Climate change: should Africa adapt or mitigate?

Climate change: should Africa adapt or mitigate? By Ndimphiwe Mpongoma and Thato Tsheole Rhodes University’s Department of Environmental Science marked its 25th anniversary by bringing students, academics, government officials and community partners together last month to share research before confronting a difficult question: should Africa prioritise adapting to climate change or mitigating it? The department’s Annual Research Forum formed part of a broader series of events celebrating its quarter-century, with research presentations held across two days before academics, students and external guests faced one another in a climate debate. For Distinguished Professor Charlie Shackleton, who has been with the department since its early years, the celebrations offered an opportunity to showcase the knowledge produced within the department while opening that knowledge to audiences beyond academia. He said the anniversary programme was deliberately broader than the Research Forum, debate and gala dinner, with other activities including a fun run, tree planting and community clean-up. “What better way to do that than to showcase the knowledge that we are producing in the department and to showcase the research that we are engaged in,” Shackleton said of the anniversary. The forum included work from researchers at different stages of their academic careers, rather than being limited to postgraduate candidates. Lecturer Dr Nanamhla Gwedla discussed urban liveability, health and well-being, drawing from a recent opinion piece she co-authored with Shackleton and Dr Jessica Thorn of Imperial College London. Gwedla argued that urban liveability, health and well-being were closely connected to large, biodiverse and high-quality green spaces. While urban densification was increasingly unavoidable, she said cities did not necessarily have to choose between density and greenery. Her argument was that larger, quality green spaces could provide ecosystem services that fragmented patches of greenery may not provide to the same extent. For Gwedla, presenting the work during the department’s 25th anniversary carried personal significance. She recalled previously standing on the same platform as an honours student presenting her own research. Years later, she returned as an academic contributing as an expert to a global conversation. “It was actually a really proud moment,” she said, reflecting on having progressed through different stages of academia and later collaborating with Shackleton, who had previously supervised her. The forum also brought government experience into the academic conversation. Duduzile Soginga, a director responsible for implementing environmental programmes in the Eastern Cape within the national Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment, spoke about the green economy and the importance of making environmental terminology accessible to communities. Soginga, who has a longstanding relationship with the department through training, partnerships and work involving invasive species, said international and scholarly concepts could become alienating when the language used to explain them was disconnected from communities. Her presentation therefore sought to explain the green economy in accessible terms and connect global environmental concepts with local experiences. “We know language actually connects people,” she said, explaining that communities were more likely to participate in ecosystem restoration when the ideas surrounding it were communicated in ways that made sense locally. From research presentations to climate contest The exchange of research during the day gave way to a livelier test of environmental arguments when two teams debated whether Africa should prioritise adaptation over mitigation in responding to climate change. On the proposition side, Nadia Sitas argued that prioritising adaptation did not mean abandoning mitigation. Her team’s case centred on where African countries should place their immediate attention when financial resources, institutional capacity and public funding were constrained. The proposition argued that African communities were already experiencing droughts, floods, heat stress and water insecurity and therefore could not wait for the longer-term benefits of emissions reductions before responding to present climate impacts. Adaptation, the team argued, could include interventions in water management, climate-resilient agriculture, ecosystem restoration and disaster-risk reduction while also producing development and, in some cases, mitigation benefits. “We are not abandoning mitigation,” the proposition said in its closing argument. “We are saying that when resources are limited and the harm is already here, protection must advance.” The opposing team challenged the idea that Africa should place one response above the other. Their argument emphasised that African countries also produced emissions, although unevenly, and that mitigation could support development through renewable energy, employment opportunities, ecosystem protection and reduced future climate risk. Professor Sheona Shackleton focused on agriculture, forestry and land-use change, arguing that protecting forests and restoring degraded landscapes could reduce emissions while simultaneously protecting water, biodiversity and ecosystem services on which communities depended. Professor Tally Palmer summarised the position more directly: Africa should not be required to choose between responding to present climate impacts and limiting future ones. “We must do both,” she said. The combination of the Research Forum and debate ultimately reflected the wider purpose of the anniversary programme: looking back at 25 years of knowledge production while creating space for disagreement about the environmental questions that would shape the years ahead.