At a summit held recently in Germany, the G7, a forum that consists of the world’s seven most industrialised economies — France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the US, UK and Canada — finally bowed to pressure and pledged to develop long-term low-carbon strategies and abandon fossil fuels by the end of the century.
BY CHIPO MASARA
The leaders of the G7 went on to invite other developed countries to join them in their drive to accelerate access to renewable energy in Africa and intensify their support for vulnerable countries’ own efforts to manage climate change.
It is a widely acknowledged fact that although poor developing countries have done very little to contribute to climate change, it is such countries that will unfortunately bear the full brunt of the catastrophe!
COP21 — the 2015 UN climate conference that is scheduled to take place in Paris later this year — is, for the first time in over 20 years of UN negotiations, expected to reach a deal that has legal force, through binding rules, to limit the rise in global temperatures to at least 2°C and establishing a new worldwide agreement to once and for all curb greenhouse gas emissions. This is a global target that had been backed by leaders of the G7.
The on-going deliberations towards a fossil-free world have serious implications for developing countries like Zimbabwe whose energy requirements still rely on the continued use of fossil fuels, while lagging in establishing renewable energy. For instance, coal is currently a very important source of energy in Zimbabwe, and will be in use for as long as it lasts.
Zimbabwe, like most developing nations, has already started to experience the harsh reality of the climate change scourge.
Temperatures have been soaring and rainfall patterns have become more erratic than before, with an increase in the frequency of floods. However, unlike neighbouring South Africa that has had climate change mitigation on its agenda for some time and has made inroads in making preparations — thanks to the country’s high access to funding — Zimbabwe is highly ill-equipped, evidenced by how the Civil Protection Unit had trouble handling the out-of-control floods experienced at the beginning of 2015, claiming 20 lives, washing away people’s homes and destroying much of the crops that had survived the drought. The country is ill-prepared to deal with cases of such extreme weather patterns.
- Chamisa under fire over US$120K donation
- Mavhunga puts DeMbare into Chibuku quarterfinals
- Pension funds bet on Cabora Bassa oilfields
- Councils defy govt fire tender directive
Keep Reading
The Department of Climate Change under the Ministry of Environment, Water and Climate — only established this year — however believes the country is slowly making strides towards climate change adaptation and moving towards a green economy. If it were to acquire more funds, the department says more adaptation projects would be established.
In an apparent admittance of guilt by the bulk of developed countries — often blamed for creating climate change through their heavy industrial activities — an international climate mechanism called the Green Climate Fund was created at the COP17 in Durban, to which donor governments have so far pledged over $10 billion. The money is intended to finance policies, projects, programmes, etc. that are designed to create climate resilience in poor developing countries.
With the government of Zimbabwe struggling to support key areas such as health and education, climate change seems at the bottom of its priority list. The Department of Climate Change therefore is banking on the initial $100 million it expects to get from the Green Climate Change.
The truth is, it will take much more than the United Nations Development Programme run small organic gardens and such other small-time projects that are currently underway in the country, to adequately prepare for climate change. What is needed is serious funding that would be channelled towards establishing climate resilient infrastructure, through gaining sufficient knowledge of the science of climate change and technology development.
For instance, since water is expected to be even scarcer as a result of climate change, why not invest in irrigation? Such a level of preparedness will involve partnerships, information sharing, and collaborative planning with other African countries facing the same predicament, with the goal being to transition to a low carbon emission, climate-resilient, green economy. But all that takes money that Zimbabwe does not have. The best chance the country has of preparing for climate change is through the Green Climate Fund.
The longer it takes for the country to get ready, the harder and more expensive it will be. According to the Africa Adaptation Gap Report, adaptation costs can only grow from the bottom rung of $7bn, moving up the ladder as the world gets hotter. If the world continues moving towards 3-4 Celsius, funding for adaptation will need to increase by 10% each year by 2020.
Zimbabwe should put in place systems and structures that enable it to take full advantage of the global finance in support of climate change adaptation and mitigation measures. The country’s past reluctance to seek for outside help has so far proved to be nothing but retrogressive in the fight against climate change. Unfortunately, it is mostly those in poor marginalised villages without a say that are bound to feel the full brunt of the devastating scourge.
In the interest of the whole country in regards to climate change, overzealous politicians need to desist from the derailing practice of chasing away NGOs and funders that would be working with local communities. And if the funds do come, they should be channelled specifically towards efforts to create a climate resilient nation.
