Online Reporter
Takudzwa Gochero [email protected]
A farmer waits for the first rains before planting maize and an urban resident wonders why heatwaves are becoming more frequent, while a family in a flood-prone community watches water levels rise each rainy season.
Although these experiences are increasingly common across Zimbabwe, many people do not connect them to climate change or understand how climate information can help them make informed decisions.
The challenge is not simply that climate information is unavailable. Rather, it is that this information often fails to reach ordinary Zimbabweans in forms that are accessible, relevant, and actionable.
Zimbabwe’s climate ambitions depend not only on scientific research and policy development but also on effective climate communication. When information remains confined to technical reports or specialist discussions, it cannot fully support public understanding or informed decision-making.
This creates a communication gap.
The climate communication gap refers to the disconnect between the production of climate knowledge by experts and institutions and the ability of communities to understand, interpret, and apply that knowledge in decision-making.
Climate information exists, but access is uneven
Zimbabwe is rich with a wide range of sources of climate information. These are not limited to but include national weather services, Government ministries, universities, non-governmental organisations, community organisations, media, and international institutions. The most important and authentic of these include the Climate Change
Knowledge Portal, the Ministry of Environment, Climate and Wildlife, and the Meteorological Service Department of Zimbabwe.
Although these institutions play a critical role in generating climate knowledge, existing communication mechanisms have limitations in reaching diverse audiences. Much of the information is disseminated through online platforms, making it inaccessible to ordinary citizens, particularly those in rural areas with limited internet connectivity and low digital literacy.
In addition, the information is often presented in highly technical or scientific language that is difficult for non-specialists to understand, creating a gap between the production of climate knowledge and public comprehension.
Most resources are also produced primarily in English, limiting accessibility for communities that rely on indigenous languages such as Shona, Ndebele, Tonga, and others. Communication from these institutions is largely one-directional, focusing on disseminating reports, forecasts, policies, and updates with limited opportunities for citizens to ask questions, provide feedback, or actively engage in climate discussions.
Furthermore, climate information is not always sufficiently localised or contextualised to address the specific needs and experiences of different communities, making it difficult for people to relate scientific information to their daily lives and livelihoods.
The communication also places greater emphasis on informing citizens about climate conditions than on promoting behavioural change by providing practical guidance on adaptation and mitigation actions.
Limited integration with community-based communication channels, such as community radio stations, schools, traditional leaders, faith-based organisations, and local civil society groups, further restricts the reach and effectiveness of climate messages.
These limitations have significant consequences for climate resilience and sustainable development in Zimbabwe.
The digital divide excludes many vulnerable populations from accessing timely climate information, increasing their exposure to climate-related risks.
The use of technical language reduces public understanding, resulting in low climate literacy and misconceptions about climate change. Limited communication in indigenous languages prevents many communities from fully understanding climate information and applying it in their local contexts. Addressing these shortcomings requires a more inclusive, participatory, and audience-centred climate communication approach that prioritises accessibility, local relevance, indigenous languages, and continuous dialogue between information providers and the communities they serve.
Cost of poor climate communication
The communication gap that exists between the climate information providers and the intended destination, which is the citizens, has tremendous consequences across a wide range of socio-economic portfolios.
Poor climate communication touches on areas such as agriculture, health, disaster preparedness, water security, urban communities, young people, and local development planning. This is a clear indication that while climate change is an environmental challenge, which developed countries have largely contributed towards from their developmental activities, the negative impacts are being felt among poorer countries, particularly vulnerable indigenous communities that ordinarily live low-carbon lifestyles, hence the call for climate justice among mitigation strategies.
However, these communities are to a larger extent being affected by the loopholes, gaps, lack of participatory approach and inefficient climate communication strategies.
Bridging the gap
The solution is not simply “more climate information”. Zimbabwe already has institutions generating climate information. The real challenge is translating information into understanding and action.
The most practical solution is the establishment of a National Climate Communication Framework, referred to as
“Participatory Climate Communication 360 Framework” elsewhere, which connects climate information providers with citizens through trusted intermediaries and two-way communication.
The most practical way of bridging the information gap between climate information providers and citizens in Zimbabwe is to move beyond simply producing climate information towards establishing an integrated, people-centred climate communication system.
Rather than expecting citizens to seek information from government websites or technical reports, climate information should be translated into simple, locally relevant messages and disseminated through communication channels people use and trust every day.
This requires stronger collaboration between the Meteorological Service Department, the Ministry of Environment, Climate and Wildlife, local authorities, community radio stations, mainstream media, schools, universities, civil society organisations, traditional leaders, faith-based organisations, agricultural extension officers, and digital platforms.
Climate information should be communicated in indigenous languages, contextualised to local realities, and accompanied by practical guidance that enables households, farmers, businesses, and communities to make informed decisions.
Equally important, communication should become a two-way process in which citizens can ask questions, share indigenous knowledge, report local climate impacts, and provide feedback to policymakers.
Such a participatory approach would transform climate communication from a one-way transfer of scientific information into a continuous dialogue that strengthens climate literacy, builds public trust, encourages behavioural change, and enhances community resilience.
From flashback to a more practical approach
In an effort to complement this idea, the same communication infrastructure used during the Covid-19 pandemic should be institutionalised for climate change. However, the key distinction is that Covid-19 was treated as a communication emergency, while climate change is often treated as a scientific or environmental issue.
Yet both require sustained public understanding and behavioural change.
During the Covid-19 pandemic, the Government did not rely solely on the Ministry of Health and Child Care’s website for information dissemination. Instead, it employed a whole-of-society communication approach.
Daily updates were broadcast on television and radio, SMS alerts were sent to mobile phone users, newspapers carried regular public health messages, social media platforms provided timely information, and billboards reinforced preventive measures. Also, community leaders, churches, schools, health workers, and local authorities all played active roles in communicating key messages.
Importantly, the information was translated into local languages and repeated consistently until behaviours, such as handwashing, facemask wearing, and physical distancing, became widely understood.
Climate communication requires a similarly coordinated approach. Instead of limiting climate information to technical reports, websites, or seasonal weather forecasts, the Government could institutionalise regular climate communication through multiple channels.
Weather forecasts should be accompanied by explanations of what they mean to farmers, businesses, schools, and households. Community radio stations could host interactive programmes in indigenous languages, while television and newspapers could feature regular climate segments.
Mobile phone alerts could warn communities of heatwaves, floods, droughts, or other climate-related hazards, just as was the case during the Covid-19 pandemic. Agricultural extension officers, teachers, healthcare workers, traditional leaders, and faith-based organisations could become trusted messengers, helping people understand both the science and the practical actions they can take.
The lesson from the Covid-19 pandemic is that information alone does not change behaviour, but effective communication does. The Government succeeded because it made health information visible, accessible, repetitive, and actionable through trusted channels.
Climate change demands the same level of commitment. While Covid-19 was an acute public health emergency and climate change is a long-term environmental and developmental challenge, both require coordinated, sustained, and people-centred communication to influence behaviour and build resilience.
It supports the emerging idea of a “Participatory Climate Communication 360 Framework” where every institution has a defined role in ensuring that climate information reaches citizens in ways they can understand, trust, and act upon.
Ultimately, climate resilience is built not only through infrastructure, technology, or policy but also via informed and engaged citizens. When climate information is communicated clearly, consistently, and in ways that reflect people’s daily realities, it becomes a powerful tool for adaptation and sustainable development.
Therefore, closing Zimbabwe’s climate communication gap is not simply a communication challenge, but a development priority.
l Takudzwa Gochero is a climate change communication researcher and writer.
