Despite record breaking temperatures and a wave of natural disasters in the first nine months of 2026 businesses are still failing to adequately address the risks posed by climate change.

New research from broker Marsh has revealed organisations are broadening and strengthening their approach to climate adaptation as their experience of extreme weather grows – but significant gaps remain in formal strategy, system-level resilience, and the translation of adaptation investment into insurance outcomes.

The warning comes in Marsh’s 2026 Climate Adaptation Survey which questioned more than 120 organisations globally around how they are responding to evolving climate risks. According to the research, 43% of respondents experienced losses and/or disruption from extreme weather in the past three years, with 60% reporting impacts from multiple perils. Compared to 2025’s results, flooding remained the leading peril (62%), while heat stress rose to second place (36%), ahead of water stress (34%) and tropical storms (25%).

“The opportunity in 2026 is to close the gap between assessment and action by linking risk intelligence to business continuity, capital planning, operational decisions, and insurance strategy,” said Amy Barnes, head of Climate and Sustainability Strategy and global head of Energy & Power, Marsh.

“Organisations are clearly moving in the right direction: they are assessing more perils, using more quantitative analysis, and looking beyond their own assets to the systems on which they depend. The next step is to turn these insights into funded, measurable adaptation strategies – and to communicate the evidence clearly so resilience investment can support better risk and insurance outcomes.”

The study found organisations are taking practical steps, particularly around business continuity and physical resilience. More than half (54%) reported improving business continuity planning, while 40% reported investing in asset engineering such as flood defenses. However, only 26% said their adaptation measures had been recognised in insurance negotiations, with 62% of respondents concerned about insurance availability and/or cost of insurance for their asset(s) worsening in the next five years.

Then ability to access insurance cover is not a driver for change the report explained.

“The research shows that the motivation for climate adaptation is mainly driven by internal and external stakeholders, and less by insurability,” it continued. “About 75% of the respondents indicate that they have little to no concerns about the lack or unaffordability of insurance at the moment. This suggests that access to insurance is not a major reason for their adaptation efforts. On average, only 5% of respondents cite access to insurance as their main motivation for investing in climate adaptation, and 10% do not see a high demand for adaptation from their insurers.

“Although access to insurance is not the main driver of the demand for adaptation, managing risks, chosen by 53% of respondents, is the most frequently cited reason for investing in climate adaptation. This motivation likely reflects the growing awareness that climate change poses systemic risks to businesses, necessitating strategic adaptation to protect assets, preserve revenue streams, and increase resilience.

“In addition to risk management, organisations are motivated by the need to protect their operations, reputation, and compliance. Awareness of possible competitive advantages (17%) and regulatory pressure (13%) are also cited as reasons for more investment in climate adaptation. Aligning insurance solutions with these broader motivations can help to improve risk transfer mechanisms and support organizations in achieving their resilience goals.”

The report stated: “Organisations are experiencing the effects of extreme weather events around the world, from wildfires in North America to flooding in Europe and tropical storms in Asia. These events not only cause disruptions but also have financial consequences.”

The survey found that the highest percentages of respondents affected by extreme weather in the past three years are in Asia (73%), followed by India, the Middle East and Africa (68%) and Canada (67%). These regional differences highlight the importance of local risk analyses and tailor-made resilience strategies.

According to the survey, 74% of respondents have experienced losses and/or disruptions to their physical assets due to extreme weather. In addition to physical risks, the research shows that these events are also increasingly affecting operational processes and personal safety. Of the respondents, 67% also report disruptions and/or losses related to business operations and people.

“The results mainly show that climate hazards pose risks that go beyond the assets themselves. The risks affect the entire network, although the impact is less significant: 35% of organisations report impacts on their customers, 32% on critical infrastructure, and 21% on resources and facilities,” Marsh added. “Because climate-related threats are broad and intertwined, it is realistic to expect that the financial damage from natural disasters will continue to increase. At the end of 2024, global insured losses from catastrophes exceeded US$100 billion for the fifth year in a row. In 2025, insurance losses are on course to exceed this amount.

“These developments highlight the urgent need for organizations to take a holistic approach to understanding the impact of losses from extreme weather events so that they can better anticipate, respond, and deploy their resources effectively.”