Original Research

Reimagining climate justice and action for marginalised voices in Zimbabwe: A Kairos moment

Gift Masengwe

Received: 28 Nov. 2024; Accepted: 30 Apr. 2025; Published: 30 June 2025

Copyright: © 2025. The Author Licensee: AOSIS.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Background: The urgent need for climate justice in Zimbabwe calls for a Kairos moment (i.e., prophetic moment) through climate activism, stressing ethical obligation towards genuine inclusion of marginalised voices in the light of acute environmental crises. The contrast arises from Zimbabwe’s presence at COP29, with an elite delegation that spent close to $2 000 000.00, including $200 000.00 on air travel, at the exclusion of grassroots communities.

Objective: The action demonstrates systemic inequities, which constitute ‘mere participation’ in the global arena.

Method: The article analyses Zimbabwe’s climate team using our theological models on the questions of justice and stewardship. The argument is constructed around issues of tokenism, interventions that lack meaningful engagement with environmentalists and marginalised communities.

Results: This study analyses the latest Local Conference of Children and Youth (LCOY): a flawed but crucial attempt at inclusion and openness, showing how exclusion of bottom-up narratives and socio-economic injustice are still present and perpetuated.

Conclusion: In order to have meaningful participation in global climate governance, Zimbabwe needs to restructure its delegation, focus on redistributing resources, and ensure that affected communities are not passive beneficiaries but active participants.

Contribution: This research is part of a broader ethos of a socioecological renaissance that is based on an ethical conception of justice, equity, and stewardship, rejection of elitist theories, and an emphasis on inclusive and effective responses to climate change. In addition, this call for genuine representation seeks to shift the climate action dune in Zimbabwe towards justice-driven solutions that ring true both here and elsewhere.

Keywords: COP29; Kairos moment; vulnerable communities; climate justice; marginalised voices; climate advocacy; climate action; Zimbabwe.

Introduction

Climate change is a major crisis that affects everyone, especially in developing countries like Zimbabwe. It causes environmental problems and worsens economic inequalities, hitting marginalised communities the hardest. If Zimbabwe seriously wants to take action on climate change, it would allow ordinary people, those hardest hit by the phenomenon to contribute to discussions, rather than spend millions to represent the views of politicians and members of the elite. In this context, the 29th United Nations Conference of the Parties (COP29) serves as a salient case in point, wherein Zimbabwe’s ostentatious delegation, replete with government officials, symbolised a gross misalignment of resources and representation amid the nation’s pervasive socio-economic turmoil. A lavish expenditure exceeding $2m for this elite assembly, as reported by Tendai Ruben Mbofana, starkly juxtaposes the lived realities of everyday Zimbabweans grappling with climate-induced adversities, hence raises significant ethical questions. According to Mbofana, Zimbabwe’s representation at the summit of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), popularly COP29, by sending a ‘bloated’ and ‘over-flow’ of 238 elite delegates, exemplifies a ‘spectacle of excess rather than a meaningful opportunity to contribute’ (UNFCCC 2024:n.p.) to the global discourse on climate change.

This article posits that Zimbabwe stands at a critical Kairos moment, an opportune juncture necessitating a paradigm shift towards authentic inclusivity in climate advocacy. By interrogating the ethical imperatives associated with representation and the theological underpinnings compacted within discourses of justice and stewardship, this article elucidates the urgent need for the substantive involvement of those most vulnerable to climate impacts. Central to this exploration is the ethical mandate encapsulated in the ‘preferential option for the poor’ (Beers 1985; Gutiérrez 2023), which compels a re-evaluation of priorities in climate negotiations, thereby affirming that genuine ecological stewardship must emanate from the insights and experiences of the disadvantaged populations who navigate the direct consequences of environmental degradation. Ultimately, this investigation aims to advocate for a recalibrated approach to climate action that amalgamates ethical considerations and grassroots voices, positioning Zimbabwe as a paragon of equity in the global climate dialogue.

The nobility of Zimbabwe’s participation in 29th Conference of Parties

Zimbabwe’s participation in the (COP29) marks a pivotal moment in addressing climate change, particularly for developing nations. President Emmerson Mnangagwa’s firm stance during the conference highlights not only Zimbabwe’s vulnerabilities to climate impacts but also amplifies the call for the global community to consider the unique challenges faced by developing countries (VOA Zimbabwe 2024).

In his address at COP29, President Mnangagwa stated:

The time for half measures is over and we all have a duty to fully implement our agreements …Zimbabwe bears the brunt of climate change and is currently experiencing one of the most devastating El Niño-induced droughts in history. (Azernews 2024)

This statement powerfully encapsulates the urgent need for comprehensive global action against climate change, emphasising that developing nations, despite their minimal contributions to global emissions, are often the hardest hit by climate crises (Reuters 2024).

Moreover, Mnangagwa’s call for prioritising the views of developing nations resonates strongly with the sentiments expressed in various media statements. He stated at a bilateral meeting with Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev, ‘Views of developing countries must be prioritised and respected at the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP29)’ (Bwititi 2024:n.p.). This assertion underlines the need for equity in climate negotiations and ensures that the voices of the most affected nations are duly represented and considered.

The climate crisis transcends geopolitical boundaries, invoking ethical and theological imperatives for climate awareness and protection. This study is concerned with the Christian religion, although it acknowledges the presence of other religious traditions that emphasise stewardship of the Earth and advocate for care of creation. For instance, in Christian theology, the concept of stewardship is often grounded in biblical texts such as Genesis 2:15, where humanity is called to ‘work and take care of’ the Earth. This theological perspective aligns with the ethical responsibility to address climate change and protect vulnerable communities.

The encyclical letter Laudato Si’ by Pope Francis, who articulates a moral obligation to care for God’s creation – saying: ‘The Earth, our home, is beginning to look more and more like an immense pile of filth’ (Francis 2015:17) – has challenged Jewish Rabbis to make a plea using a similar approach (https://blessedtomorrow.org/author/path2positive/). This statement underscores the gravity of environmental degradation, an issue that, as President Mnangagwa noted, is further exacerbated by the socio-economic vulnerabilities faced by countries like Zimbabwe.

Zimbabwe’s engagement in COP29 and President Mnangagwa’s statements serve to illuminate the dire consequences of climate change faced by developing nations. His assertive advocacy for the recognition of these nations’ perspectives, coupled with ethical and theological frameworks that call for environmental stewardship, positions Zimbabwe as a leader in the discourse on climate justice. The interconnections between faith-based values and climate action highlight the moral imperative for global cooperation and solidarity in addressing the environmental crises that disproportionately affect developing countries. This appraisal showcases Zimbabwe’s proactive approach in the global climate discourse through its participation in COP29, while integrating ethical and theological perspectives to strengthen the call for climate justice and action. However, our concern for this Kairos moment is in the large representation that attended the conference and the representativeness of this group on the vulnerable people as discussed in the following section.

The ethical imperative for representation in the 29th Conference of Parties

Inclusivity through the Local Conference of Children and Youth

Zimbabwe’s Local Conference of Children and Youth (LCOY) 2024 exemplifies a significant effort towards inclusivity in climate advocacy by actively engaging young people in discussions about climate change, a challenge that disproportionately affects them. This initiative reflects a recognition of the need for diverse representation in crafting effective solutions to climate issues, but it also raises discussions regarding its merits and demerits.

Zimbabwe’s decision to include young people in climate advocacy through the LCOY represents an important step towards a more inclusive approach to addressing climate change. One of the primary merits of including young voices in climate advocacy is the empowerment that arises from their representation. Munashe Masvaure, a student from Lord Malvern High School, aptly expressed this sentiment: ‘As children, we need to be heard and taken seriously and not just seen as kids’ (Chibvuma 2024:n.p.). This powerful call aligns with ethical considerations that emphasise the importance of giving voice to marginalised groups (Young 2002). Children, especially those from underrepresented communities, bring unique perspectives and experiences that are vital for understanding the impacts of climate variability and for developing workable solutions to human activity, although the model may be limited in scale (eds. Crate & Nuttall 2016).

Moreover, integrating children’s perspectives into climate discussions contributes to more comprehensive solutions. Ethical frameworks often highlight the intrinsic value of diverse community voices in achieving holistic understanding and responses. The outcome statement from the conference underscores ‘the need for unity and cooperation’ (Chibvuma 2024:n.p.), reflecting a key ethical principle of solidarity found in Christianity. This principle promotes collective responsibility for the common good (eds. Ulbert et al. 2018), suggesting that input from all, including children, can lead to more nuanced and effective climate solutions.

Additionally, involving children and youth in these discussions lays the groundwork for future leadership. Edward Kallon articulated this importance: ‘Children and youth must be at the front and centre in climate policies and implementation as today’s change-makers and tomorrow’s leaders’ (Chibvuma 2024:n.p.). In their proposal, the LCOY pushed ‘for the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG), which affirms that finance must respond to the disproportionate impacts of climate change on children and empower them through targeted measures’ (Chibvuma 2024:n.p.). This proactive approach aligns with social ethics, which argue that participation in decision-making fosters accountability and cultivates a sense of responsibility among young people for the future (Jacquez, Vaughn & Wagner 2013).

However, these merits are accompanied by notable demerits that warrant careful consideration. One primary concern is the potential for tokenism. While the intent behind their inclusion is commendable, there is a risk that young voices may be superficially included without genuine regard for their contributions. The United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund [UNICEFs) emphasis on the need for ‘meaningful change’ (Chibvuma 2024:n.p.) implies a deeper level of accountability beyond mere participation. Ethical perspectives stress that if children are not sincerely integrated into decision-making processes, their involvement may simply become a façade rather than a genuine vehicle for influence (Michael 2002).

Furthermore, the demands placed upon children to articulate their concerns and propose solutions can be overwhelming. Even amid the vibrancy evident at LCOY, the burden on young advocates raises ethical questions around emotional and cognitive readiness. Young participants voiced the necessity for ‘age-specific interventions’ (Chibvuma 2024:n.p.) that promote climate education (Chibvuma 2024), highlighting the demand for tailored support systems to alleviate the pressures on these young advocates (Fraser 2000).

Lastly, the socio-cultural dynamics within Zimbabwe, and similar contexts, may impact how effectively young contributions are received within climate advocacy. Ethical discourse regarding marginalised voices recognises that their ability to be heard can hinge significantly on existing societal structures and power dynamics. Thus, it is crucial to critically reflect on these cultural constraints to ensure that children’s voices lead to actionable measures and policies rather than being relegated to the background. Thus, Zimbabwe needs to ensure that children’s voices and agency are genuinely incorporated into climate strategies, not only for the sustainability of response efforts but also for nurturing a sense of responsibility among future leaders (Chibvuma 2024:n.p.). Lundy (2007) says that giving children a mouth only (i.e., a voice), without space (i.e., place), audience (i.e., an ear) and influence (i.e., agency), left the initiatives lacking in best interests of children as the starting point of all plans. This imperatively calls for efforts to focus both on inclusive representation and fostering an environment where young voices truly matter. While Zimbabwe’s approach to including young people in climate advocacy reflects a positive step towards inclusivity, emphasising empowerment, comprehensive solutions and future leadership, it simultaneously encounters challenges such as tokenism, inadequate support and cultural constraints.

The ethics of climate justice, thus, demand that we consider who is represented in global dialogues about climate change. Mbofana articulates, ‘If Zimbabwe is to have any meaningful impact at these summits, it must rethink its approach to representation’ (Mbofana 2024:n.p.). The theological foundation for prioritising the impoverished is deeply rooted in many world religions, which teach compassion and justice for the marginalised. For instance, the biblical concept of ‘preferential option for the poor’ emphasises the moral obligation to lift the voices of the most oppressed when addressing structural injustices.

Overlooking the inclusion of impacted communities at the 29th Conference of Parties

The representation of vulnerable groups in climate advocacy and action is increasingly recognised as essential for fostering effective climate policies and ensuring equitable responses to climate change impacts in various parts of the world (Figure 1). In the context of Zimbabwe, Article 7 of the Paris Agreement on adaptation calls to question the absence of rural farmers, survivors of natural disasters and communities grappling with economic hardships, as established in the agreement that adaptive capacity must be enhanced to the vulnerable by strengthening their resilience to climate vulnerability. In other words, it questions the national adaptation strategy by failing to include, in its approach, the most vulnerable of society in important global climate discussions at the COP29.

FIGURE 1: Climate impacted communal farmers.

The ‘preferential option for the poor’, a theological and ethical principle deeply rooted in various faith traditions, emphasises the moral imperative to prioritise the needs and voices of the most marginalised populations. This concept, central to Catholic social teaching, asserts that society should be structured to benefit those who are poor and vulnerable first. As articulated in the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Latin America (CELAM) in their 1968 Medellín Conference, ‘the option for the poor … is not only a choice; it is a commitment to a style of life’ that seeks to rectify existing inequalities (The Medellín Conference Documents 1968).

In treating climate change as a mere technical or economic challenge, the Zimbabwean delegation at COP29 largely overlooked this crucial ethical consideration. Instead of including representatives from impacted communities, the government prioritised elite participants who often lack the direct experience and insight required to advocate for those facing immediate and severe impacts from climate change. For example, scholars such as Banerjee (2021), Adger et al. (2003, 2006) and Wisner et al. (2004) emphasise that climate change disproportionately affects the most economically disadvantaged people because they are vulnerable because of political, economic and social conditions limiting their capacity to prepare for, cope with and recover from climate-induced disasters. This is also supported by McEntire, Gilmore Crocker and Peters (2010) and Blaikie et al. (2014), who argue that everyone is vulnerable to disasters, but the most vulnerable are more likely to suffer from it compared to all others. Vulnerability encompasses the traits of individuals or groups that affect their capacity to anticipate, cope with and recover from natural hazards. Resilience is enhanced by social networks facilitating resource access, enabling effective self-organisation and response to disasters (Blaikie et al. 2014; Wisner et al. 2004:11). Thus, it follows that effective climate action must incorporate the lived experiences and knowledge of these vulnerable populations.

This study uses the Christian faith in its reflection on ethical stewardship of creation, aligning calls for justice and equity with Oluf Langhelle (2000:303), who traces the concept’s roots to the early 1970s World Council of Churches (WCC), articulating that climate change has not just been an environmental problem but has always been a matter of environmental justice and equity. In that spirit, COP29 is advocating for a ‘justice-driven climate action’ that most profoundly affects marginalised communities (WCC 2024). Further, Rev. Prof. Jerry Pillay, the WCC general secretary, in the WCC News, emphasised the ethical urgency of the moment saying:

As people of faith, we believe addressing the climate crisis is not only a scientific necessity but a profound moral obligation rooted in Christian values of justice and compassion. We urge developed nations to lead by example, recognizing their historic responsibility and supporting a global response that meets the needs of the most vulnerable, honoring God’s creation and upholding our commitment to care for each other. (WCC 2024)

This is supported by the director of the WCC Commission on Climate Justice and Sustainable Development, Athena Peralta, saying:

The impacts of climate change extend beyond physical damage; they touch the very heart of communities, eroding cultural heritage and spiritual identity, particularly for Indigenous peoples …Climate finance frameworks must consider these intangible losses, respecting and protecting Indigenous knowledge as vital to resilient climate solutions.

Empowering communities to be active participants in climate justice

This shift aligns with the Hyogo Framework for Action, which asserts that ‘at-risk’ communities should not be passive recipients of information, but rather active participants empowered to both disseminate and respond to disaster information (UNISDR 2012). By integrating community-led early warning systems (CBEWS) and participatory approaches, communities can transform from mere recipients of climate action to proactive agents of change, transforming the way they perceive and respond to disaster risks. This paradigm shift from silence to resilience requires a fundamental shift in the way we approach climate action, prioritising community-led initiatives and empowering vulnerable communities to take ownership of their disaster risk reduction and management processes.

Furthermore, the UNFCCC (2015) highlights the need for diverse stakeholder inclusion, especially women, yet progress in climate leadership and governance remains inconsistent, risking accountability and ownership in climate finance (Tanner & Horn-Phathanothai 2014). According to Article 6 of the Paris Agreement, ‘Parties should enhance steps to ensure the engagement of all stakeholders, including those most affected by climate change’ (United Nations 2015). Zimbabwe’s decision to exclude these stakeholders from its delegation at COP29 constitutes a departure from internationally recognised norms.

The moral and ethical implications of neglecting the representation of vulnerable groups are profound. When decisions about climate action are made without input from affected communities, it not only reinforces existing social inequities but also leads to policies that exacerbate their struggles. The experiences of coal mining communities highlight how knowledge of coal mining and climate change impacts could inform equitable policy responses, emphasising the need for adaptive social protection (ASP) to build resilience and prevent further poverty among the vulnerable (Banerjee 2021). Their insights into agricultural adaptations to changing rainfall patterns, for instance, would provide invaluable context for climate negotiations but remain unheard within a tightly controlled and elite-driven delegation framework.

Thus, the omission of vulnerable groups from Zimbabwe’s COP29 representation indicates a missed opportunity to honour what Gustav Gutiérrez has commonly referred to as ‘the preferential option for the poor’ (Kim 2012:99–157) and to execute ethical climate advocacy. Furthermore, effective climate responses must meaningfully incorporate the voices of those most impacted by climate change. By doing so, not only can Zimbabwe embrace a more just approach to climate action, but it can also align itself with a broad international consensus that values equity, justice and representation for all, especially those currently suffering on the frontlines of the climate crisis.

Community narratives as testimonies: A missed opportunity

Climate change, a profound global challenge, demands that the voices of those directly affected in Zimbabwe be amplified and integrated, transforming climate resilience (i.e., mitigation and adaptation strategies) from mere ambition into a binding commitment that transcends national and temporal boundaries (ed. Trinh 2024). In Zimbabwe, communities such as those in Hwange struggling with the water crisis (iFAW 2023), survivors of Cyclone Idai in Manicaland (BBC 2019) and residents of the Lowveld grappling with drought (AlJazeera 2024) are not just statistics; they provide invaluable narratives that encapsulate the lived experiences and struggles of the most vulnerable populations. These grassroots testimonies must be prioritised in climate advocacy, particularly at forums like COP29, where the collective consciousness about climate issues is shaped.

In the 1st Climate and Health Africa Conference on 28 October 2024 to 31 October 2024, emphasis on stories was made rather than science because ‘climate change affects people, lives, and not just chemistry, physics and biology but represents human stories’ (CHAC 2024). This supports Mbofana’s (2024) argument that the ‘real voices of climate change’ (n.p.) are those belonging to communities whose lives have been irrevocably altered. In these voices are authentic experiences that highlight the urgent need for climate action and adaptation. Community narratives play a fundamental role in understanding climate impacts at a human level. They articulate the specific challenges that marginalised groups face, elucidating the consequences of policy decisions often made by elites without consulting those affected. For instance, the residents of Hwange do not only deal with rising temperatures and erratic rainfall patterns but also face the added burden of economic instability as their agricultural practices become increasingly untenable. Listening to their stories allows stakeholders to develop more nuanced and effective climate strategies (Adger et al. 2003, 2006).

Moreover, narratives from Cyclone Idai survivors underline the necessity for immediate disaster preparedness and response plans that genuinely reflect the realities experienced by those impacted. The ethical implications of excluding these groups from climate conversations are profound. As highlighted by theologian Norman Wirzba (2015), the narrative of the marginalised must take centre stage in discourses that affect their lives. Failing to include these voices perpetuates a cycle of neglect and exacerbates inequality, as policymakers remain uninformed about the ground realities faced by the most vulnerable communities.

From a religious perspective, faith leaders emphasise a moral imperative to care for nature and to prioritise the vulnerable people. In this study, reference is made mainly to the Christian faith because of its large following. Thus, Pope Francis’ advocacy for social justice for this study is relevant, especially his underscoring of this responsibility, rooted in biblical teachings like Psalm 24:1, which declares, ‘the earth is the Lord’s’. This stewardship extends to amplifying the voices of those impacted by climate change, ensuring that their suffering informs decision-making processes and urging political leaders to confront climate change as a profound moral issue. Moreover, liberation theology argues that the ‘preferential option for the poor’ constitutes a fundamental ethical stance within Christian thought. This perspective posits that God’s favour lies with those who are disenfranchised and oppressed. By ignoring community narratives, there is a disservice not only to ethical governance but also a failure to align with spiritual tenets that call for awareness, compassion and justice for marginalised populations (Gutiérrez 2023).

At COP29, the lack of representation for communities affected by climate change in Zimbabwe was a glaring omission. Testimonies from individuals who have first-hand experience of climate impacts could have provided critical insights into effective adaptation measures. For example, farmers in Hwange could discuss their innovative coping strategies, which may include traditional ecological knowledge that enhances resilience. Survivors of Cyclone Idai in Chimanimani could share the psychological and socio-economic effects of natural disasters, pushing for more robust disaster response frameworks. Additionally, people’s organisations interested in prioritising the interests of the vulnerable rather than the elites, like the Centre for Natural Resource Governance (CNRG) and social groups developing strategies for Tackling Climate Change through Education and Training (TaCCET), should have been integral parts of Zimbabwe’s delegation to COP29. These people and their organisations could have directly conveyed to world leaders and decision-makers their collective communities’ experiences and demands. This could have led to the reframing of their testimonies on the climate narrative to focus more on human stories rather than abstract data, ensuring that policies reflect the needs and aspirations of Zimbabweans on the frontlines of climate change.

Incorporating community narratives as testimonies into climate discussions is not just an act of representation; it is a crucial step towards ethical governance and effective climate policy. The exclusion of these voices from platforms like COP29 exemplifies the disconnect between policymakers and the realities faced by vulnerable populations in Zimbabwe. By centring the narratives of those most affected, Zimbabwe can move towards a more equitable and responsive approach to climate change that truly reflects the interests of its people. By centring the narratives of those most affected, Zimbabwe can forge a responsive climate strategy that echoes its people’s interests, in light of what other developing nations are grappling with on climate change that also threatens their environments and well-being, illustrating contrasting yet interconnected struggles.

Rethinking the delegation structure

Rethinking the delegation structure for Zimbabwe’s representation at international forums such as COP29 is not merely an administrative adjustment; it is a necessity driven by ethical considerations, social responsibility and a genuine commitment to represent the voices of those most affected by climate change. Mbofana’s (2024:n.p.) call for a radical restructuring highlights how a substantial segment of society remains voiceless and overlooked amid governmental excess and elite representation.

In ethical governance, the principle of representation is not just a question of numbers but rather about who gets to speak and whose needs are prioritised. The current practice of sending a bloated delegation primarily composed of government officials who are often disconnected from the realities faced by vulnerable communities raises serious ethical concerns. This is why emphasis on ethical governance that demands displays of transparency, accountability and representation has been hailed for truly reflecting the society the government serves (Solomon 2020).

By contrast, a delegation that incorporates not only representatives from affected communities but also civil society organisations aligns with these ethical imperatives. Such a model allows for a broader spectrum of experiences and insights to be represented, facilitating a deeper understanding of the issues at hand. For instance, the local farmers from drought-stricken areas in Zimbabwe possess invaluable first-hand knowledge about climatic changes, agricultural challenges and adaptive strategies. Their presence at COP29 could transform the narrative, moving it from merely theoretical discussions to grounded, lived experiences that demand urgent attention.

From a theological standpoint, many belief systems emphasise the moral obligation to advocate for the marginalised and the voiceless. In Christian teachings, for instance, Proverbs 31:8–9 states, ‘Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves; ensure justice for those being crushed. Yes, speak up for the poor and helpless, and see that they get justice’. Such religious ethical frameworks underline the necessity for governments to prioritise the voices of the vulnerable in their representation at international forums.

Moreover, many religious traditions advocate for stewardship of creation, which includes caring for the environment and the communities that depend on it. The concept of ‘kaizen’, or continuous improvement, present in various traditions, aligns with the need to constantly re-evaluate and improve decision-making structures to ensure inclusivity and justice. This theological lens offers a compelling argument for restructuring the delegation to ensure that resources and representation honour the dignity of all individuals, particularly those most impacted by climate change.

The lavish expenditure of $2m on a delegation while millions of Zimbabweans struggle for basic necessities presents a staggering imbalance in priorities. This misallocation of resources not only undermines ethical governance but also fails to address the immediate needs of the population. According to Rawls (2017:43), just resource allocation prioritises benefits for the least advantaged. Yet, ‘Africa’s energy systems stand at a crossroads’ (Africa Progress Panel 2015:68), despite its renewable potential. It is struggling with energy needs amid rising greenhouse gas emissions, risking development because of eschewed coalitions (eds. Klöck et al. 2021). Redirecting funds allocated for elite representation towards community aid, climate adaptation projects like buying solar kits for businesses and supporting local farmers not only adheres to this ethical mandate but also directly addresses Zimbabwe’s pressing needs.

In constructing a more ethically sound delegation, Zimbabwe could have housed representatives from civil society organisations, such as TaCCET and CNRG, whose on-the-ground efforts to engage with vulnerable communities put them in a better position to articulate the pressing challenges faced by these groups. The inclusion of these voices could have led to a stronger advocacy for specific adaptation strategies, such as improved agricultural practices and immediate disaster relief, which are crucial for community resilience against climate change impacts.

The absence of grassroots representatives at COP29 resulted in a missed opportunity to address significant issues. The testimonies from individuals at grassroots affected by climate adversities could have illuminated the urgency of immediate and tailored international assistance. Their perspectives could have also reformulated dialogue on climate finance, highlighting the need for funds to be allocated not just for technology and infrastructure but also for socio-economic resilience initiatives in the most affected communities.

Furthermore, the lack of a representative structure that encapsulates local insights poses the risk of climate action initiatives being crafted without an understanding of the cultural, economic and environmental contexts that define the Zimbabwean experience. According to Adger (2006), local knowledge plays a pivotal role in shaping effective and culturally sensitive adaptation strategies. Without these voices, Zimbabwe risks endorsing solutions that overlook the lived realities of its citizens.

In all, a reconsideration of Zimbabwe’s delegation to international climate forums is not solely a logistical adjustment; it is a moral imperative. Rethinking the structure to prioritise grassroots representation allows for ethical alignment with the principles of justice, accountability and transparency. By amplifying the voices of those most affected by climate change, Zimbabwe can provide a more authentic and compelling narrative at COP29 and contribute to solutions that truly reflect the needs of its population.

Perspectives on redistributing resources for a just transition

Zimbabwe’s lavish expenditures on COP29 starkly contrast with its citizens’ urgent needs, highlighting the necessity for a re-evaluation of resource allocation. Defining climate migration – environmental, ecological and disaster – can aid policymakers in effectively addressing climate-induced population shifts. The allocation of approximately $1.2m for daily allowances for a bloated delegation is emblematic of a disconnect that must be addressed in the pursuit of a just transition (Mbofana 2024). Resources that could significantly alleviate pressing issues such as drought relief and infrastructure development are instead funnelled into extravagance and privilege.

From an ethical standpoint, one could draw upon the principle of prioritising the needs of the marginalised, which is rooted in various theological frameworks advocating for ‘the preferential option for the poor’. For instance, the biblical imperative found in Proverbs 31:8–9 calls upon the community to ‘Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves, for the rights of all who are destitute’. This resonates with the notion that decision-makers should prioritise the voices and needs of the most vulnerable in society, those who are living the consequences of climate change, rather than elites who are detached from its impacts.

Additionally, the ethical frameworks found in Stewardship Theology emphasise the responsible management of resources within the context of God’s creation. This theology mandates that resources should not merely serve the interests of a few but must benefit the broader community. Middleton (2005) notes that:

[T]he Imago Dei designates the royal office or calling of human beings as God’s representatives and agents in the world, granted authorized power to share in God’s rule or administration of the earth’s resources and creatures. (p. 27)

Meaning true stewardship of the earth’s resources involves the active management and equitable distribution of natural resources to ensure that the common good is achieved. If Zimbabwe’s leaders are stewards of the nation’s resources, they have a moral obligation to use funds to address the immediate needs of their populations rather than expending them on ostentatious displays of authority.

Theological reflections on justice often emphasise the concept of restorative justice, which seeks not merely to punish wrongs but to repair and restore relationships and communities (Horsley 2003). By channelling funds towards solutions that address the grievances and unmet needs of climate-affected populations, Zimbabwe’s government would embody a commitment to restorative justice. This consideration could have been crucial in shaping discussions at COP29, as it would elevate the conversation from one focused solely on national representation to one that incorporates holistic community healing and restoration.

Missed opportunities: Disconnect between elites and citizens on future directions

At COP29, the discourse on redistributing resources for a just transition could have deepened, especially as stark contrasts emerged between luxury portrayed by government officials and the harsh realities many Zimbabweans continue to endure. Mbofana (2024) advocates for grassroots prioritisation in global climate dialogues. Major faiths advocate for harmonious living with nature, and Christianity emphasises stewardship of God’s creation, as seen in Genesis 2:15, highlighting the moral imperative to protect our planet for all. The exclusion of these individuals from the summit reflects a failure not only in representation but also in recognising their lived experiences and practical knowledge in climate resilience and adaptation. Instead of sending an elite contingent to Azerbaijan, engaging community leaders could have highlighted urgent climate-related issues – like food security and clean water access – demonstrating how climate change jeopardises human development and the Sustainable Development Goals. In doing so, shared narratives could provoke awareness among international stakeholders about the real consequences of climate inaction, which has far-reaching implications for countries like Zimbabwe.

In fact, the $200 000.00 expenditure on a private jet serves as both a financial drain and a psychological barrier, leading to disenfranchisement among the citizenry. A shift towards community-focused resource distribution would demonstrate a commitment to genuine representation and effective use of national funds. Ethical stewardship posits a view that leadership should embody humility and serve the well-being of the community rather than indulging in self-serving luxury. Zimbabwe’s government must reassess its priorities to foster sustainability and resilience amid escalating climate challenges (Trinh 2024).

The implications of this imbalance extend beyond immediate financial misallocation; they reflect a broader societal ethos that prioritises appearances and prestige over the urgency for action and justice. Academic scholars such as Adger et al. (2003, 2006) illustrate how vulnerability to climate change is often exacerbated by social inequities, which should compel Zimbabwean leaders to consider a strategy that addresses the broader socio-economic factors contributing to vulnerability. By implementing a just transition focused on community empowerment and resource redistribution, Zimbabwe could present itself as a model not only of participation in global dialogues but also of genuine commitment to the realities faced by its citizens.

In moving forward, it is essential to foster institutional mechanisms for community participation in climate discussions, ensuring that both their voices and experiences inform national and international policies. Such engagement would ensure that Zimbabwe’s approach to COP summits and climate action is grounded in a responsible, ethical and just framework conducive to meaningful change.

A call for informed actions: The case for genuine inclusion in climate discourse

The current climate crisis represents an urgent call to action for nations worldwide, and Zimbabwe is no exception. This moment demands transformational approaches that amplify marginalised voices, especially from nations like Zimbabwe facing severe climate impacts. Engaging faith leaders globally reveals that a crucial intersection of ethics, advocacy and creation care takes place.

The anticipated dialogue at COP29 was largely characterised by the presence of a bloated delegation that exemplified excessive expenditure rather than genuine engagement with the issues at hand. Rather, Zimbabwe’s elites should engage on issues of reduction of coal use and other carbon-intensive industries that severely contaminate the air and soil in Zimbabwe and abroad. This is a justice issue that the Bible also alludes. The Book of Isaiah calls for ‘defending the oppressed, taking up the cause of the fatherless and pleading the case of the widow’ (Is 1:17, New International Version [NIV]). This scripture serves as a reminder that ethical action towards climate change involves advocating for those who lack a platform, ensuring the inclusion of voices from traditional communities suffering the direct impacts of environmental degradation.

Additionally, the Catholic social teaching of the ‘preferential option for the poor’ in alignment with the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), World Bank and African Development Bank (ADB)’s subscription to the Millennium Development Goals, emphasises the moral obligation to prioritise the needs of the most vulnerable in society, which strongly supports the need to attend to issues of equity, especially addressing climate-related vulnerability among the most impoverished Zimbabweans. Pope Francis, in his encyclical letter ‘Laudato Si’: On Care for Our Common Home’, urges us to listen to the cries of the earth and the poor by suggesting that we should reduce birth rate to resolve poverty saying that ‘the poor and the Earth are crying out’ (Francis 2015:24; Schlesinger, Ring & Cross 2015). By failing to include grassroots representatives, Zimbabwe’s delegation sidelined those who embody the very voices urgently calling for change as the nation confronts the triple threats of environmental degradation, climate invariability and economic instability.

The absence of vulnerable communities from COP29 discussions could have grave implications for Zimbabwe’s climate action strategy. As mentioned earlier, the perspectives of grassroots communities are vital for informing policies that genuinely respond to local needs. As established by the UNFCCC that ‘the local value and knowledge systems must be considered’ (UNFCCC 2021), the participation of local communities, especially women and children in education, health, home-based enterprises and vocational and technical services, needs to be emphasised for effective climate action, although stark reality shows minimal movement in policy and decision-making processes on climate change. Yet, the decision to inflate the delegation with government officials undermines this principle of integrated representation.

Moreover, the theological discourse surrounding creation care underscores humanity’s responsibility to protect the environment as stewards of God’s creation. Genesis 2:15 states, ‘The LORD God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it’ (NIV). Governments compromise ecological stewardship by prioritising luxury over sustainability; Zimbabwe’s extravagant portrayals dilute climate responsibility, while Australia’s violations of human rights for Torres Strait Islanders highlight the profound disconnect between policy and climate realities (Adamson et al. 2024).

Zimbabwe’s actions at COP29 presented an opportunity to elevate the lived experiences of those most affected by climate crises. Instead of engaging in authentic dialogue about reparative measures through redressing the negligence suffered by marginalised communities, the delegation’s focus remained on prestige and excess.

For instance, testimony from local communities revealing experiences of drought, food insecurity and economic hardship could have been transformative. Wide-ranging dialogues could have yielded concrete policy proposals that stress sustainable agriculture, restorative practices and community resilience. Ethically, the exclusion of these voices leads to a disservice to international climate negotiations, where pet projects of a political elite overshadow critical grassroots movements seeking just and equitable solutions.

Moreover, civil society organisations engaged in local environmental advocacy could have served as catalysts for meaningful negotiations if they had been represented. Their expertise in grassroots mobilisation and local adaptive strategies would have provided COP29 discussions with the critical insights needed to formulate impactful climate protection policies.

In light of these observations, Zimbabwe must carefully examine its approach to international climate discussions going forward. The gap between lavish spending and immediate local needs must be bridged through informed action. This demonstrates a commitment not only to climate justice but also to ethical governance – one that acknowledges the legitimate claims of the marginalised and their inherent rights to shape policies impacting their lives (eds. Scott & Salamanca 2020).

It is pertinent to highlight that informed action necessitates a paradigm shift towards inclusion, transparency and accountability. By prioritising the voices of those most impacted by climate change, Zimbabwe can cultivate a more just and equitable approach to climate negotiations. The essence of the 21st-century climate conversation must transcend mere representation; it should embody a holistic commitment to equity, leading the way for meaningful investments in sustainable development that uplift the most vulnerable and transform Zimbabwe’s role in the global climate discourse from one of excess to one of moral leadership.

Conclusion

The exigencies of climate action in Zimbabwe beckon a profound reorientation of both representation and resource allocation within the framework of international climate discourse, particularly as exemplified by evident shortcomings on Zimbabwe’s actions at COP29. The ethical imperative articulated through the ‘preferential option for the poor’ necessitates that the voices of marginalised communities, often overshadowed by the hegemony of elite narratives, be elevated as pivotal players in the climate dialogue, effectively altering the trajectory of policy formulation to reflect the lived realities of those most affected by environmental degradation.

Moreover, the theological underpinnings that advocate for stewardship and care for creation must be intricately woven into the fabric of climate advocacy. They compel decision-makers to transcend mere rhetorical commitment to inclusivity, necessitating an institutional framework that authentically engages grassroots representatives. As articulated throughout this discourse, the consequences of exclusionary practices are profound, perpetuating cycles of inequality and undermining the integrity of climate interventions.

Thus, a recalibrated delegation structure, anchored in ethical governance and informed by the imperative of accountability, stands as an essential prerequisite for fostering equitable climate solutions. Such an approach not only aligns with international norms as codified by frameworks such as the UNFCCC but also resonates with theological principles advocating for justice, equity and collective responsibility. By prioritising the insights and experiences of those whose lives are irrevocably altered by climate change, Zimbabwe can metamorphose its role in the global climate narrative from that of an indulgent participant to a paradigm of moral leadership and transformative action.

The imperative for genuine inclusion, transparency and collaborative engagement in climate discussions must serve as the cornerstone of Zimbabwe’s climate strategy moving forward. By embracing ethical, moral and theological commitments, like what other nations did (eds. Markandya, Galarraga & de Murieta 2014), this nation can strengthen its social framework against climate change, facilitating a just and sustainable future while navigating the complexities of optimal adaptations under varying emission scenarios.

Acknowledgements

Artificial intelligence was used for English editing, flow and clarity of statements.

The author declares that they have no financial or personal relationships that may have inappropriately influenced them in writing this article.

G.M. is the sole author of this research article.

Ethical clearance to conduct this study was obtained from the Zimbabwe Open University Research Ethics Committee (No. ZOU-REC[REID]2024/1/03/24).

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no new data were created or analysed in this study.

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and are the product of professional research. It does not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any affiliated institution, funder, agency or that of the publisher. The author is responsible for this article’s results, findings and content.

References