Participation and Planning for Climate Change - Lessons From An Experimental Project in Maputo, Mozambique

"Local citizens have a wealth of knowledge that can be applied to the study of climate change…One resource that is often overlooked is local citizens themselves, who are both capable and eager to take action to improve the quality of life in their communities."

This Learning Paper explores the participatory approach used in the ‘Public, Private, People Partnerships for Climate Compatible Development’ (4PCCD) project, an experimental project implemented by a range of partners in Maputo, Mozambique. The project developed a participatory planning method called Participatory Action Plan Development (PAPD) to assist communities to identify climate-related development problems and solutions in a community in Maputo, as well as create partnerships and structures that address these concerns in an effective and sustainable way. While the focus was on addressing directly the concerns of local residents, such as sanitation, the project also sought to integrate climate change concerns and highlight development solutions as equally addressing the communities’ vulnerability to climate-related impacts.

As explained in the paper, Mozambique is highly vulnerable to natural disasters, in particular those of hydro-meteorological origin such as floods, drought, and cyclones. Vulnerability is increased by the urban living conditions in many parts of Maputo - such as Chamanculo C where the project took place - where settlements are unplanned, often in low-lying areas, and where infrastructure and services are often lacking. These existing urban conditions make communities particularly vulnerable during floods. For example, the presence of accumulated waste that surrounds houses may increase runoff, block drainage canals, and contaminate living spaces, with potentially detrimental effects on health.

The paper discusses the partnerships that existed between international non-governmental organisations (NGOs), government departments, municipalities, and local communities to address these issues. It highlights the fact that interactions are characterised by a lack of recognition by municipal and government authorities of communities’ knowledge and their potential to become active contributors to the process.

To address this, the project introduced the methodology of PAPD, which the paper goes on to describe in detail. It explains that PAPD "aims to foster negotiation and dialogue that can lead to knowledge co-production. The objective of PAPD is to give community residents the opportunity to articulate their needs so that they develop the capacity to influence policies and processes at the district, national and international levels. This is done through building consensus among different interest groups, which can enable the community to prioritise problems and implement potential solutions." As explained in the paper, building consensus refers to consensus not just in relation to what decisions are to be taken, but also to how such decisions will be taken. Building new political and institutional relationships is therefore a key part of PAPD to ensure that marginalised communities are included in the planning process. "As a consensus-building approach, the emphasis is on building relationships between diverse stakeholders to raise awareness and understanding of their different perspectives, using skilful facilitation to ensure the full participation of the most vulnerable and to avoid descending into a conversation that follows the fault lines of familiar local animosities."

The facilitator's role in this case was taken on by the project team. They also helped establish the community-led Climate Planning Committee (CPC) to support communication between the different stakeholders and to help build horizontal and vertical relationships. As stated in the paper, "the key process that articulates PAPD is that of locally organising communities for dialogue."

The paper explains how PAPD involves the following six steps:

1. "The preparation stage requires gathering background knowledge to identify primary stakeholders and organise them into representative groups.
2. Problem census and problem prioritisation entails the discussion of a range of environmental issues to increase awareness of underlying causes and how they impact different groups. This stage should help to identify alternatives that are shared among broader groups of stakeholders, thus helping to build mutual trust between different groups. This is the stage in which climate change information should be presented to primary stakeholders for their inclusion in climate change discussions.
3. Information gathering is the process whereby community representatives flesh out their proposals and establish their requirements, in terms of feasibility and suitability for existing problems. The CPC at this stage was one of the greatest achievements of our project, particularly because the CPC took leadership of the process from then on.
4. Analysis of solutions is the stage at which each proposal is evaluated, based on available information, in relation to different criteria, including social, technical/financial, environmental, political/institutional and sustainability factors.
5. Public feedback is given in collective meetings through direct engagement with specific actions.
6. Action planning summarises the results and states the possibilities for intervention, and may open up possibilities for action beyond the PAPD process."

In terms of project achievements, the brief highlights two key achievements: i) developing institutions for climate change governance at the local level, and ii) establishing channels of communication among different stakeholders from government, business, and civil society. Overall, the project created a shift away from just having local residents participating in planning for their neighbourhood to actively leading and mediating the process. For example, the CPC wrote the community’s proposals into a Community Plan for Climate Change Adaptation, they showcased their plans to other government institutions, and they established partnerships with civil society and private organisations that would otherwise not have existed prior to the project.

The authors of the paper conclude that: "The project demonstrates that local residents in Chamanculo C, and perhaps Maputo more broadly, could be responsive to a participatory planning culture. Giving each citizen a voice is essential to developing the potential of local communities to both engage with climate change information and to catalyse action for climate change. They can do so by incorporating climate change concerns into local development priorities. While in an abstract setting conflicts between development, mitigation and adaptation priorities may seem irreconcilable, communities are able to formulate practical and feasible options that negotiate and even resolve such trade-offs. The project also demonstrates that government institutions and business have a lot to gain from listening to local communities’ perspectives. Overall, local communities have a grounded understanding of climate, and they can do a lot with limited resources by capitalising on their own human resources."