent trends in disaster response technologies
The global incident and emergency management market is projected to grow in size from USD 137.45 billion in 2024 to USD 196.20 billion by 2030, at a CAGR of 6.1 percent during the forecast period (
Specific technologies undergoing patent activity include AI-powered disaster prediction, drone-mounted cameras for monitoring and thermal imaging, personal transponders for tracking individuals during an emergency and robotics for search and rescue operations in hazardous environments where human presence is limited. These technologies enhance the efficiency and safety of disaster response teams. Innovations in communication technologies, such as satellite communications, portable cell towers and mobile applications for direct alerts to emergency services, are also improving connectivity in disaster-affected areas. Recent patents reveal a strong trend toward integrating automation, connectivity and data-driven intelligence, with a growing emphasis on multi-functional platforms that combine hazard monitoring, situational analysis and operational coordination. Together, these developments reflect a shift toward faster and more integrated disaster response solutions that prioritize resource allocation, reduce response times and improve the safety of affected populations.
Globally, patenting for disaster response technologies is growing rapidly, driven by innovations in digital technologies
Patent activity around drones for disaster response has grown rapidly over the past decade, led by those countries with a strong UAV industry such as the United States, China, Japan, the Republic of Korea and Israel. In the United States, Google Patents lists filings such as US20200031438A1 for autonomous search-and-rescue drones and US11727817B2 for UAV medical and emergency delivery systems. Chinese companies, particularly DJI, hold broad patent portfolios, including rescue UAVs such as drowning-response drones (US11840363B1, Google Patents). Japan and the Republic of Korea have emphasized UAV communications relay systems for disaster zones (
Across these filings, common themes include UAVs serving as temporary base stations when ground networks fail, drones with multi-sensor payloads (thermal, multispectral, ultra-wide band (UWB)) for locating survivors, and automated dispatch systems integrated with vehicles or control centers. Examples include US11250262B2 for wildfire surveillance UAVs with multispectral sensors and US2024/0241520A1 from General Motors, which patents a vehicle-launched emergency drone (
Modern early warning systems for disasters, floods and hurricanes, and other environmental hazards leverage a combination of real-time sensors, predictive analytics and automated communication channels to detect and respond to emerging threats. These systems typically gather data from IoT devices, satellites or ground-based sensors, process it using algorithms, and issue alerts to authorities, organizations and affected communities. Over time, patents in this space increasingly reflect integration with cloud computing, AI and mobile communication, highlighting a broader trend toward multi-hazard platforms that monitor conditions and forecast potential disasters to guide decision-making in increasingly complex situations.
As discussed in the wildland fire chapter, patent activity in forest fire technologies has also surged over the past decade, showing strong growth within the last five years. Countries like the Russian Federation, Australia, Spain and Portugal stand out for innovation, particularly in AI- and drone-based fire detection and management. Most patents in this field focus on extinguishing technologies, while prevention, protective equipment, and especially post-fire restoration, remain underdeveloped (