Colombia ranked first in the Global Climate and Health Alliance’s 2026 Healthy NDC Scorecard, scoring 29 of 32 points. Nigeria scored 25 and Cambodia 24. The results show a sharp divide: low- and middle-income countries dominate the highest scores, while several large emitters—including Japan, India and New Zealand—earned only two points. The scorecard evaluates what governments put in their 2035 climate plans, not whether those promises have been delivered.
What the Healthy NDC Scorecard measures
Published on October 14, 2026, the scorecard examines 132 national climate plans submitted to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change before August 1, 2026. The sample includes the European Union’s joint plan. These plans are Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), the commitments countries make under the Paris Agreement for cutting emissions and adapting to climate risks.
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
The Global Climate and Health Alliance (GCHA), a consortium of more than 300 health-professional and health civil-society organizations and networks, assesses whether each NDC:
Free tools Windows power users keep installed
One-click scans. No signup required.
- recognizes the links between climate change, air quality and population health;
- sets specific health-sector actions and describes implementation;
- includes air-pollution and black-carbon measures;
- matches health priorities with sufficiently ambitious emissions reductions and a fair-share approach;
- provides governance, monitoring and financing arrangements; and
- reports air-pollution mortality where country data are available.
The maximum score is 32. A high number means that health is integrated into the plan’s text and proposed action; it is not proof that policies are funded, implemented or improving health outcomes.
#1 Best Overall
“The Healthy NDC Scorecard enables us to evaluate how governments are considering health in their climate planning, whether this is matched by their emissions reductions ambition, and to compare intended health and climate action to actual national air pollution mortality,” said Dr Nova Tebbe, GCHA’s postdoctoral researcher and research lead.
Colombia’s 29-point lead
Colombia’s NDC links its climate objectives directly to protecting people. It frames carbon neutrality and resilience by 2050 as necessary to protect life, and calls climate change a direct threat to health, water, food, housing and peoples’ self-determination.
The plan also names concrete risks rather than treating health as a general co-benefit. It identifies malnutrition, dengue, leishmaniasis, displacement, storms, floods, droughts and forest fires. That combination—an explicit health rationale, named hazards and affected systems, and proposed climate action—helps explain Colombia’s top score.
What’s actually slowing this PC down?
Pick the symptom - the matching free tool is one click away.
Colombia is one of only five countries in the assessment with a black-carbon reduction target. The others are Cambodia, Chile, Costa Rica and Paraguay.
How countries scored
| Country or plan | Score (out of 32) | What the result indicates |
|---|---|---|
| Colombia | 29 | Highest integration of health in the assessed NDCs |
| Nigeria | 25 | Second-highest score |
| Cambodia | 24 | Third-highest score; one of five black-carbon target setters |
| Paraguay | 22 | Among the next-highest scores; black-carbon target setter |
| Timor-Leste | 22 | Among the next-highest scores |
| Japan | 2 | One of the lowest scores among major emitters |
| India | 2 | One of the lowest scores among major emitters |
| New Zealand | 2 | One of the lowest scores among major emitters |
| Republic of Korea | 4 | Low score |
| Russia | 6 | Low score |
| Brazil | 7 | Low score |
| Australia | 9 | Low score |
| China | 9 | Low score |
| United Kingdom | 9 | Low score |
Nineteen of the 20 highest-scoring countries are low- or middle-income countries. The pattern does not mean those countries have lower climate or health risks. It indicates that their submitted plans more often spell out health consequences and related actions than the plans of many wealthier, high-emitting states.
Are high-emitting countries doing enough?
On the scorecard’s evidence, several are not. Japan, India and New Zealand each received two points; the Republic of Korea received four; Russia six; Brazil seven; and Australia, China and the United Kingdom nine.
A low health-integration score does not by itself establish a country’s total emissions or health performance. It does show that the NDC gives limited attention to the scorecard’s health criteria. For large emitters, that omission matters because faster emissions cuts can deliver domestic air-quality benefits while reducing climate-driven risks beyond their borders.
GCHA’s interpretation is that the highest present and historical emitters need to mitigate fastest. It also argues that developed countries should provide finance aligned with the Paris Agreement so developing countries can carry out their plans.
Health language can coexist with weak mitigation ambition
The reverse problem also appears in the results. Indonesia scored 11, the European Union 12, South Africa 13, Türkiye 14, Canada 16 and the United Arab Emirates 19 on health-related criteria. Yet GCHA says the emissions-reduction ambition in these plans is still insufficient to prevent worsening health impacts.
This distinction is central to interpreting the ranking. A plan can describe heat, disease, air pollution or health-system needs in detail and still fail to cut emissions at the pace required to limit future exposure. The scorecard therefore compares health attention with mitigation ambition rather than treating health language as a substitute for emissions reductions.
Air pollution and the black-carbon gap
Only Cambodia, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica and Paraguay set explicit black-carbon reduction targets. Black carbon is both a powerful short-lived climate pollutant and a contributor to harmful air pollution. Its presence in an NDC can connect near-term climate action with immediate public-health gains.
Do these 3 things before closing this tab:
1Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problems2Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minute3Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsThe absence of a black-carbon target does not prove that a country has no air-quality policy. It does mean that the target is not stated in the assessed NDC. GCHA’s executive director, Dr Jeni Miller, described air-quality action as “a vital part of effective climate action,” warning that people’s health and lives are at stake with both.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.What the scores can—and cannot—tell you
They describe commitments
The scorecard evaluates the content and stated ambition of submitted NDCs. A detailed commitment may still lack a budget, enforcement, staff or reliable monitoring. Conversely, a low score does not measure every climate or clean-air policy operating outside the NDC.
They do not establish outcomes
Scores are not mortality totals, exposure measurements or proof that a country’s population is becoming healthier. The report includes country-specific air-pollution mortality rates in some entries, but those figures must be read in the context of the relevant country card rather than generalized across the ranking.
The United States entry is time-sensitive
The United States NDC was analyzed, but GCHA describes it as inactive after the U.S. withdrawal from the Paris Agreement. That status can change with future policy decisions, so the score should not be presented as a permanent measure of U.S. climate planning.
The Tool Desk
Outbyte PC Repair FREEClear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →Outbyte Driver Updater FREEScan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →What a stronger climate-and-health plan would contain
Across the scorecard’s comparison axes, a credible plan would connect six elements:
- Recognized health risks: identify specific diseases, injuries, displacement pressures and health-system vulnerabilities.
- Defined actions: assign measures to health, energy, transport, agriculture and other sectors, with responsibilities and timelines.
- Clean-air targets: include pollutants such as particulate matter and black carbon where they are relevant, alongside greenhouse-gas targets.
- Ambitious mitigation: set emissions cuts consistent with a country’s capabilities, historical responsibility and fair-share obligations.
- Implementation machinery: specify financing, governance, monitoring and public reporting.
- Outcome tracking: monitor air quality and health indicators so governments can test whether intended benefits occur.
As Dr Tebbe put it, “The human face of climate change has never been more obvious – governments must act now to integrate health.” The 2026 scorecard’s central warning is that health-centered wording is valuable, but it cannot protect people if emissions cuts remain too weak.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
