Zimbabwe recently convened a Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) 3.0 inception meeting, marking a significant step in the country’s ongoing engagement with the Paris Agreement and global climate governance processes.
The meeting brought together government ministries, technical agencies, development partners, and selected stakeholders to present the direction, scope, and architecture of Zimbabwe’s Third NDC.
Through a series of policy and technical presentations, government outlined its updated mitigation and adaptation ambitions, as well as proposed systems for tracking greenhouse gas emissions and reporting progress under the Enhanced Transparency Framework. The NDC 3.0 process is unfolding at a critical juncture for Zimbabwe. The country is grappling with deepening climate impacts, economic fragility, rising inequality, and a development model still heavily dependent on climate‑sensitive sectors such as agriculture, mining, and energy. In this context, NDC 3.0 is not merely a technical climate document.
It is a political and developmental statement about whose interests climate action will serve, how costs and benefits will be distributed, and whether climate policy will reinforce or disrupt existing patterns of exclusion.
Government presentations summary
Government officials presented NDC 3.0 as an evolution of Zimbabwe’s earlier submissions, aligned with Vision 2030 and the National Development Strategy 2.
The updated NDC retains a focus on key mitigation sectors including energy, agriculture, forestry, and waste, while reaffirming adaptation as a national priority given Zimbabwe’s vulnerability to climate shocks. The presentations emphasised that Zimbabwe’s mitigation targets remain partly conditional on international support, particularly climate finance, technology transfer, and capacity building.
Government reiterated Zimbabwe’s contribution to global emissions is negligible, and that ambitious climate action must therefore be understood within the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities.
- Cartoon: September 15, 2022 3dition
- Local energy firm bids to create employment
- Vision 2030 achievable if measures are taken to improve Zim economy
- Whose role is it to convert natural resources into decent employment?
Keep Reading
Institutionally, NDC 3.0 was framed as a whole‑of‑government agenda. Ministries and agencies were encouraged to see climate commitments not as environmental add‑ons, but as integral to economic planning, infrastructure development, and sectoral policy reform. This framing signals an intention to mainstream climate considerations across government, at least at policy level.
A central technical pillar of the inception meeting was the presentation on strengthening Zimbabwe’s Greenhouse Gas Inventory Management System.
The system is intended to improve the collection, verification, storage, and reporting of emissions data across sectors, supporting compliance with the Paris Agreement’s Enhanced Transparency Framework.
Government highlighted efforts to digitise emissions data, standardise reporting templates, and improve coordination among data‑producing institutions. The GHGIMS is also positioned as a tool for informing policy decisions, tracking progress against NDC targets, and enhancing Zimbabwe’s credibility with international climate finance mechanisms.
The inception meeting was presented as the beginning of a broader consultation process leading to the finalisation of NDC 3.0. Government acknowledged the role of civil society, academia, the private sector, and sub‑national actors in shaping the NDC, although details on how participation would be structured, resourced, and sustained remain limited.
Zimbabwe’s climate vulnerability is not a future risk; it is a lived and escalating reality. Over the past decade, the country has experienced recurrent droughts linked to El Niño cycles, destructive floods, prolonged heatwaves, and increasing water stress across both rural and urban areas. These climate shocks have directly undermined food security, reduced hydroelectric power generation, damaged infrastructure, and heightened public health risks. For rural households dependent on rain-fed agriculture, climate variability translates into crop failure, loss of income, and heightened dependence on humanitarian assistance.
These impacts intersect with deep structural inequalities. Women, smallholder farmers, informal workers, and residents of mining-affected and peri-urban communities bear a disproportionate share of climate-related burdens, despite contributing least to greenhouse gas emissions. Climate change in Zimbabwe therefore functions as a threat multiplier, intensifying existing challenges related to poverty, land insecurity, water access, and environmental degradation.
At the same time, Zimbabwe’s economic recovery strategy remains heavily reliant on climate- and resource-intensive sectors. Mining is promoted as the backbone of economic growth, contributing significantly to export earnings and fiscal revenues. Agriculture continues to employ the majority of the population, while energy expansion is framed as essential for industrialisation and development. However, these sectors are also major drivers of land use change, water depletion, pollution, and social conflict. The expansion of mining, in particular, has generated disputes over land, displacement of communities, environmental contamination, and uneven distribution of benefits.
This development model places Zimbabwe in a difficult balancing act. On one hand, the country must pursue economic growth to address unemployment, service delivery gaps, and fiscal pressures. On the other, it faces mounting climate risks that threaten to erode development gains and deepen inequality. Climate policy, therefore, cannot be treated as a technical exercise divorced from political economy. Decisions embedded within NDC 3.0 will shape land access, investment priorities, community rights, and the distribution of climate finance.
Understanding NDC 3.0 within this context is essential. The document is not only a statement of emissions targets and adaptation priorities; it is also a governance framework that will influence whose voices matter, whose livelihoods are protected, and whose sacrifices are deemed acceptable in the name of climate action.
Promise and pitfalls of NDC 3.0
NDC 3.0 reflects improved policy coherence and technical preparedness. The emphasis on emissions tracking, institutional coordination, and integration with national planning frameworks enhances the credibility of Zimbabwe’s climate commitments. The recognition of adaptation as a central pillar is particularly important given the country’s vulnerability profile.
The acknowledgment of financing constraints also situates Zimbabwe’s commitments within global climate equity debates, reinforcing the argument that ambitious action in developing countries requires predictable and adequate international support.
Despite these strengths, the NDC 3.0 process as presented remains heavily technocratic. The focus on targets, inventories, and reporting systems leaves limited space for discussing how climate action will be experienced at community level. Issues such as land tenure insecurity, displacement linked to infrastructure or extractive projects, gendered impacts of climate change, and the protection of informal livelihoods receive little attention.
There is also a risk that digital monitoring systems become detached from accountability. Without strong governance frameworks, emissions data may serve international reporting requirements without meaningfully influencing domestic policy enforcement or corporate behaviour. Communities affected by pollution, land degradation, or water contamination may remain excluded from both data access and decision‑making processes.
Finally, heavy reliance on conditional commitments risks delaying urgent adaptation action if climate finance is slow to materialise, leaving already vulnerable populations exposed to escalating climate risks.
Recommendations for strengthening NDC 3.0 implementation
To ensure that NDC 3.0 becomes a tool for transformative and inclusive climate action, several steps are necessary:
Embed climate justice in implementation frameworks
Social, gender, and livelihood considerations should be explicitly integrated into sectoral implementation plans, with safeguards for rural, mining‑affected, and climate‑vulnerable communities.
Strengthen sub‑national climate governance
Provinces and districts require resources, authority, and technical support to translate national commitments into locally relevant actions.
Institutionalise meaningful participation
Stakeholder engagement must move beyond consultation to sustained participation in planning, monitoring, and review processes.
Link GHGIMS to domestic accountability
Emissions data should inform regulatory enforcement, public disclosure, and policy reform, not only international reporting.
Align climate action with economic justice
Climate policies must avoid reinforcing inequality, displacement, or resource conflicts, particularly in extractive‑led development pathways.
- Tracy Mutowekuziva Mafa* is a legal practitioner and social justice advocate specializing in climate justice and extractives. With an LLB and Masters in Law of Land and Natural Resources from University of Zimbabwe, she empowers African communities and sustainable development through expertise in natural resource governance, transparency and accountability.
