Zimpapers Logo

Jeffrey Gogo Climate Story
Zimbabwe is now on the road to formulating a National Climate Policy, but the country is being asked to think clearly whether a climate policy is the correct decision as opposed to a policy on climate change proper. Although the NEP will include fundamental aspects of climate change response, experts attending

the Environment Ministry’s climate policy inception workshop in Harare last week quipped: “Should this be a climate policy or climate change policy?”

This was a question far above semantics. The underlying argument being the policy was prompted by, and a direct reaction to climate change, a dangerous phenomenon birthed through historic and present human interference with the natural climate system.

In the absence of human-sponsored climatic changes, would a policy have been necessary? If so, why didn’t it come much earlier, say 30 years ago?

Dr Leonard Unganai, who in recent years has successfully spearheaded a pioneering adaptation project in Chiredzi jointly implemented by the UN Development Programme and Government, wanted clarity on the decision for a climate policy, and not climate change policy.

This could be confusing, he said, having a climate policy that attempts to address meteorology and climate change simultaneously.

“All along, stakeholders have been working under the impression they are creating a climate change policy,” Dr Unganai said in a separate interview.

Professor Sarah Feresu of the Institute of Environmental Studies, lead consultants in the policy making process, picked on Dr Unganai’s submissions, pressing for an answer from Mr Prince Mupazviriho, permanent secretary in the Environment, Water and Climate Ministry.

And the responses from Mr Mupazviriho, supported by Meteorological Services Department director Dr Amos Makarau were neither here nor there.

The climate system has always been changing, Dr Makarau emphasised, and “we are talking about the whole domain of the climate system”, from weather, climate variability, climate change, etc.

Therefore, it is unreasonable to design a specific policy aimed at tackling climate change, he said. That climate policy/climate change policy debate was virtually left hanging.

An interjectory voice from the floor called for a caucus to investigate this issue deeper. And attention shifted. But not before Mr Mupazviriho’s response.

“It has been clearly demonstrated that what is affecting us here is not necessarily as a result of human factors happening in Zimbabwe,” the permanent secretary said.

“It is a global issue. What happens somewhere is going to affect us in the next decade or decades to come. So if you understand that, if you have got an awareness of that, you are then able to say ‘what is it we need to do as Zimbabwe?’

“So you come up with a policy which facilitates your ability to respond to future changes in the climate. You cannot come up with mitigation strategies when you are not familiar with what is happening in the area of climate.

“That’s the reason it has to be a climate policy, looking at all these scenarios. The climate policy influences whatever response strategy we can come up with.”

Perhaps it’s not that important. After all, the National Climate Policy will mainstream climate change into national budgetary and developmental processes. That’s what the climate change policy would have done, isn’t it? Albeit, at a different scale.

“May be the climate policy would be the best thing at this stage,” Dr Unganai later submitted.

But it is stimulating debate, the kind critically vital to developing a robust and comprehensive climate policy. The policy will operationalise the already concluded National Climate Change Response Strategy.

Until now, Zimbabwe’s response to climate problems have remained largely fragmented and ineffective.

There is no specific budgeting towards climate change in the National Budget, even though funds may be allocated to other fields that indirectly address the climate challenge, such as irrigation.

This is at a time the country faces increasing risk from climate- linked events such as floods, tropical storms or droughts.

New Hope

Now, the climate policy seeks to stop all that, bringing new hope to communities that have so far remained in the front lines of climate impacts.

The Environment Ministry’s two-day workshop last week interrogated the risks, opportunities and possible implications for policy in the areas of agriculture, water, transport and energy.

In farming, permanent secretary for Agriculture Mr Ringson Chitsiko said “climate change can be a spoiler” and outlined six areas he would like to see the national climate policy tackling.

These include implementation of strong adaptation strategies through promoting the planting of drought tolerant crop varieties, indigenous crop varieties and local livestock production.

Research into new hybrid crop varieties should be strengthened, Mr Chitsiko said, and added to that the need to increase the area under irrigation and adoption of water efficient irrigation systems such as drip.

The permanent secretary wants to see stronger agriculture education in the national curriculum, and the policy to clearly define the role of agriculture in climate change mitigation. Disaster risk and management, particularly early warning systems, should be strengthened.

Agriculture is one of the key sectors to be hardest hit by climate change, if temperature rise is not contained to a maximum 2 degrees Celsius. Crop yields are expected to decline by between 30 and 50 percent by 2030, according to latest estimates from the UN panel on climate change.

Permanent secretary for the Transport Ministry Mr Munesushe Munodawafa agreed to consider the potential for sustainable transport to contribute to poverty alleviation, sustainable urbanisation and sustainable growth, and to promote the integration of sustainable transport in national systems.

For example, he said the bulk of energy to be used at the new airport in Victoria Falls, which is currently being expanded to accommodate bigger planes, will be solar. Hydro and thermal will back up.

Though invited, the permanent secretary from the two key ministries of Local Government and that of Energy and Power Development failed to attend.

Worldwide, energy is the biggest polluting sector responsible for driving climate change, and this is where the most radical reforms to cut emmissions are needed.

At the last count in 2000, Zimbabwe produced over 25 000 Gigagrams of carbon dioxide emissions (CO2), the most potent global warming-causing gas, according to the Second National Communication report.

Most of the emissions occurred in the energy industry where activities such fuel combustion contributed 68 percent to the national total. Agriculture produced 22,4 percent of CO2, industry 5,2 percent and waste 3,9 percent.

The first draft of the National Climate Policy is expected to be ready by April-end 2015, and the final document four months later. That means climate change could enter Government’s budgets, usually delivered in every November, a year from now. It’s a short wait given the emptiness of the past.

God is faithful.

[email protected]