In many developing countries, the availability and use of climate data are still in their infancy. While meteorological data has become more accessible, much of the existing knowledge surrounding climate action is focused on fiscal frameworks, community mobilization efforts, carbon markets, and the regulatory environments that shape climate mitigation and adaptation measures. While these areas are undeniably important, they don't provide the granular, localized data required for effective climate-resilient development planning.
For true climate resilience, we need to look deeper—specifically, at the risks, impacts, and vulnerabilities specific to each region. This analysis helps to determine what kinds of data are necessary for planning, and which government agencies need to be involved in addressing vulnerabilities in sectors most affected by climate change. In regions where climate change is accelerating challenges such as poverty, inadequate infrastructure, and poor governance, understanding and acting on these risks is crucial.
As we explore the concept of climate-resilient development, three pivotal questions emerge: What climate risks does a particular area face? Which service delivery sectors are most vulnerable? And how are different levels of government coordinating to address these vulnerabilities? Finding answers to these questions is the first step in supporting climate-sensitive development planning, especially in the world's most climate-vulnerable regions.
What Climate Risks Are Facing the Region?
The first step in building climate resilience is understanding the specific risks a country, city, or community faces. For instance, is the area located in an arid region, like parts of Northern Nigeria, or is it a coastal region, like Lagos? Each of these locations faces distinct challenges. Arid regions are more likely to grapple with desertification, reduced agricultural productivity, and water scarcity, while coastal cities are vulnerable to rising sea levels, flooding, and coastal erosion.
To build resilience, it’s not enough to know that climate change is a threat; we must know exactly what kind of threat it presents. The nature of the risk will influence the type of data required for resilience planning. In Northern Nigeria, for example, data on rainfall patterns, water resources, and desertification trends would be critical for managing agricultural practices and preventing food insecurity. On the other hand, in coastal regions like Lagos, data on sea level rise, flood patterns, and infrastructure vulnerability is essential to plan for future urban development and protect critical infrastructure.
These differences underscore the need for context-specific climate data. Localized climate models, real-time data, and predictive analytics can help decision-makers understand the potential impacts on health, the economy, environmental sustainability, and vulnerable populations. In many cases, these impacts will have cascading effects across multiple sectors, from agriculture and water resources to infrastructure and healthcare.
For example, water-related risks in both arid and coastal cities may follow different paths but lead to similar outcomes: reduced access to clean water, which impacts public health and economic productivity. The lack of clean water can increase disease outbreaks, reduce agricultural yields, and force populations to migrate, increasing pressure on already fragile urban systems. In this sense, climate resilience isn’t just about adapting to the physical environment but also about protecting economic and social stability.
Which Service Delivery Sectors Are Most Vulnerable?
Once we understand the specific climate risks facing a region, the next step is to identify which sectors are most vulnerable. In many developing countries, critical services such as water supply, healthcare, education, and infrastructure are already under strain. Climate change acts as a stress multiplier, exacerbating existing vulnerabilities and creating new challenges.
For instance, in flood-prone areas like Lagos, infrastructure is particularly vulnerable. Flooding can damage roads, bridges, and buildings, disrupting transportation networks and limiting access to essential services. This, in turn, affects healthcare delivery, education, and the local economy. In Northern Nigeria, desertification and drought threaten food security by reducing agricultural productivity, putting millions of people at risk of hunger and malnutrition.
Identifying the service sectors most vulnerable to climate impacts allows policymakers to prioritize interventions. For example, ensuring that health facilities are located in flood-safe areas, that water supply systems are climate-resilient, or that agricultural practices are adapted to drought conditions are critical actions for safeguarding service delivery in climate-vulnerable regions. Moreover, sector-specific climate data, such as hydrological data for water management or soil quality assessments for agriculture, is essential for targeted adaptation strategies.
Climate vulnerabilities are long-term stressors that can coalesce into sudden shocks. For example, recurrent flooding may not only disrupt daily life but also lead to the long-term degradation of infrastructure, making cities more vulnerable to future climate events. Without the proper data and decision-support tools, it becomes nearly impossible for governments to anticipate and respond to these vulnerabilities effectively.
How Are Government Agencies Coordinating Climate-Sensitive Service Delivery?
Coordination among different levels of government is crucial for climate-resilient development. In many developing countries, the lack of institutional coordination hampers efforts to address climate risks effectively. Even when data on climate vulnerabilities is available, poor communication between local, regional, and national governments can prevent timely and effective action.
Effective governance requires a clear understanding of which service delivery agencies are responsible for managing specific climate risks and how these agencies can work together to implement climate-sensitive policies. For example, in Lagos, managing flood risks may require coordination between urban planners, environmental agencies, and water management authorities. Without a cohesive plan that integrates all relevant stakeholders, efforts to address flooding may fall short.
In regions like Northern Nigeria, where governance is already tenuous, strengthening institutional capacity for climate adaptation is critical. Developing new knowledge on institutional coordination for service delivery and ensuring that agencies at all levels of government are aligned can significantly improve the implementation of climate-resilient policies. This could involve creating integrated platforms for data sharing or establishing multi-agency task forces to respond to specific climate risks, such as drought or flooding.
After the Questions: What’s Next?
Once we’ve addressed these three key questions—understanding climate risks, identifying vulnerable sectors, and improving institutional coordination—the next step is to translate this knowledge into action. Effective climate-sensitive development planning requires the right data, tools, and governance structures. It also demands a commitment to building capacity at all levels of government, from local to national, to ensure that policies are implemented effectively.
For developing countries, especially those most vulnerable to climate change, the stakes are high. Failure to address these challenges could result in catastrophic social, economic, and environmental consequences. However, with the right approach—one that integrates localized climate data prioritizes vulnerable sectors, and fosters institutional coordination—these countries can build resilience and protect their most vulnerable populations from the worst impacts of climate change.
By asking the right questions and using data-driven decision-support tools, governments in climate-risk regions can begin to build a more sustainable and resilient future. Climate change may be one of the greatest challenges of our time, but with the right strategies in place, it is a challenge that can be met.
References
1. Gates, S., Hegre, H., Nygård, H. M., & Strand, H. (2010). Consequences of civil conflict. ResearchGate.
2. Goemans, C., Koester, D., & Loudon, S. (2021). Gender equality and fragility. OECD.
3. Nyadera, I. N., Kisaka, M. O., & Agwanda, B. (2020). Boko Haram crisis in Nigeria: A nexus of just war and fragile state. The Round Table, 109(4), 411-426.
4. Egharevba, M. E., & Iruonagbe, C. T. (2015). Ethnic/religious insurgencies and nation-building in Nigeria. International Affairs and Global Strategy.
5. Ikpe, E. (2017). Counting the development costs of the conflict in North-Eastern Nigeria: The economic impact of the Boko Haram-led insurgency. Conflict, Security & Development, 17(4), 305-326.
6. Atela, M., Ojebode, A., Makokha, R., & Otieno, M. (2021). Women organizing in fragility and conflict: Lessons from the #BringBackOurGirls movement. Gender & Development, 29(1), 53-69.
7. Tripp, A. M. (2012). Women's political empowerment in state-building and peace-building: A baseline study. London: DFID.
8. Goemans et al. (2021).
9. Central Bank of Nigeria. (2018). National Financial Inclusion Strategy (Revised).
10. Melander, E. (2015). Gender equality and intrastate armed conflict. International Studies Quarterly, 49(4), 695-715.
11. Lahai, J. I., & Koomson, I. (2020). State fragility and resilience in sub-Saharan Africa: Indicators and interventions.
12. Nyadera et al. (2020).
Comments