Introduction

Across the globe, climate-related disasters, including cyclones, drought,

wildfires, and extreme heat, have increased significantly in the past few years.
The Southern African region is warming up faster than the global average (Bauer and
Scholz, 2010). Many rural communities rely on (NGOs) to help them prepare for,
recover from, and adapt to climate impacts. Over the years, NGOs have implemented
various adaptation interventions in rural communities. However, some scholars argue
that NGO adaptation projects have a marginal effect (Angula and Kaundjua, 2016;
Rahman, 2021). This argument emanates from the programming strategies used (Dube,
2021). Scholars have criticized NGOs for using prescriptive top-down strategies,
imposing their projects on people, and promoting dependency syndrome (Banks et al.,
2015; Osei, 2017). Other criticisms include the lack of beneficiary participation
in adaptation projects because of the short time frames of the projects,
undermining the empowering potential of the projects, and long-term sustainability
of projects (Banerjee and Jackson, 2017; Banks et al., 2015; Osei, 2017; Smith,
2015).
NGO’s role in climate change is prominent in disaster situations. However, their
interventions are reactive, distributing food to affected people, attending to
health needs, providing temporary shelter, and assisting relocations (Mondal et
al., 2015). NGOs also implement adaptation and disaster risk reduction (DRR) to
help people adjust to climate change. In line with the sustainable development
agenda, NGOs are to move beyond mere adaptation to increase the adaptive capacity
of poor and vulnerable communities, promote long-term adaptation, and enable
communities to be resilient to climate change impacts (Appe, 2019; Frankenberger et
al., 2014). Adaptive capacities must be transformational in areas where the
likelihood of future climate damage is high and communities fail to adapt (Pelling,
2011).
Some NGOs in Zimbabwe have shifted from imposing projects to collaborating with
communities, building their adaptive capacity to strengthen their resilience to
climate change. Few scholars, if any, have explored this shift in Zimbabwe. This
paper aims to understand how CARE’s ENSURE program builds people’s resilience to
climate change in the Zaka district, Masvingo Province. The study addresses the
following questions: What is the vulnerability of people in Zaka to climate-related
impacts? How does CARE’s ENSURE program build people’s resilience to climate
impacts? The study responds to world leaders’ urgent call for action at the 2023
COP 28 conference to find solutions for adaptation and mitigation for Africa and
the world’s people. This is because of the increasing poverty, which makes it
difficult for the people in rural communities to adapt. The findings of this study
are also timely as they contribute to the community-level solutions to tackle
climate change. The findings further support the 2024 Nairobi Declaration of
Climate Change view, which acknowledges the critical role that local communities
play in climate change adaptation and mitigation. Adaptation and resilience are
emerging fields, and this paper contributes knowledge to this growing body of
research.
Background and context
Zimbabwe lies in the semi-arid region of Southern Africa and experiences a
subtropical climate characterized by dry winters and hot summer periods (Mavhura,
2018). The country has experienced the devastating effects of El Nino since 1982
(OCHA, 2024). The El Nino conditions are characterized by prolonged dry spells,
increased temperatures, and less rainfall than the average, resulting in water
shortages, extreme heat, and drought affecting food security (Mavhura, 2018). The
last few years have also seen an increase in climate-related disasters, including
drought, floods, cyclones, and extreme heat (Macheka, 2024; Mavhura, 2018; Ngwenya,
2018).
The country has been devastated by a series of flooding disasters, including
Cyclone Eline in 2000, Cyclone Japhet in 2003, Cyclone Dineo in 2017, Cyclone Idai
in 2019, Tropical Storm Chalane in 2020, Cyclone Eloise in 2021, Cyclone Ana in
2022, and Cyclone Freddy in 2023 (Macheka, 2024). Concurrently, drought periods
have been on a relentless rise from 1982 to the present, with significant ones in
1992, 1995, 2000, 2007, 2013, 2016, 2018, and 2020. The impact of these climate
events is severe, with maize yields, for instance, declining significantly over the
years and recurrent droughts leading to food insecurity. The 2023–2024 season has
been declared a drought, and an estimated six million people are food insecure
(OCHA, 2024). The Zimbabwe Vulnerability Assessment Committee (2023) reports that
about 35% of rural households have inadequate water supply, while about 45% travel
long distances to fetch water for household use and livestock. The shortage of
drinking water caused by droughts in rural areas is a grave threat to human health.
In the recent past, the country has recorded high temperatures of 45°C (113°F) in
areas such as Victoria Falls, Kariba, Chiredzi, Masvingo, and Beitbridge,
significantly above the average high of 30°C (86°F) (Zimbabwe Meteorological
Services, 2024). Excessive heat is causing distress among rural populations as they
lose their crops and livestock. Extreme temperatures are predicted to increase in
frequency, duration, and severity as the region becomes hotter and drier than the
global average (Bauer and Scholz, 2010). Meanwhile, the country is grappling with
disaster response and management implementation challenges that must be aligned
with the Sendai Framework. Zimbabwe’s policy documents overlook some crucial
aspects. For instance, the Civil Protection Act (Chapter 10:06) does not address
community resilience (Macheka, 2024) to align with climate policy and national
response strategy, and there is no public health response to heat-related illnesses
(Ngwenya, 2018). The Climate Policy and National Climate Change Response Strategy
Policy documents do not outline how vulnerable groups will be protected from
extreme heat.
Masvingo Province is one of the arid regions, which receives less rainfall than
other regions, recurrent crop failure, and has persistent drought seasons that
affect food security and nutrition (Brazier, 2015). The 2017 vulnerability
assessment reported that 33% of children (0–5 years) had stunted growth due to
malnutrition in the Zaka district. Drought has had a ripple effect as it affects
livelihoods, which are agriculture-dependent, and affects underground water,
resulting in the shortage of drinking water. In this district, the water shortage
is causing many vector-borne diseases, including bilharzia in human beings, anthrax
in livestock, and water and sanitation in the home.
About 61.4% of the Zimbabwean population reside in rural areas and are particularly
vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change ZIMSTAT, 2022. These
communities rely heavily on natural resources such as water, forests, and land, all
adversely affected by climate change. As climate change impacts deepen and increase
in frequency and severity, there is an urgent need to build people’s resilience to
respond and recover from climate shocks and stresses. Many people in rural areas do
not have any social protection or safety nets and lack the power to influence
policies that affect their access to resources (Ensor and Berger, 2009). While
people often employ their agency to cope and adapt, as climate impacts become more
severe and persistent, many rural communities become more vulnerable as they
deplete assets trying to manage. Failure to adapt is when households experience
hazards whose extent of damage is high such that they cannot bounce back (Jiri and
Mafongoya, 2017).
Resilience matters in climate change NGO programming
With growing uncertainty in climate predictions and increasing vulnerability of
populations to experiencing frequent and severe climate impacts, resilience becomes
central to improving their ability to respond, recover, and thrive again in the
face of adverse climate. Resilience and adaptation are concepts often used
interchangeably in literature, yet complementary. Adaptation is taking a series of
actions and adjusting to current and future impacts. Resilience is about enhancing
social, economic, cultural, financial, and political capacities to respond and
recover well after experiencing a climate shock (Mehryar, 2022; Siders, 2019). To
Smit and Pilifosova (2003), this is improving the adaptive capacity, which is
defined as the enhanced practical means of coping with changes and uncertainties in
climate change, building resilience.
Resilience is a contentious term stemming from its definition and measurement.
Different scholars from different disciplines define resilience differently. Within
the social sciences, the term is widely used in social ecology, sociology, and
psychology. The term is also in greater use by NGOs, donors, agencies, and other
key stakeholders in development (Frankenberger etal., 2014). The historical roots
of resilience can be traced to the Social Ecology discipline, where Holling (1973)
defines resilience as the ability of an ecological system to bounce back to its
original state after experiencing a disturbance. In defining the concept, scholars
have often contextualized the concept while maintaining the initial ecological
conceptualization. In this paper, resilience is the ability of rural communities to
respond to and recover from climate shocks within a changing climate. To help rural
communities become resilient means developing people’s adaptive capacity to promote
long-term adaptation, which strengthens the resilience of communities to respond to
climate shocks and stresses and recover (Siders, 2019). NGOs, with their unique
capabilities and resources, can play a crucial role in building rural communities’
adaptive capacity by strengthening their social, economic, political, cultural,
financial, and ecological capacities to help them become resilient in a changing
climate.
Another controversy around the concept of resilience is that of measurement. There
is disagreement over how resilience can and should be measured. Frankenberger et
al. (2012) developed a resilience framework emphasizing access to productive
assets, institutional structures, livelihood strategies, prevention, preparedness,
and response. Central to the framework is capacity, commonly known as the capacity
approach, Frankenberger argues that building resilience requires improving three
distinct but interrelated capacities, which are absorptive, adaptive, and
transformational. Absorptive minimizes exposure to shocks through preventive
measures such as social safety nets, social capital, DRR, and assets. Adaptive is
about identifying alternative livelihood strategies such as diversification,
remittances, knowledge, and skills. Transformative includes governance mechanisms,
policies, and regulations that promote an enabling environment, such as access to
local governance services, markets, gender, and participation in decision-making.
These three reinforce each other and exist at multiple levels. International
agencies and donors have used Frankenberger’s framework and capacity approach to
measure resilience. For example, TANGO International (2018) evaluated the
relationship between shocks, capacities, and responses to current and future states
of well-being. They developed three quantitative indicators of resilience: well-
being outcomes, shocks and stresses, and resilience capacities (absorptive,
adaptive, and transformative).
IFAD (2015) argues that resilience cannot be measured with single quantitative
indicators but by combining both qualitative and quantitative. Qualitative
indicators would include all dimensions of human life, including social, economic,
cultural, financial, and political assets. These dimensions contribute to household
and community resilience. IFAD (2015) further identifies four factors to consider
when measuring resilience. These are well-being outcomes: shocks and stresses,
absorptive, adaptive, and transformative capacities at different levels, and the
responses of households and communities to shocks and stresses against the overall
trajectory of well-being outcomes. These factors resonate with Frankenberger’s
resilience framework and are common in TANGO and IFAD projects.
A resilient household can demonstrate a degree of toughness, resistance to climate
shocks and stresses, and the ability to recover from the impact (Ashmawy, 2021:
IFAD, 2015). To be resilient, households should be able to maintain a specific
minimum threshold condition after exposure and experience a climatic shock or
disturbance (Ensor and Berger, 2009). Within this changing climate, communities
require knowledge and information to help them cope well with climate change
(Ashmawy, 2021). Communities that are well-capacitated tend to prepare, respond,
and recover well. NGOs are better placed to help communities mobilize these
resources, which communities seldom realize they have (Green and Goetting, 2010).
NGOs can mobilize resources from other stakeholders, including the government and
private sector. Lassas (2018) study shows successful collaboration between the
state, private sector, civil society, and NGOs. This triadic relationship is
necessary for the future of resilience in a changing climate.
Role of NGOs in climate resilience—review of literature
NGOs and other humanitarian organizations are the first responders in disasters
like drought and floods. Ensor and Berger (2009) highlight that vulnerable people
affected by climate change use their capabilities, skills, knowledge, and
technologies. They engage in various coping strategies, including crop
diversification using religious beliefs and practices to adapt to climate shifts
(Merid et al., 2017), indigenous practices such as organic manure to enhance soil
fertility, pre-season tillage, and post-harvest mulching (Musa and Umar, 2017).
Despite community efforts to adapt to climate change, the pervasiveness of the
changing climate continues to affect their farming activities and livelihoods. It
degrades the natural environment they usually turn to during times of crisis. This
double tragedy results in households and communities lacking the adaptive capacity
to cope independently (Simane, 2013).
As highlighted elsewhere in this paper, some scholars argue that NGO adaptation
efforts are marginal, not achieving the desired results of building the resilience
of households and communities to respond and recover from climate shocks (Angula
and Kaundjua, 2016; Fitzpatrick and Molloy, 2014; Rahman, 2021). For some scholars,
the absence of partnerships affects resilience. NGOs must build stronger
partnerships with government institutions and communities to build resilience for
affected people (Fitzpatrick and Molloy, 2014). Drakaki et al. (2023) emphasize the
need to create sustainable partnerships to build the strength of communities to
address climate change. NGOs educate communities on the importance of collective
action and partnerships. Partnerships promote community empowerment and long-term
sustainability and are critical in promoting climate resilience.
For other scholars, marginality results from using top-down strategies in
adaptation that do not promote participation, empowerment, and sustainability.
These four key debates have preoccupied scholars for a long time. Several scholars
show that NGOs use structured methods in adaptation that provide little room for
beneficiary participation, suggesting a prescriptive nature of NGO strategies
(Angula and Kaundjua, 2016; Baruah, 2015; Meding et al., 2011). In Pakistan, Khan
and Ali (2015) found that beneficiaries lacked ownership of projects, suggesting
that NGOs were using top-down approaches that do not promote ownership of projects.
Similarly, Pertiwi et al. (2019) found that NGO-led disaster preparedness programs
in Indonesia were not providing people with the skills and knowledge to plan and
implement DRR projects, suggesting that NGOs maintain an expert approach to
programming. Lassa (2018) points out that local communities in DRR are often
excluded from decision-making processes as the programs are top-down. In Lesotho,
Kamara et al. (2019) found that the NGO had limited participation of beneficiaries
and an overreliance on scientific knowledge. Other scholars report of the exclusion
of traditional coping mechanisms and traditional knowledge in DRR plans and rarely
consider the agency of rural people (Hamukwala et al., 2008; Harvey et al., 2019;
Sahoo, 2013). The above studies show that NGOs’ contribution to resilience is
marginal because of a lack of partnerships, top-down strategies, and community
participation, affecting project ownership and sustainability. This suggests that
NGO projects are not building communities’ adaptive capacity to become resilient.
However, literature also shows that some NGOs are adjusting their approaches,
moving beyond just adaptation with single projects to promoting adaptive capacity
by providing a range of options to enhance longer-term adaptation, which ultimately
contributes to the resilience of communities. For example, Adem et al. (2017)
report that CARE Ethiopia combines local knowledge and scientific data in
implementing an integrated program that provides a framework for dialogue with and
between communities and external stakeholders. This empowering program allows the
local communities to drive their future by actively participating and inspires hope
for a more resilient future. In Savelugu in Ghana, NGOs provided capacity-building
programs to farmers, giving them information on climate change, skills and
knowledge to deal adequately with climate shifts, mobilizing different forms of
capital to assist in coping and adaptation, and financial assistance to build
livelihoods (Tahiru et al., 2019). These projects point to an integrated program
that creates the adaptive capacity of farmers. Other scholars support this kind of
programming. For example, Jiri and Mafongoya (2017) argued for increased
investments in adaptive capacity that combine the Indigenous Knowledge Systems and
meteorological data, contributing to sustainable adaptation and resilience.
Advocates of adaptive capacity emphasize that interventions by institutions, such
as NGOs, should aim for a range of options for communities. This includes shifting
from a single project to integrated programming, informed decision-making,
information, knowledge, skills, social equity, gender, participatory partnerships
with communities, and incorporating local knowledge in programming (Adem et al.,
2017; Drakaki et al., 2022; Frankenberger et al., 2014; Jiri and Mafongoya, 2017).
Institutions supporting adaptation, programs, and projects must constantly
collaborate with their communities (Simane, 2013; Tahiru et al., 2019). All these
attributes are vital to building resilient communities.
Methodology
This study is based on a 4-year (2016–2019) qualitative ethnographic study of the
contribution of CARE Zimbabwe’s ENSURE program implemented in Wards 14 and 16 of
Zaka district, Masvingo Province. Although the program was being implemented in 11
wards in the district, the researcher chose Wards 14 and 16 to have a balanced view
of ENSURE. In Ward 14, ENSURE was a complete project, while in Ward 16, the project
was still ongoing. The two wards were also chosen because they were close to each
other and, therefore, convenient and cost-effective for the researcher. The
district is a semi-arid region in ecological zone III. This zone is characterized
by less rainfall of between 600 and 630 mm compared to other regions. It is a
drought-prone area (Brazier, 2015). ZimVAC (2017) reported a poverty prevalence of
69.6%, coupled with food insecurity and high stunting levels in children under
five. The district reported the highest number of shocks per household and the
highest severity of exposure to shocks. They also reported a low capacity to cope
(ZimVAC, 2018).
The choice of qualitative methodology was deliberate, as it was best suited to the
nature of the study. The advantages of qualitative research were seen in drawing
meaning from people’s experiences of a phenomenon (Patton, 2005). Adopting
qualitative methodology allowed for the study of people in their natural settings,
which promotes interaction with respondents in a natural way in most cases in their
homes and the site where participants experience the phenomenon and try to make
sense of the meanings they experience (Creswell, 2013). With qualitative
methodology, the interaction was mostly face-to-face, allowing the researcher to
observe how they work with NGOs and document their narratives on their experiences.
At the same time, the qualitative methodology accorded beneficiaries some level of
empowerment as they shared their experiences (Creswell, 2013). The advantage of
this was neutralizing the power relationship between the researcher and
participants, who could listen more and allow the participants to share their
experiences. It is worth noting that the study was conducted with the utmost
respect for the ethical standards, ensuring the privacy and dignity of the
participants.
The case study design was chosen because of its ability to provide a comprehensive
understanding of a single case within a real-life context (Yin, 2003). This
research design was particularly suited to provide a detailed “thick description”
of the CARE programming as the case being investigated. Using in-depth interviews,
direct observation, focus group discussions (FGDs), and documentary analysis as
data collection methods further enhanced the study’s comprehensiveness. The
analysis of CARE reports, the conduct of FGDs, and follow-up in-depth interviews
all contributed to a thorough understanding of how CARE is building resilience to
climate impacts. Key informant interviews corroborated the participants’ interviews
and FGD views. At the time of data collection, the dam project in Ward 14 was
complete and fully functional, while the researcher observed the ongoing dam
construction project in Ward 16.
The study employed a non-probability sampling technique in line with the
qualitative case study research design. Purposive sampling was used, where the
researcher deliberately selected respondents who participated in the ENSURE
program. In line with the case study design, a sample should not be too small to
achieve data saturation. Thus, a sample of 18 in-depth interviews was selected.
Four FGDs, two from each ward with 6–8 participants in each group were held. FDGs
were meant to complement the weaknesses of other data collection methods
(triangulation). FGDs allowed participants to freely discuss issues they would not
feel comfortable discussing during interviews. A total of 11 key informant
interviews were held with two CARE officials—Program manager and Program officer,
one informant from Agritex, one from the Ministry of Gender, two from Local
Government—Social Services Official and Liaison officer, one from the Department of
Irrigation, one from Environmental Agency, and three traditional leaders composed
of two headmen from each ward and one Sadunhu (leader of the area). The key
informants from local government, Agritex, and traditional leaders work closely
with communities and other organizations such as the Ministry of Gender, the
Department of Irrigation, and the Environmental Agency. These are also the
institutions that CARE linked with communities to oversee the projects after CARE
exited the district in 2020. In tandem with the case study research design, data
were collected and analyzed in two stages in an iterative process that ensured the
thoroughness and validity of the findings. The first stage involved coding data
from the transcripts and field notes, while the second stage involved identifying
emerging patterns and grouping them into themes. Two themes emerged from the study:
vulnerability to climate change impacts and the role of CARE in building
resilience.
Findings and discussion
Vulnerability to climate change impacts
Evidence from the study revealed that rural communities in the Zaka district are
experiencing various climate-related shocks, including drought, heat waves, and
cyclones. This confirms evidence from related literature that the country is
experiencing the worst impacts of climate change (Macheka, 2024; Mavhura, 2018).
Experiencing cyclones for four consecutive years from 2020 to 2023 suggests an
increase in the frequency of cyclones (Macheka, 2024), confirming scientists’
climate predictions that extreme temperatures will likely increase in frequency and
severity (Bauer and Scholz, 2010). Findings from in-depth interviews indicated that
drought periods have become recurrent, resulting in food insecurity, and during
drought periods, adults and children eat less unbalanced meals, contributing to
stunted growth in children. CARE key informant confirmed that the region was
experiencing recurrent drought seasons and cyclone floods.
Responses from FGDs pointed to communities relying on their local knowledge,
beliefs, and practices, such as holding traditional rain-making ceremonies known to
them as mikwerera; crop diversification, including growing drought-resistant crops,
was cited as a common coping and adaptation strategy for the communities. This
corroborates findings from related studies that people use their agency to respond
and adapt to the shifting climate (Ensor and Berger, 2009; Jiri and Mafongoya,
2017). Although they tried to cope and adapt to climate change, they exhausted all
their assets as they experienced one disaster after another every few years. One
participant said we have many catastrophes here. We are suffering because our food
stocks do not last two years. Moreover, we sold our chickens and goats to send
children to school. Findings revealed that rural communities in Zaka are at risk of
experiencing more frequent severe climate shocks in the future because of their
semi-arid location. Participants indicated that they were now learning to live with
climate change, suggesting that they are aware of climate shifts and are learning
to adapt. Lack of social protection worsens these rural communities’ ability to
cope independently. The poor and vulnerable often lack resources to respond and
recover from climate change impacts (Ensor and Berger, 2009). To increase their
adaptive capacity, CARE Zimbabwe implemented an integrated program.
Role of CARE in building resilience of rural communities
CARE’s ENSURE program
ENSURE is an acronym for Enhancing Nutrition, Stepping Up Resilience and
Enterprise. CARE key informant highlighted that the ESURE program directly
responded to shocks and stressors identified during a baseline survey in the
district by CARE Zimbabwe. CARE Zimbabwe reports (2014, 2018) confirmed that the
program is an integrated one, with three projects: Health and Nutrition, DRR, and
Agriculture and Economic Development. The findings are similar to those obtained by
Adem et al. (2017) where CARE Ethiopia is implementing an integrated program,
suggesting an emerging shift in NGO programming from focusing on single projects to
combining them. ENSURE aimed to increase long-term food security caused by
recurrent drought and growing poverty. The Health and Nutrition project was a
supplementary feeding program to improve the nutrition of 0- 5-year-old children,
pregnant, and lactating mothers. This project responded to the stunting problem
highlighted in the ZimVAC Report, 2017. The second project DRR, was designed to
increase preparedness for future disasters by creating community assets, such as
weir dams (small dams), nutritional gardens, and early warning systems. The
Agriculture and Economic Development project was designed to increase household
income through microfinance schemes, farming as a business (FAB), and poultry
projects. The project mainly empowered women in agricultural production and income-
generating projects because, in Zimbabwe, women make up a significant percentage of
the labor force in the agriculture sector in rural areas. The garden project was
set to increase household income by taking FAB. This project promoted value chains
by establishing producer groups producing ground and round nuts, livestock, and
poultry projects, thereby increasing income streams. Capacity-building programs
designed to increase the knowledge about climate change impacts, how they can
adapt, and what the projects were intended to do to increase their adaptive
capacity and become resilient to food insecurity complemented the three projects.
Capacity-building programs
From the in-depth interviews, the study found that the ENSURE program began with
capacity-building management, workshops on project management, information sharing
about climate change, and its terminologies to ensure that communities understand
in their local language. This increased their climate change awareness, risk
factors, and vulnerability to climate change impacts. They understood vulnerability
in their local language because one of the participants was asked to stand in the
sun without an umbrella in one of the workshops. They understood vulnerability as
kuyanikika (exposure). They understood the climatic challenges they faced as
zvigozhero. In a DRR workshop, beneficiaries understood DRR in their local
language, as kuderedza matambudziko munharaunda (reducing challenges or dangers in
the local environment). Risk was understood as a fumuro ku ngozi (exposure to
danger). They also understood early warning systems and how they can prepare for
disasters such as floods or drought. Capacity-building workshops helped deepen
their understanding of climate change and the actions they needed to take to
increase their ability to respond. One participant said CARE has taught us a lot
about the changes in climate and what we should do to survive. This is very
important for us so that we know when and what to plant.
Project management was also covered in the capacity-building workshops where
communities were involved in decision-making from problem identification to design,
implementation, monitoring, and evaluation. Beneficiaries were allowed to put into
practice the knowledge learned. For instance, they came together to list 10
challenges they face in the order of priority. The central issue that affected
communities was water shortage, and they suggested that a dam would solve their
challenge. CARE then partnered with communities in building small dams, suggesting
the transfer and sharing of power between NGOs and rural communities, essential in
building adaptive capacity. Other training programs for human capacity building
included conservation agriculture, livestock production, post-harvest and handling,
nutrition, water, and sanitation. Communities adopted new production strategies
such as water harvesting technologies.
Partnership approach using local resources
From the capacity-building workshops, a partnership approach was established. CARE
partnered with the community to construct a small dam. Although this study focused
on CARE Zimbabwe’s ENSURE program, findings from FGDs revealed that NGOs operating
in the district, including Christian Care, Aquaculture Zimbabwe, Plan
International, and World Vision, were partnering with communities in similar
projects. This agrees with arguments in the literature that tackling climate change
requires a collective effort between institutions and the local people (Drakaki et
al., 2022; Jiri and Mafongoya, 2017). In the dam project, CARE provided the
technical expertise (Engineer), materials, and equipment, while the communities
provided the labor. In this partnership, communities used knowledge from project
management to design and implement the projects. The members formed committees to
run the projects. Women formed most committee members, and this researcher
witnessed first-hand women taking charge of the projects in Ward 16. This was novel
because women traditionally never led any project; men did. While communities
provided the labor in the construction of the nutritional garden, CARE provided
pipes, technical personnel, cement, fences, and poles.
Findings from FGDs indicated that beneficiaries built the garden, toilet with a
hand washing unit, and ponds to draw water from, and connected the pipes with
technical guidance from CARE and Agritex, Mechanization Department for Irrigation.
In the Agriculture and Economic Development project, beneficiaries had the
opportunity to apply the skills they learned from the workshops on how to
effectively run an enterprise, such as community-based microfinance projects,
different poultry projects, get involved in producer groups and nutritional gardens
where they would get vegetables for consumption and sale and increase their
incomes. Such partnerships are what Drakaki et al. (2022) call sustainable
partnerships that contribute toward sustainable development.
The partnership between CARE and communities, known to beneficiaries as
Mushandirapamwe (Working Together) in DRR, is more than a collaboration. To them,
partnership in ENSURE is known as ndezvedu (this is ours), suggesting a sense of
ownership of the projects through working collectively. The key theme in all
participants’ responses on ENSURE was that CARE had changed and that the ENSURE
program recognized them as people who can contribute to their community development
given the opportunity, knowledge, skills, and resources. One participant said CARE
has changed from how it was before. They used to give us food and now they are
making us work for our community. They recognized CARE as a partner in ENSURE,
which is evidence of the success of the partnership approach. These findings align
with the literature on partnerships, where scholars advocate for collective action
through partnerships (Drakaki et al., 2022). CARE key informant highlighted that
they used the local term “mushandirapamwe” to ensure that beneficiaries understand
and take up the idea of collective participation. In as much as beneficiaries were
aware of the partnership, there is no evidence from participants to suggest that
beneficiaries agreed to the partnership. Instead, it was CARE telling beneficiaries
what was going to happen. This may suggest power dynamics at play where
beneficiaries cannot question NGOs imposing on communities how things were to be
done, suggesting unequal top-down partnerships where NGOs have control over the
programming processes and beneficiaries lack the power to question NGO decisions.
The findings agree with observations by Osei (2017) that in Ghana, beneficiaries
could not question NGOs’ decisions for fear of losing NGO support. However, this
could also be a form of participation, an information-sharing stage, where the NGO
explains to beneficiaries how the project would be rolled out to avoid confusion
and ensure that all stakeholders know the specific details about the program.
From the workshops and training, communities could identify community resources,
which to them is known as kushanda nezvatinazvo (working with what we have),
including using manure instead of fertilizer. The researcher observed heaps of
manure in the garden and the Chairperson explained how they collect leaves from the
environment and mix them with vegetable and banana leaves to make manure. They
understood that they had money generated from microfinance schemes, ukama (social
relations), traditions, simba redu (our labor), zviwanikwa (natural resources from
the environment), and their local knowledge, beliefs, and practices. These findings
resonate with findings by Green and Goetting (2010) that rural people are endowed
with resources they do not know they have. Within the sustainable development
paradigm, local resources play a crucial role in achieving sustainable community
development at the local level (Dahie, 2019). This emphasis on local resources
inspired in them a sense of optimism and hope in tackling climate change at a local
level.
Putnum’s three social capital concepts of bonding, bridging, and linking applied to
the study. In terms of bonding, the ENSURE program brought them together as
households and communities. The program allowed communities in different wards to
build the dam and construct the nutritional garden. Bridging social capital
permitted community members to interact and network with others from various wards.
However, this may also bring conflicts as they fail to relate with each other,
mainly when working in the garden. Using the Constitution as a legal document and
project management knowledge and skills may help reduce conflicts. Regarding
linking social capital, CARE connected communities with external institutions,
including local authorities and markets, for their produce. However, some
government institutions such as Agritex and the Department of Irrigation, while
they exist in rural centers, are often limited in terms of resources such as fuel
to visit rural communities, and remote areas tend to suffer more because of lack of
access. One key informant alluded that government institutions usually do not have
functional equipment to help the communities. For instance, when a pump breaks
down, the Department of Irrigation may be unable to replace it immediately;
sometimes, it never does. In such cases, there is a need to increase the political
will of the government to formulate a policy and allocate resources to address such
issues.
Building resilience within a changing climate
For most beneficiaries, understanding resilience revolves around what they know as
“being strong” to respond and recover from any climate shocks. Participants
indicated that the ENSURE program had given them the power and assets to tackle
food insecurity in their district. One beneficiary said
We now have our dam as a community where we get water for garden and livestock, we
get vegetables to eat and sell, and we have many projects such as mikando
(microfinance) and poultry projects giving us money for our microfinance. We also
have ruzivo (knowledge). We are strong now.
This aligns with Frankenberger et al. (2012) resilience framework, which emphasizes
access to productive assets, tangible and not, that generate income and appreciate
over time, institutional structures, and processes. The program has created
productive assets such as small dams, nutritional gardens, microfinance, and
poultry projects that meet the current needs of the communities. Having a dam means
that communities can rely on the dam for irrigation during drought seasons and
future generations may benefit from the same resource. This is preparedness and
prevention in the Frankenberger framework. A key element of sustainability critical
in developing resilience, identified by Frankenberger et al. (2012) is the aspect
of developing institutional structures and processes, such as having a committee
and a constitution in every project. Findings revealed that each project had a
committee to manage it. There were more women than men in each of the committees
surveyed, suggesting gender equity in community projects. The constitution is a
legal document developed by groups involved in microfinance schemes. The
constitution spelled out how the project would work. The same document was used in
the garden project, where the members came together and agreed on how the garden
would function, the rules each member should respect, and how violations would be
dealt with. The Police department ratified the constitution as a legal document.
Having a committee and constitution increases ownership and participation in
decision-making, contributing to the long-term sustainability of projects.
A critical element in Frankenberger’s resilience framework is that of capacity.
Findings revealed that the program developed absorptive, adaptive, and
transformative capacities summarized in the table below:
Absorptive Adaptive Transformative
Bonding social capital, Collective action, social cohesion Bridging social capital
Linking social capital
Microfinance Education and training Availability of markets
Asset creation—dam and garden assets Microfinance Gender equity
Disaster preparedness Decision-making Institutions—Local government, EMA,
Agritex, Department of Irrigation
Safety nets—supplementary feeding DRR committees to the Civil Protection
Unit
EMA: Environmental Management Agency.
To build absorptive capacity so as to minimize exposure, ENSURE created
opportunities for people to interact, creating bonds and networks to rely on during
times of crisis. They interacted in village loans and savings (microfinance),
working together and creating bonds during community asset creation—building dams
and gardens promoting social cohesion and collectivism. Thus, the first line of
response was created in the community because of the bonds created. In practice,
they would turn to each other before the Civil Protection Unit (CPU) or donors,
which is more sustainable. Disaster preparedness was also part of preventive
measures, including weather forecasting and early warning. In terms of adaptive
capacities, the program opened opportunities for diversified livelihoods,
increasing income streams through FAB, microfinance, poultry projects, education,
knowledge, and skills received during capacity-building workshops reinforced their
ability to respond and recover from climate shocks. Microfinance schemes provided
people experiencing poverty with capital to start small businesses. CARE key
informant highlighted that ENSURE influenced some aspects of transformative
capacities. For example, the program created links with the outside markets for
garden produce. The program linked DRR committees that were created at the
community level to provide information to the civil protection unit at the district
level. However, the program failed to influence structural changes at the national
level to have the DRR committees recognized and included in the policy. This is an
issue of concern raised by Macheka (2024).
Thus, the program strengthened the economic, social, financial, cultural, and
political assets essential to building resilience (Mehryar, 2022). Economically,
ENSURE created community assets through dams and gardens; financially, multiple
income streams were created through producer groups, microfinance, poultry, and FAB
to purchase productive assets at the household level. Socially, the program created
networks they can use and rely on in times of need and disasters. Findings from in-
depth interviews revealed that ENSURE made participants realize the value of their
nutritious indigenous foods. One participant said we used to look down upon our
traditional knowledge and food, but CARE has opened our eyes again western foods
had killed us. The program linked them to markets outside their communities where
they would sell their produce and poultry products. DRR committees were created
locally, and linkages with CPU enhanced their political capacity. Their physical
participation in dam construction and nutritional gardens reinforced their adaptive
capacity to become resilient. Capacity-building projects complemented the
capacities in that communities acquired knowledge about the changing climate,
project management, and DRR early warning systems, as well as skills to manage and
preserve the dam and its environment. The skills they gained helped them take care
of their environment and community assets, such as building ridges around the dam
to prevent siltation. To CARE key informants, these are the building blocks to
resilience, and adaptive capacity is a pillar of resilience. According to
Frankenberger et al. (2012), the extent to which capacities have been enhanced
results in two pathways: resilience and vulnerability. Findings revealed that
resilience outcomes included food security, adequate nutrition, and environmental
security. Stunting reduced from 33% in 2017 to 26.3% in 2018 (ZimVAC, 2018).
Conclusion and recommendations
This paper sets out to understand how CARE’s ENSURE program in the Zaka district is
building the resilience of rural communities to respond to and recover from
climate-related shocks. The article asserts that CARE is responding to and moving
beyond the criticisms of marginality, dependency, lack of participation,
empowerment, and sustainability. Findings revealed that CARE attempts to transcend
the aforementioned concerns by shifting its focus from a single project to
implementing an integrated program with three projects that combine local and
modern knowledge to boost the adaptive capacity of people in rural Zaka, thereby
strengthening their resilience to the shocks engendered by climatic shocks. Through
a partnership approach, the ENSURE program increased the absorptive, adaptive, and
transformative capacities. The program promoted the active involvement of
beneficiaries in the project’s design, implementation, monitoring, and evaluation.
As the article argues, such an approach should be read as an empowering process
that increases ownership of projects and promotes the sustainability of projects.
CARE’s capacity-building workshops were designed to share knowledge and information
on climate change impacts and project management, enhancing rural communities’
adaptive capacity to become resilient to future climate shocks. CARE’s ENSURE
program enhanced resilience by strengthening networks and relations, economically
creating community assets, financially increasing income streams, ecologically
addressing food insecurity challenges, and disaster preparedness. These insights
can be taken as best practices that have the potential to be replicated elsewhere
in and beyond Zimbabwe. This article argues that CARE’s program has reconfigured
the climate action landscape in rural Zimbabwe by adopting bottom-up and
participatory interventions that enhance sustainable resilience to climatic shocks.
The ENSURE project in the Zaka district ended in 2020, so further research is
required to assess the resilience of communities after NGO withdrawal from the area
to confirm or refute the findings of this paper. There is a need to understand the
response and recovery after experiencing another climate shock. The paper
recommends that instead of working as independent NGOs, which does not fully
promote the long-term sustainability of projects, NGOs should collaborate and pull
resources with other NGOs and implement solid integrated programs that empower
communities to become resilient and transform their lives. The paper further
recommends climate policy reforms that include DRR committees’ responses at the
ward level. At the same time, the government should ensure that DRR committees are
recognized in the Civil Protection Unit Act.
Funding
The author received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or
publication of this article.