Jeffrey Gogo Climate
ZIMBABWE plans to set up a National Climate Fund to tackle the deadly escalating impacts of climate change. This is important to achieving the desired level of mitigatory or adaptive success at the community and national levels.

It follows stronger calls during the ongoing national climate policy-making process for the pooling of finances into a common Fund to address specific climate issues.

More than likely, the proposed climate fund will seek capitalisation of up to $10 billion in line with recommendations from the completed National Climate Change Response Strategy (NCCRS).

Officials are still working out details of the plan. “Currently there have been no discussions in terms of levels of capitalisation and the possible seed capital,” said Veronica Gundu, spokesperson, Environment, Water and Climate Ministry.

“However, this can be guided by the short-term to long-term strategies highlighted in the NCCRS…”

Zimbabwe is keen to build resilience against a spat of dangerous climate hazards ranging from droughts, floods and erratic rainfall, which have increased in frequency and extremity.

To do so, the country has drawn up a climate change strategy, now awaiting the National Climate Policy before it enters into force. The climate policy should be completed by August.

There is no clear direction yet as to the structure that the climate fund will take nor as how it will be managed. That’s what the climate policy will define, says Ms Gundu.

However, and for obvious reasons, Government will be the first port of call when start-up capital is needed, whatever the amount may be.

“Upon finalisation of the climate policy, a proposal would be submitted to the Government to provide seed capital for the Fund…” said Gundu on Wednesday, by email.

Now, how will Government raise the initial capital, given it is pressed for cash and that the bulk of the funding for the NCCRS and the National Climate Policy came from development agencies?

Are we likely to see a new round of compulsory taxes for the worker, already burdened by multiple levies?

That we do not know and neither does Ms Gundu, at least for now. “The Government will provide guidance on the source of funds,” she said.

“However, capitalisation of the Fund could use a bi-pronged approach were local funding would be mobilised from compliance tax regimes and the global financial mechanisms like the Green Climate Fund (GCF)…and other bilateral engagements.”

With the current extent of politicking around global climate finance, governments looking for swift solutions shouldn’t be putting too much faith into such mechanisms as the GCF.

Those obliged to pay for the climate damage they have caused worldwide are unwilling to do so. The GCF remains a fund of pledges, nothing tangible, with $10 billion-worth of such commitments made by rich countries to date.

The promise of $100 billion per year until 2020 has been sorely neglected, unfulfilled.

Carbon Tax Head-start

Now, using funds generated locally, Zimbabwe’s proposed climate fund may have a head-start. Through carbon tax-a levy against the polluting energy and automotive industries – the country is already collecting over $30 million each year.

Treasury currently uses that money for anything, including projects which may potentially undermine climate efforts. The carbon tax earnings are not much, but can be a good start.

These should now be ring-fenced as seed capital for the climate fund. As Ms Gundu already alluded, “compliance tax regimes” will provide additional liquidity.

It is clear, however, to urgently tackle the climate change problem in Zimbabwe, there is greater need for funding and integrated policy making across the currently unrelated policy agendas of water pollution, waste management, deforestation and land degradation.

Some lessons can be learnt here from the HIV and AIDS domestic funding model.

In the absence of reliable external funding, the country has reported far greater success on HIV and AIDS from internal funding than those countries receiving foreign support, with the prevalence rate falling to 15 percent in 2013 from 60 percent 15 years earlier.

HIV and AIDS is no longer a death sentence as was commonly the case before 2000.

Deaths have declined to 52 000 per year in 2013 from 156 000 per year in 2004, as more people went on anti-retroviral treatment.

Climate linked droughts may cause severe food shortages, loss of human life, livestock and wildlife as well as significant financial losses from damaged or lost private and public property.

There is need to understand the innovative techniques that mobilised investment into the HIV and AIDS crusade, particularly the roles played by Government and the private/NGO sector, from which the climate change sector can learn.

Zimbabwe is unlikely to secure long- term finance from developmental partners, even under the Green Climate Fund.

Global funders still consider Zimbabwe risky, even for developmental finance. The HIV and AIDS sector bears testimony.

The more likely foreign funding will be short-term and must therefore, when received, be immediately aligned with policy measures and deployed effectively to those programmes that need it most.

God is faithful.

You Might Also Like

Comments

Take our Survey

We value your opinion! Take a moment to complete our survey