British multinational bank Barclays has officially withdrawn from the Net Zero Banking Alliance (NZBA), a United Nations-backed coalition of financial institutions committed to aligning their portfolios with global climate goals. The move follows a series of similar exits by major companies, including HSBC, all major banks in the US and Canada, and financial institutions in Japan and Australia, raising urgent questions about the future of coordinated climate finance and what it means for emerging economies in Africa in particular.
In a statement, Barclays said the decision was made because the partnership itself had become less relevant. “With most of the global banks exiting, the organization no longer has the members to support the transition.”
The bank reaffirmed its commitment to net zero by 2050 and said it remained committed to mobilizing $1 trillion in sustainable and transition finance by 2030. It also reported generating £500 million (US$660 million) in revenue from green and transition finance activities in 2024, and has so far committed $220 billion towards its long-term goals.
Also read: Horn of Africa leaders drive regional digital integration to foster growth and stability
For many climate finance watchers, the message is clear. The era of large-scale, voluntary collaboration among the world’s banks to tackle climate change is under stress. Established in 2021, the NZBA aims to bring banks in line with the Paris Agreement and support the decarbonisation of lending and investment while funding clean energy and climate resilience. This was particularly important for Africa, where many governments and project developers rely on private capital to fill climate adaptation and infrastructure gaps.
Now, with its most powerful member withdrawing, the alliance risks losing credibility and Africa risks losing a vital bridge to sustainable finance.
Barclays’ withdrawal is the latest sign that political intervention in climate finance is beginning to reshape the global financial union. In the United States, conservative lawmakers increasingly view climate-smart investing as a form of political overreach. Financial institutions are under legal and commercial pressure to withdraw from ESG-related agreements, and some states are threatening to exclude companies from public contracts if they maintain their climate-related commitments.
This pressure is causing ripple effects across the global banking sector. And while most of this backlash is concentrated in the Global North, its effects are being felt across the Global South, especially in Africa, where many countries have the least responsibility for global emissions but face the harshest climate impacts.
From Kenya’s drought-prone northern counties to Mozambique’s cyclone-prone coastlines, climate-resilient infrastructure and energy transitions will not happen without access to reliable and affordable finance. The NZBA at least provided a framework for channeling that money. Without it, or without reliable alternatives, African governments, businesses and communities could face fewer options and higher costs.
Barclays insists it will continue to support clean energy and transition technologies. But the deal’s withdrawal also highlights the limits of relying on voluntary global alliances to fund Africa’s green transformation. These frameworks remain subject to political cycles and commercial changes, and the continent’s long-term needs are rarely prioritized.
Also read: Uasin Gishu County looks to Chinese coffee technology as Africa rethinks agricultural innovation
The challenge now for Africa is not just how to respond, but how to adapt. The continent needs to invest in regional climate finance mechanisms that are resilient to global uncertainties. This could include strengthening institutions like the African Development Bank’s climate change focal point, expanding the green bond market, and improving credit access for local climate innovators and renewable energy developers.
It also means building trust and transparency in regional systems, ensuring that African financial institutions are not just passive recipients of climate capital, but are actively designing how it is raised, priced and deployed.
Barclays’ decision to leave the Net Zero Banking Alliance is not just a restructuring of global finance, it is also a wake-up call. As big banks retreat from collective responsibility, cracks are beginning to appear in global climate cooperation. For Africa, the risks are particularly high.
Participation in international alliances remains important, but the continent needs to reduce its dependence on weak external frameworks. It is now more urgent than ever to build a national climate finance system that is rooted in African realities and governed by African priorities.
