Unlocking a Shared Future: How Africa–EU Cooperation Can Deepen the Green Transition

 

When I met Amina, a young solar technician in Garissa, Kenya, she stood on a tin rooftop tightening bolts on a newly installed solar panel while her daughter slept gently on her back. “This work is my future,” she said. “But it’s also how we build a better Africa—clean energy, good jobs, less worry.”

Her hopes echo the ambition of Agenda 2063, the African Union’s roadmap for a prosperous, climate-resilient continent. And they illuminate why Africa–EU cooperation is central to accelerating a people-centred green transition.

Europe’s Global Gateway Africa–Europe Investment Package, aiming to mobilise €150 billion for sustainable infrastructure and clean energy, has opened opportunities for renewable projects, climate-smart agriculture, and digital tools for resilience. Yet cooperation must evolve to address real constraints in Africa’s transition—energy poverty, technology gaps, high debt burdens, weak grids, and limited climate finance.

Across the Sahel, farmers are restoring degraded soils through agro-ecological techniques supported by EU programmes like AgriFI and DeSIRA, proving that partnership can strengthen resilience and food security. In Nairobi, Kigali, and Accra, young innovators are transforming waste into new value—plastic into construction materials, textiles into innovative fabrics, and organics into biogas—supported by the EU–AU Circular Economy Agenda. Circularity offers a powerful pathway for job creation, emissions reduction, and resource efficiency.

However, friction points in Africa–EU relations are becoming increasingly difficult to ignore.

African leaders and businesses have raised concerns about the EU’s unilateral trade mechanisms, particularly the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) and the EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR).

For many exporters—from steel manufacturers in Egypt to coffee growers in Uganda—CBAM is seen as a de facto barrier, introduced without adequate transitional support or recognition of historical responsibility. Producers fear increased compliance costs, reduced competitiveness, and the risk of being priced out of EU markets.

Similarly, the EUDR, while rooted in legitimate environmental goals, has created anxiety among smallholder farmers who lack the digital tools and geolocation systems required to prove their products—coffee, cocoa, rubber—are deforestation-free. As one coffee farmer in Eastern Uganda put it, “We want forests protected. But don’t shut the door while we are still learning how to comply.”

These concerns underscore a broader principle repeatedly emphasised in UN Climate negotiation processes: climate action must be just, differentiated, and supportive of development needs. African negotiators at the annual Conference of the Parties (COP) meetings, including the recently concluded COP30 in Belem, Brazil, underscore the need for transition periods, capacity-building, and finance to ensure that climate-related trade measures do not intensify inequality or erode livelihoods.

The way forward is cooperation, not conditionality. The EU can support Africa by investing in traceability systems, providing technology transfer for low-carbon industrialisation, and aligning CBAM and EUDR implementation with Africa’s realities. Joint Africa–EU platforms need to ensure policies are co-designed, not imposed.

As the sun sets over Amina’s village, her daughter wakes and reaches toward the glowing solar panels. Amina smiles. “By the time she grows up,” she says, “I hope our whole region will run on clean energy—and thrive doing it.”

Her hope is a blueprint. With equitable partnerships, shared innovation, and policies that uplift rather than exclude, Africa–EU cooperation can drive a green transition that is resilient, fair, circular, and true to the vision of Agenda 2063.

Closing the Climate Resilience Gap: Lessons from UNEP’s Adaptation Gap Reports

United Nations Environment Programme’s Adaptation Gap Report (2025)

When Maria – a smallholder farmer in Mozambique – watched the rains come later and later each season, and when Elisapeta  – living on a vulnerable Samoan island in Oceania  – saw the sea creep closer to his home, these weren’t just isolated stories of climate change. They were the lived realities behind the warnings of the United Nations Environment Programme’s Adaptation Gap Reports (UNEP, 2014–2025).

Since the first edition over a decade ago, UNEP’s message has been unwavering: climate risks are accelerating, adaptation finance and implementation are falling short, and transformational, not incremental, change is urgently needed.

Escalating risks outpacing our efforts

From the outset, UNEP cautioned that climate impacts were arriving faster than societies could prepare for. The Adaptation Gap Report 2020 warned that “the world must plan for, finance and implement climate change adaptation measures appropriate for the full range of global temperature increases—or face serious costs, losses and damages” (UNEP, 2020).

By the following year, the 2021 report concluded that “growth in climate impacts is far outpacing our efforts to adapt” (UNEP, 2021). The 2025 edition echoes that concern even more starkly, warning that the world is “gearing up for resilience—without the money to get there” (UNEP, 2025).

For Maria, this means worsening droughts; for Elisapeta, it’s the sea eating away at ancestral land. UNEP’s data backs up what they already know: climate risk is accelerating faster than adaptation progress.

Progress in planning, but finance and implementation still lag

UNEP’s reports consistently highlight improvements in adaptation planning. By 2022, 84% of countries had at least one national adaptation plan, policy, or strategy in place (UNEP, 2022). Yet progress on paper hasn’t translated into tangible results.

The 2025 report shows that estimated adaptation costs for developing countries could reach US$310 billion annually by 2035, or up to US$365 billion when based on national adaptation plans and NDCs (UNEP, 2025). However, international public adaptation finance flows were only US$26 billion in 2023, down from US$28 billion the year before. That means developing countries receive barely one-tenth of what they need.

As UNEP notes, “the adaptation finance gap is widening, not closing” (UNEP, 2025). For Elisapeta, that means his country has plans but no budget to elevate homes or protect coasts. For Maria, drought-resilient seeds exist, but she can’t access them without support.

Transformational change—not incremental steps—is needed

From the early editions, UNEP has urged governments to move beyond short-term, project-based measures. The 2020 report emphasised that adaptation must be “integrated across sectors and scales” (UNEP, 2020). The 2024 edition reinforced this, calling for a shift “from reactive, incremental, project-based financing to anticipatory, strategic, and transformational adaptation” (UNEP, 2024).

The 2025 report continues that call, arguing that adaptation must “transform systems—agriculture, water, cities—rather than patch vulnerabilities one project at a time” (UNEP, 2025). For communities like Maria’s and Elisapeta’s, that means not just coping, but rebuilding for resilience and equity.

Why do the same messages keep returning?

Because they mirror the reality of a world that’s planning more than it’s doing. Risks are rising faster than responses; finance remains inadequate; and incremental efforts no longer match the scale of the challenge.

Each Adaptation Gap Report is both a warning and a roadmap. It reminds us that adaptation isn’t a future luxury—it’s a present necessity. And unless the global community acts boldly now, the “gap” UNEP describes won’t just remain; it will define the future of millions like Maria and Elisapeta.

References

• UNEP (2025). Adaptation Gap Report 2025: Running on Empty. Nairobi: United Nations Environment Programme. https://www.unep.org/resources/adaptation-gap-report-2025
• UNEP (2024). Adaptation Gap Report 2024: Come Hell and High Water. Nairobi: United Nations Environment Programme. https://www.unep.org/resources/adaptation-gap-report-2024
• UNEP (2022). Adaptation Gap Report 2022: Too Little, Too Slow. Nairobi: United Nations Environment Programme. https://wedocs.unep.org/handle/20.500.11822/41080
• UNEP (2021). Adaptation Gap Report 2021: The Gathering Storm. Nairobi: United Nations Environment Programme. https://wedocs.unep.org/handle/20.500.11822/37298
• UNEP (2020). Adaptation Gap Report 2020. Nairobi: United Nations Environment Programme. https://wedocs.unep.org/handle/20.500.11822/34727

When the World Stopped: Lessons for Climate Change Mitigation from the COVID-19 Response

An empty road in Kampala (Wandegeya) due to the COVID-19 lockdown in Uganda (Photo: Ndahiro Derrick)

When the airport loudspeakers announced that flights were suspended “until further notice,” Maria, a café worker at Entebbe International Airport in Uganda, initially thought this meant a delay of a few hours. It wasn’t until crowds dispersed, doors closed, and silence filled the terminal that she realised something unprecedented was unfolding. Within days, the world slowed in a way no climate policy document had ever predicted.

COVID-19 was a human tragedy—lives lost, jobs wiped out, families separated. However, amidst this turmoil were valuable lessons on how societies can mobilise, coordinate, and change behaviour at extraordinary speed. These lessons are crucial for climate change mitigation, as the climate crisis—though slower, quieter, and less attention-grabbing—demands the same urgency and clarity of action.

Collective action is possible—and can happen quickly when the threat feels immediate 

In the early weeks of the pandemic, governments introduced policies that would have been unthinkable just months earlier. Cities built temporary hospitals within days, entire industries shifted production lines, and communities organised food drives and mutual aid networks.

In contrast, climate change is often perceived as a distant threat—even as floods, heatwaves, and droughts reshape daily realities. The COVID-19 response demonstrated that people are willing to act, even make sacrifices, when they believe their actions matter. The key lesson here is to make climate impacts feel as immediate and real as they actually are, through better communication, local storytelling, and visible leadership.

Behaviour change scales when systems make it easy  

Maria remembers how hand-washing stations appeared everywhere—outside shops, in taxi parks, and even at all public functions she attended. Behaviour changed not because people suddenly became more hygienic, but because the infrastructure made it simple.

For climate mitigation, this sends a clear message: sustainable choices must be the easiest choices. If clean transport is unavailable, if clean cooking is unaffordable, or if renewable power is unreliable, behavioural appeals will not work. System design—not moral pressure—drives transformation.

Science matters, but trust matters more 

During the pandemic, countries that communicated clearly, shared data openly, and centred decisions on science fared better. However, where trust in institutions was low, even accurate guidance struggled to have an impact.

Climate mitigation faces a similar challenge. Emissions data, carbon budgets, and IPCC reports are only as effective as the trust people have in those delivering the message. Building that trust requires engaging communities early, respecting local knowledge, and ensuring that climate policies improve everyday lives—not just fulfil distant global commitments.

Inequality determines vulnerability—and response capacity  

Maria lost her job for six months. In contrast, her neighbour, who worked remotely for a tech firm in Entebbe, hardly felt the economic impact. COVID-19 revealed how unequal societies struggle during global crises.

Climate change presents a similar scenario. Emissions reduction pathways that ignore justice will lead to resistance and deepen inequality. The lesson here is that climate mitigation must be people-centred, protecting livelihoods, supporting transitions, and ensuring that no community is left behind.

Crisis-driven innovation can be transformative

The pandemic accelerated digitalisation, reimagined workplaces, and spurred new technologies. If a similar level of ambition were applied to renewable energy storage, low-carbon transport, green buildings, and regenerative agriculture, the world could rapidly bend the emissions curve.

Maria is now back at work, but she still remembers the eerie silence of those early days. “It showed me how connected we all are,” she reflects. Perhaps this is the greatest lesson: our actions, both small and large, shape global outcomes.

The climate crisis demands that we act with the same urgency—before we reach a tipping point. Global emissions must fall by 40–55% by 2035 (relative to 2019 levels) to keep the 1.5 °C limit within reach. In particular, major emitters must heighten their ambitions by establishing stronger 2035 Nationally Determined Contributions that align clearly with the 1.5°C pathway, supported by credible implementation plans.

Putting People in the Policy: Why Trade Measures Must Champion Climate Justice

Arabica coffee in a homestead in Sironko, Mount Elgon region (photo: Kimbowa Richard)

When I first met Gabriel Wadada, a small-scale arabica coffee exporter in Mbale, he was staring at a stack of papers that had arrived from his European buyer, requiring his attention. “New climate requirements,” he sighed. “If I can’t prove my coffee is deforestation-free, the border closes for me.”

For Gabriel, unilateral climate-related trade measures—like the EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) or deforestation-free regulations (EUDR)—aren’t abstract policies. They shape whether his children go to school, whether his community keeps jobs, and whether his farm survives shifting markets and climate pressures. His story captures the core question: Can unilateral trade measures truly support climate action?

This is the question that must be put before negotiators at the ongoing 30th Conference of the Parties (COP30) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in Belem, Brazil. At the end of the first week of COP30, negotiators reportedly left the venue with no clarity on some of the most politically charged issues placed under Presidential Consultations, including the question of climate-related unilateral trade restrictions.

Large markets can indeed influence global behaviour by sending strong signals that carbon-intensive production will face penalties (OECD, 2023). This can drive cleaner technologies, discourage emissions leakage, and raise ambition across supply chains (IPCC, 2022). This is true as long as the principle of Common But Differentiated Responsibilities (CBDR-RC) that has guided the global climate change negotiations since 1995 in Berlin is upheld.

Similarly,  Gabriel’s story reiterates the above position. Unilateral measures can only drive climate action if they do not deepen inequality. Compliance costs—data, certification, traceability—often fall hardest on small producers (UNCTAD, 2023). Without support, such measures risk excluding those least responsible for the climate crisis and most dependent on trade.

Whether these measures become catalysts—or barriers—depends on three conditions:

Equity and Capacity Support

Trade policies must be paired with real investments in producer capacity: traceability systems, climate-smart agriculture, and finance (WTO, 2023). When Gabriel joined a cooperative supported with digital mapping and training, compliance became possible—and resilience increased.

Dialogue and Co-Creation

Affected countries and producers need a seat at the table. Climate standards gain legitimacy when shaped through partnership, transition periods, and mutual recognition rather than unilateral imposition (UNFCCC, 2021). That turns trade measures into shared progress rather than new barriers.

Policy Coherence

Trade tools alone cannot decarbonise global value chains. They must align with climate finance, adaptation support, and national development priorities (IPCC, 2022). Otherwise, emissions simply shift—or vulnerable producers are pushed out of markets.

For Gabriel, the turning point came when his cooperative accessed climate-smart training and digital traceability, enabling them to meet new requirements and increase yields. “If they help us meet the standards,” he told me, “we can be part of the solution. But if it’s just rules without support, we lose.”

So, to what extent can unilateral trade measures support climate action?

They can play a meaningful role, but only when designed with fairness, capacity support, and partnership at their core. Otherwise, they risk becoming walls instead of bridges.

And Gabriel’s reminder stays with me: “Climate action should bring people in, not push them out.”

The Gap That Keeps Growing: What UNEP’s Emissions Reports Have Been Telling Us All Along

Behind every emissions graph is a person like Aisha — waiting for rain that never comes. UNEP’s Emissions Gap Report 2025 reminds us: closing the gap isn’t just science, it’s survival.

'We still need unprecedented cuts to greenhouse gas emissions – now in an ever-compressing timeframe and amid a challenging geopolitical context. And let us not forget that the world is not even on track to meet the 2030 pledges. Policies currently in place are pointing the world towards up to 2.8°C of warming...'  

- UNEP Executive Director (Inger Andersen)

When the rains stopped coming on time, Aisha knew the maps on her phone were no longer just numbers — they were warnings. She runs a small market garden outside Arua (West Nile region of Uganda); her neighbours’ cassava, once a steady green, was patchy and thin. “We planned for two seasons,” she told me over tea, “but the weather plans for itself.” Her story is one among millions that the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) has tried, year after year, to convey through charts into a single, blunt lesson: promises without deep cuts leave people vulnerable (UNEP, 2025).

Since the first Emissions Gap Report in 2010, UNEP has returned to the same core message like a doctor checking a fever: the world is not cutting greenhouse-gas emissions fast enough, and the gap between what countries pledge and what science says is needed continues to persist (UNEP, 2010; UNEP, 2019). The report series is an annual pulse-check—measuring global emissions trajectories, comparing them to pathways that would limit warming to 1.5 °C or well below 2 °C, and naming the shortfall. That steady framing has helped move the debate from vague intentions to hard arithmetic: how much more needs to be done, and how fast (UNEP, 2022).

In the villages and cities, that arithmetic has a face. For Aisha, the Emissions Gap Reports’ repeated warnings about near-term targets—the need for deep cuts by 2030 and 2035—translate into the urgency to shift to drought-resistant crops and to lobby for local water infrastructure. UNEP’s recent findings are unequivocal: to keep 1.5 °C within reach, global greenhouse-gas emissions must fall by roughly 40–55 per cent by 2035 compared with 2019 levels. (UNEP, 2024; UNEP, 2025). For communities like Aisha’s, those numbers mean the difference between adaptation and devastation.

Another consistent message UNEP has delivered is that policy detail matters. It’s not enough to announce “net zero by 2050” — governments must align short-term actions with those long-term pledges. Each annual report has pushed countries to close the gap between ambition and implementation by strengthening nationally determined contributions (NDCs) and enacting concrete, near-term policy measures (UNEP, 2021). For people on the frontline, this translates into whether new renewable-energy projects are funded today, not promised for some distant future.

Finally, UNEP has consistently cautioned against over-reliance on speculative carbon-removal technologies as a substitute for immediate emissions cuts. The 2023 and 2025 reports highlight that avoiding emissions now is far cheaper and more effective than banking on future technologies — a point that resonates with vulnerable farmers who can’t wait for a laboratory fix (UNEP, 2023; UNEP, 2025).

Above all, the message that threads through every edition of the Emissions Gap Report is both scientific and deeply human: every fraction of a degree avoided spares lives, livelihoods and ecosystems (UNEP, 2022). For Aisha, that’s no abstract metric — it’s the difference between a harvest that feeds her children and one that doesn’t.

The Emissions Gap Reports have always been more than numbers; they are annual reminders that climate policy must match the urgency people already feel in their fields, homes and futures. If leaders listen, the next rains can come as planned. If not, the gap will keep telling the same story — only the faces it affects will change.

References

• UNEP (2010). The Emissions Gap Report 2010. United Nations Environment Programme.
• UNEP (2019). Emissions Gap Report 2019. United Nations Environment Programme.
• UNEP (2021). Emissions Gap Report 2021: The Heat Is On. United Nations Environment Programme.
• UNEP (2022). Emissions Gap Report 2022: The Closing Window. United Nations Environment Programme.
• UNEP (2023). Emissions Gap Report 2023: Broken Record – Temperatures Hit New Highs, Yet World Fails to Cut Emissions. United Nations Environment Programme.
• UNEP (2024). Emissions Gap Report 2024: No More Hot Air… Please!. United Nations Environment Programme.
• UNEP (2025). Emissions Gap Report 2025: Off Target. United Nations Environment Programme.

Beyond the Numbers: Rethinking Outcome-Based Financing for Africa’s Energy Future

 

Solar lamps are charged with small solar panels at a refugee camp following floods in Malawi.
(Photo: Ashley Cooper / Getty Images)

Outcome-based financing (sometimes called results-based financing or pay-for-results) was meant to drive results and accountability in Africa’s energy sector. Yet delays in payments, complex verification systems, and unequal access are revealing deeper flaws. This piece argues that for Africa to achieve universal energy access, financing must focus on people — not just numbers.

In a small village near Masindi, Mid-western Uganda, Grace (not real name) runs a solar business that’s changing lives. Her customers — many of them rural families — are switching on lights for the very first time. The air in their homes is cleaner, children can study after dark, and local shops stay open longer.

Grace’s company was part of a results-based financing programme — a model that rewards businesses for verified outcomes, like the number of households connected to clean energy. At first, everything looked bright. But then, cracks began to show.

When Results Take Too Long to Pay

A few months in, Grace found herself waiting — not for customers, but for payments. Verification agents had to confirm each household’s connection before she could get paid. Some customers had relocated, others defaulted on payments, and the paperwork took months to process.

Her business nearly stalled. Like many small African energy entrepreneurs, Grace didn’t have the cash flow to bridge those long waiting periods.

This is one of the key loopholes in outcome-based financing: it assumes that small firms can shoulder the financial risk while waiting for “results” to be verified (ESMAP, 2023). In reality, many can’t — especially in rural markets where every shilling counts.

Counting Connections vs. Creating Impact

Outcome-based financing (OBF) was designed to make development funding more accountable and impactful (World Bank, 2023). But the question is — what counts as an “outcome”?

Many OBF programmes focus on easy-to-measure results like “number of solar systems sold” rather than long-term impact — such as affordability, reliability, or how energy access improves livelihoods (SEforALL, 2024).

Grace got paid for connecting households, not for ensuring those lights stayed on six months later. That’s a common story across Africa — where short-term numbers often outshine long-term sustainability.

The Equity Gap

There’s also a fairness problem. OBF schemes tend to work best in semi-urban or accessible regions where customers are easier to reach and verify (Lighting Global, 2021). Remote communities — the ones most in need of power — are often left out because the cost of verification is too high.

Ironically, the model meant to drive inclusion sometimes ends up excluding those furthest behind.

Complexity and Capacity Gaps

The contracts and reporting systems behind OBF are usually designed by international donors or development banks (African Development Bank, 2022). They’re full of technical jargon, data requirements, and audit demands that can overwhelm local entrepreneurs.

Grace isn’t alone — many small African clean energy firms say the system is too complex and expensive to navigate. As a result, larger, donor-savvy companies dominate, even when they’re less connected to community realities.

Lighting a Fairer Way Forward

Despite the challenges, there’s momentum for change. Some initiatives now blend grants with results-based payments, giving entrepreneurs breathing room while still rewarding performance (GOGLA, 2022).

Others are testing digital verification tools — using mobile data, smart meters, and GPS mapping to confirm results faster and cheaper (SEforALL, 2024).

For entrepreneurs like Grace, these reforms could make all the difference. Because ultimately, outcome-based financing should empower — not burden — those who bring light to Africa’s off-grid communities.

As the continent races toward universal energy access, financing models must do more than count connections. They must power fairness, trust, and resilience — the true outcomes Africa needs to shine.

References

·         African Development Bank (2022). Unlocking Finance for Decentralized Energy Access in Africa. AfDB Energy Sector Report.

·         ESMAP (2023). Results-Based Financing for Energy Access: Lessons from Africa. World Bank.

·         GOGLA (2022). Results-Based Financing to Catalyse Off-Grid Solar Market Growth. Global Off-Grid Lighting Association.

·         Lighting Global (2021). Outcome-Based Financing Mechanisms: Lessons and Insights from the Field. World Bank Group.

·         SEforALL (2024). Powering Inclusion: The Future of Results-Based Financing in Africa’s Energy Transition. Sustainable Energy for All.

·         World Bank (2023). Paying for Results: The Promise and Pitfalls of Outcome-Based Financing in the Energy Sector. Washington, D.C

Powering Change: How Uganda’s Small Businesses Are Lighting the Way for a Greener Future

A biogas system (Kakungube-Kassanda district) to manage poultry manure while generating energy for cooking, brooding, as well as the generation of biofertiliser (Photo: Ecosafe)

On the outskirts of Mukono town near Kampala City, Sarah Nanyonga runs a small bakery that smells of sweet, freshly baked mandazi. But unlike most bakeries, Sarah’s oven doesn’t rely on charcoal or firewood. Instead, it’s powered by a locally made biogas system that converts organic waste from her kitchen into clean energy.

“I used to spend more than UGX 150,000 every month on charcoal,” she says, smiling as she stirs dough. “Now, I use that money to buy more ingredients and even pay my workers on time.”

Sarah’s story is just one example of how Small and Medium Scale Enterprises (SMEs) in Uganda are taking the lead in transforming the country’s energy systems—while also protecting the environment and supporting livelihoods.

A Silent Revolution in Energy and Livelihoods

Across Uganda, SMEs account for over 90% of the private sector and employ more than 2.5 million people. These enterprises are often at the heart of rural and peri-urban economies—running agro-processing units, carpentry workshops, small restaurants, metalworks, car garages, and trading centres. Their daily operations heavily depend on energy, often sourced from non-renewable sources such as firewood, charcoal, or diesel.

But a shift is happening, partly due to reduced supply and escalating prices of charcoal and firewood and the pervasive electricity constraints due to high cost and the unstable supply. From solar-powered maize mills in Jinja to eco-briquette production in Gulu, SMEs are rethinking how they power their work. Many are embracing renewable energy solutions not only to cut costs but also to inherently reduce their environmental footprint.

Take ECOSAFE Limited - a Ugandan enterprise that deals in construction/ installation, repair, maintenance, after-sales and extension services of biogas digesters of various sizes and types. They focus on biogas systems (Sistema.Biobolsa, Fixed-Dome: CARMATEC and BSU 2016 designs and supply of biogas appliances & accessories), which provide biogas for cooking and lighting, among other applications, but also contribute to improved sanitation, health, and agricultural productivity for the locals. ECOSAFE Limited targets households, farmer/dairy groups/cooperatives, local/urban authorities, government agencies, and research institutions. Biogas Solutions Uganda Limited, a Company entrusted to nurture the biogas sector in Uganda, awarded ECOSAFE Limited the best biogas construction enterprise 2018, 2019. ECOSAFE Limited specially targets educational institutions through practically demonstrating and enabling children right from childhood to appreciate the notion that ‘waste is misplaced wealth’ that can be transformed into clean energy, a nutrient-rich soil conditioner, while contributing to improved sanitation.

In Northern Uganda, Divine Bamboo Group produces sustainable bamboo charcoal briquettes that burn longer and cleaner than traditional charcoal. This is against the backdrop that bamboo grows fast and has an average rotation of four years, requires minimal maintenance, no fertilisers or pesticides and can be integrated in both agroforestry and mixed farming systems. Divine Bamboo produces high-quality, clean and affordable briquettes produced from fast-growing local bamboo species and already existing agricultural waste as a sustainable cooking fuel alternative to conventional biomass fuels like charcoal and firewood that are driving high deforestation rates in Uganda. In addition, the company employs youth and women, providing training in sustainable forestry and clean energy entrepreneurship.

How SMEs Can Lead the Energy Transition

SMEs have the flexibility to innovate quickly and adapt solutions to local realities. However, their potential is often limited by access to finance, technical know-how, and policy support.

To unlock this potential, Uganda can learn from other parts of the Global South. In Kenya, for instance, small enterprises like Solar Sister empower women to distribute solar lamps and clean cookstoves in remote communities. In India, microenterprises supported by the government’s Ujjwala and Solar Saubhagya programs have expanded energy access to millions of households.

Uganda’s recent National Energy Policy (2023) offers a foundation for similar partnerships as it also counts on the private sector and civil society in its full realisation. By connecting SMEs to green financing, incubation hubs, and market incentives, the country can fast-track an inclusive energy transition that uplifts communities. The Energy Policy (2023) aims to ensure a sustainable, adequate, affordable, competitive, secure, and reliable supply of energy at the least cost geared to meet national and county needs while protecting and conserving the environment. The energy sector still faces the challenges of financing. An appropriate mix of financing resources from the Government (Central and local), private investments, and bilateral and multilateral partners is vital for successfully implementing the Policy.

Lighting the Path Forward

When small businesses go green, the ripple effects are powerful: cleaner air, healthier workers, more resilient livelihoods, and reduced pressure on Uganda’s forests.

Back in Mukono, as Sarah stacks her golden-brown mandazi on trays, she reflects on her journey. “Clean energy didn’t just change my business,” she says. “It changed how I think about the future.”

Her story—and many others like it—shows that Uganda’s path to sustainable energy isn’t just about technology. It’s about people, enterprise, and the courage to do things differently with the planet in mind.

 

 

Turning Africa’s E-Waste Challenge into a Circular Economy Opportunity

 

Source: Geneva Environment Network

In a small workshop on the outskirts of Kampala (in Katwe), 28-year-old Timothy dismantles an old computer with steady hands. What once seemed like junk to many is now his source of livelihood. The wires, chips, and plastic casings spread across his table represent a growing reality for Africa — the continent’s digital rise has brought not only opportunity but also a surge in electronic waste (e-waste).

Each year, the International E-Waste Day is held on 14 October as an opportunity to reflect on the impacts of e-waste and the necessary actions to enhance circularity for e-products. The 2025 Theme is ‘Recycle Your E-waste – It’s Critical!’ Geopolitics are highlighting how important these materials are. And while many people have heard about Critical Materials (CRMs) by now, not all of them know that these elements can be recovered from unused or broken electronic products sleeping in our garages, drawers and attics (Geneva Environment Network, 2025). This is why the 2025 edition of the International E-Waste Day will focus on raising awareness about this fact.

For example, across Africa, mobile phones, solar systems, and computers are transforming lives — connecting farmers to markets, lighting up rural homes, and enabling remote education. But behind this progress lies a mounting environmental cost. In 2019 alone, Africa generated over 2.9 million tonnes of e-waste, and less than 1% of it was formally recycled (Forti et al., 2020). Much of the rest ends up in informal dumps or is burned, releasing toxic fumes that threaten human health and ecosystems.

The Policy Backbone: Responsibility Starts at the Top

For years, many countries have operated without strong e-waste laws. Yet change is taking root. Nigeria and Rwanda are leading the charge with Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) policies that hold manufacturers accountable for what happens to their products after use (Manomaivibool, 2020). If expanded across the continent, EPR could shift the burden of waste management from taxpayers to producers — and finance proper collection and recycling systems.

People Power: Inclusion and Awareness

Most e-waste in Africa is processed by informal workers — people like Timothy — who recover valuable materials but often without safety gear or knowledge of the risks. Excluding them would be a mistake. Integrating these recyclers into the formal economy through training, protective equipment, and incentives could turn a hazardous activity into a green industry. Public awareness campaigns and school programs could also change mindsets about what “waste” really means — showing that discarded electronics can hold economic and environmental value (Nnorom & Osibanjo, 2008).

Building the Future: Infrastructure that Works

Africa’s recycling capacity remains thin, but examples like Rwanda’s Enviroserve facility prove what’s possible. Opened in 2017 with support from the Rwanda Green Fund and UNDP, the plant can process over 10,000 tonnes of e-waste a year, safely extracting metals and plastics while employing and training local technicians (UNDP, 2017). It’s not just recycling — it’s job creation and environmental restoration in one package.

Beyond Africa, lessons can be drawn from India’s Attero Recycling, which scaled from a startup in 2008 into one of the world’s largest e-waste firms. By formalising the role of informal waste pickers and using clean technology to recover gold, copper, and silver, Attero turned what was once dangerous work into a structured value chain (Dwivedy & Mittal, 2012). Africa can emulate such models — adapting them to local realities and building regional recycling hubs.

A Circular Vision: Waste as Wealth

Every old phone and broken laptop contains valuable metals — gold, copper, and rare earths — waiting to be recovered. Embracing a circular economy means reusing, repairing, and recycling instead of discarding. Imagine if sites like Agbogbloshie in Ghana, once notorious for unsafe recycling, were transformed into centres of innovation, where young entrepreneurs use clean technology to recover materials safely. That’s the kind of transformation Africa needs — one that merges environmental health with economic opportunity (Baldé et al., 2017).

Innovation for Impact

Digital tools can make this vision real. Mobile apps could help consumers locate drop-off points, while blockchain can track e-waste across supply chains to ensure transparency (Kiddee et al., 2013). Better product design — modular and repairable electronics — would also reduce waste before it even begins.

Closing Reflection

Africa’s growing digital economy doesn’t have to come at an environmental cost. With the right policies, partnerships, and people-first approaches, the continent can turn its e-waste challenge into a story of innovation, inclusion, and green growth. The question is no longer whether Africa can manage its e-waste, but rather how soon it can turn waste into wealth for all.

References

• Baldé, C. P., et al. (2017). The Global E-waste Monitor. United Nations University.
• Dwivedy, M., & Mittal, R. K. (2012). An investigation into e-waste flows in India. Journal of Cleaner Production, 37, 229–242.
• Forti, V., et al. (2020). The Global E-waste Monitor 2020. United Nations University, ITU & ISWA.
• Geneva Environment Network (2025). International E-waste Day 2025 https://www.genevaenvironmentnetwork.org/events/international-e-waste-day-2025/#scroll-nav__1
• Kiddee, P., Naidu, R., & Wong, M. H. (2013). Electronic waste management approaches: An overview. Waste Management, 33(5), 1237-1250.
• Manomaivibool, P. (2020). Extended producer responsibility in developing countries. Waste Management & Research, 38(3), 223–225.
• Nnorom, I. C., & Osibanjo, O. (2008). Electronic waste (e-waste): Material flows and management practices in Nigeria. Waste Management, 28(8), 1472-1479.
• Oteng-Ababio, M. (2012). E-waste management in Ghana – Issues and practices. Sustainable Development, 20(1), 1–10.
• Schluep, M., et al. (2012). Sustainable e-waste management. StEP Green Paper Series.
• UNDP. (2017). Rwanda Launches First Large-Scale E-Waste Recycling Facility. United Nations Development Programme.

From CDM to PACM: Can Africa Turn Early Movers into Continental Leaders?

Delegates at the UNFCCC COP29 that formally operationalised the Paris Agreement Crediting Mechanism (PACM) under Article 6.4 (Photo: UNFCCC)

At the close of 2025, the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) will officially give way to the Paris Agreement Crediting Mechanism (PACM, under Article 6.4). For Africa — a region that hosted hundreds of CDM projects but also faced barriers in attracting climate finance — this transition marks both an opportunity and a test of readiness. How ready is Africa for this transition? What is working now and what is not? What can be done to offset the challenges?

Where Africa Stands Today

The good news is that the transition pathway is clear. The UNFCCC has defined procedures for CDM projects and Programmes of Activities (PoAs) to request migration to PACM before the deadline (UNFCCC, 2023). This gives developers of renewable energy, afforestation and efficiency projects the ability to preserve their investments rather than start from scratch.

At the same time, initiatives like the African Carbon Markets Initiative and support from UNECA, the NDC Partnership and bilateral donors are helping governments strengthen their Designated National Authorities (DNAs), build national registries and train staff. Countries with stronger CDM legacies — South Africa, Kenya, Morocco and a few others — are already piloting Article 6 projects and drafting bilateral agreements (NDC Partnership, 2024).

South Africa: With one of the largest CDM portfolios in Africa, particularly in renewable energy and industrial energy efficiency, South Africa has leveraged this base to prepare for Article 6 transactions. Its Designated National Authority (DNA) has been active in clarifying approval processes, while South Africa has also engaged in bilateral discussions on Article 6 cooperation, particularly with European buyers (World Bank, 2023). Pilot projects in sectors like renewable hydrogen and carbon capture are being structured to test how corresponding adjustments and reporting will work under Paris rules.

Kenya: Known for its geothermal and clean energy projects under the CDM, Kenya is emerging as a regional innovator in carbon markets. The government has enacted legal frameworks that clarify carbon rights and revenue-sharing with local communities (Government of Kenya, 2023). Kenya is also part of international initiatives exploring Article 6 pilots, including discussions with Switzerland, which has been one of the most active Article 6 buyers globally. These pilots are designed not only to secure international demand but also to feed directly into Kenya’s climate strategies.

Morocco: Morocco’s extensive CDM portfolio in wind and solar energy provides a strong foundation for Article 6 activities. The country is actively exploring bilateral agreements with European partners, leveraging its role as a key energy exporter in the region. Morocco’s Ministry of Energy Transition has signaled its intent to align carbon markets with its broader green hydrogen roadmap, which is central to its industrial decarbonization strategy (UNECA, 2024).

Many of these Article 6 pilots are small-scale, early-stage, or focused on readiness (capacity building). Few are yet generating large volumes of carbon credits with clear buyer demand under Article 6.4 or with robust registry/corresponding-adjustment systems. Even with pilots, some countries still lack fully operational rules on how Internationally Transferred Mitigation Outcomes (ITMOs) are authorised, how they interact with Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), how corresponding adjustments are managed, what legal contracts look like, and how property rights, etc., operate.

In addition, the pilot nature means higher risk, and many investors are cautious until they see stable market participation and clear demand. Transparency around methodologies, accounting, price risks, etc., remains a concern. Similarly, these Article 6 pilots are experimenting with different approaches; convergence on best practices (baseline methods, additionality, leakage, permanence, etc.) is still underway. Furthermore, differences across countries/sectors complicate a standardised rollout.

Nevertheless, these early movers are not just benefiting themselves — they are creating templates for other African countries. By testing registry systems, piloting corresponding adjustments, and negotiating bilateral deals, South Africa, Kenya, and Morocco are ironing out the legal and technical kinks. Their progress could help establish regional standards or even inspire shared registry platforms, reducing costs for less-prepared countries.

What are the ‘Early Wins’?

The existing CDM infrastructure offers a base to build on, reducing transaction costs. The UNFCCC decisions and CDM guidance enable eligible projects to transition rather than restart, preserving investment certainty for many renewables, Afforestation and Reforestation (A/R) and efficiency Programmes of Activities (PoAs). That has already unlocked interest in submitting transition requests.

In addition, targeted donor support is creating “early mover” countries that can demonstrate success. For example, regional reports show active private sector and donor financing for readiness and registry work, enabling an “early mover” cohort of projects to convert quickly.

Also, developers and buyers are showing an appetite for new Article 6 credits, especially where governments signal openness.

These are important confidence signals — they prove the transition is possible, not just theoretical.

The Challenges Ahead

Despite the above optimism, Africa’s readiness is uneven. Many DNAs remain understaffed and underfunded, struggling to develop robust approval systems or connect registries to international platforms (World Bank, 2023). The quality of credits is also under scrutiny: older Carbon Emission Reductions (CERs) face questions about additionality and whether they align with tougher Paris-era integrity standards.

Perhaps the biggest challenge lies in policy clarity. Host countries must decide how transitioned credits interact with their own NDC targets and whether to allow their use internationally. Without this, project owners face uncertainty over market demand and credit pricing.

Finally, technical hurdles persist. Linking registries, applying corresponding adjustments, and ensuring transparent accounting require digital infrastructure that many countries have yet to establish (UNFCCC, 2023).

Looking Forward

Africa’s transition to PACM will likely happen in waves. The first successes will emerge from better-prepared countries and projects. But unless governance systems, financing and technical tools are scaled rapidly, many others risk being left behind.

The pathway is there. The early wins are encouraging. The real question is whether Africa can convert them into a continent-wide success story — one that ensures not just participation, but leadership in the next era of global carbon markets

References

·   UNFCCC (2023). Decisions on the transition of CDM activities to the Article 6.4 mechanism. Available at: https://unfccc.int

·      World Bank (2023). State and Trends of Carbon Pricing 2023. Washington, DC: World Bank.

· NDC Partnership (2024). Africa Article 6 Readiness Support Initiatives. Available at: https://ndcpartnership.org

·    Conservation Rising (2025). Kenya and Switzerland Sign Carbon Credit Trade Deal. Available at: https://www.conservation-rising.com/p/kenya-and-switzerland-sign-carbon-credit-trade-deal

·    Hespress (2020). Morocco, Germany Sign Green Hydrogen Cooperation Agreement. Available at: https://en.hespress.com/17129-morocco-germany-sign-green-hydrogen-cooperation-agreement.html

·    Hiba Press (2024). Morocco and Germany Strengthen Climate and Energy Alliance. Available at: https://en.hibapress.com/7703.html

·      Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment (DFFE), South Africa (2023). Draft South Africa Article 6 Framework. Pretoria: Government of South Africa. Available at: https://www.dffe.gov.za/sites/default/files/docs/draftsa_article6_framework.pdf

·      South African Revenue Service (SARS) (2024). Phase Two of the Carbon Tax – Discussion Paper. Available at: https://www.sars.gov.za/wp-content/uploads/Legal/DiscPapers/Legal-LPrep-DP-2024-03-Phase-two-of-the-carbon-tax.pdf

East Africa’s Cities Are Growing Fast — But Are They Growing Fair?

 

                              Houses constructed in a waterlogged area in Kampala city suburbs (Photo: UCSD)

World Habitat Day 2025, observed on October 6, will highlight urban crisis response amid growing challenges such as climate change, conflict, and inequality. Organised by the United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-Habitat), the global observance will be hosted in Nairobi, Kenya, bringing together policymakers, innovators, and communities to showcase tools and strategies for sustainable urban development.

According to UN-Habitat, this year’s theme emphasises addressing multifaceted crises threatening urban stability and livability, making it a critical platform for organisations aligned with sustainable development goals.

East Africa’s towns and cities are growing rapidly, offering opportunities for economic growth but also exposing residents to deep social, infrastructural, and environmental pressures. The region’s urban future depends on how effectively governments and communities respond to the crises of inadequate housing, overstretched services, climate risk, and inequality. Addressing these challenges requires pragmatic investment, inclusive governance, and drawing lessons from other parts of the Global South.

As we mark World Habitat Day 2025, in East Africa, we need to ponder over some key questions: How do we make these cities and other urban settings livable and stable for all? Does East Africa focus too much on infrastructure at the expense of little on equity? To what extent are the East African Community Partner States really prepared to integrate the voices of women, youth, and informal workers in urban planning?

Upgrading the informal city

A significant proportion of East Africa’s urban residents live in informal settlements, which often lack secure tenure, sanitation, drainage, and basic services. These conditions perpetuate poverty and expose households to floods, disease outbreaks, and eviction risks (UN-Habitat, 2020).

Incremental upgrading—through provision of secure land rights, small-scale infrastructure, and community-led planning—improves safety, opportunity, and stability. Successful projects across African cities highlight that involving local women’s groups, youth, and informal worker associations ensures that interventions respond to diverse lived realities (World Bank, 2022). For example, addressing youth unemployment in the growing cities and urban areas across East Africa is a major challenge calling for long-term supportive policies and plans.

Climate risk as a planning priority

East Africa is already experiencing climate extremes. Recent floods in Kenya, Uganda, and Tanzania showed how unplanned expansion and weak drainage intensify disaster impacts (Relief Web, 2024).

Building resilience requires investment in green-blue infrastructure—wetlands restoration, retention basins, and permeable pavements—combined with enforcing land-use policies that protect the remaining wetlands, natural waterways and the urban greenery. Intersectional adaptation must account for the fact that women, children, and low-income groups often live in flood-prone areas and are disproportionately affected by displacement and loss of livelihoods (UN Women, 2021).

Health, heat and flood resilience

Rising temperatures, though unusual, are a flaring new phenomenon that threatens public health, particularly for vulnerable groups such as outdoor workers, the elderly, the sick and children. Ahmedabad, India’s Heat Action Plan—introducing early warning systems, public cooling centres, and targeted outreach to at-risk groups—demonstrates the life-saving potential of low-cost preventive approaches (Knowlton et al., 2014). In East Africa, similar measures should integrate gender-sensitive communication and ensure accessibility for the vulnerable, people with disabilities, and children who are often overlooked in emergency planning.

In the same way, the effects of extreme precipitation, rising water levels causing displacements, floods, and tropical storms on vulnerable communities across East African cities need action. These could be mitigated by scaling up locally-led, cost-effective mitigation measures that strengthen nature-based capacities.

Mobility, inclusion, and public space

Social exclusion and unequal access to services often fuel instability. Medellín, Colombia, pioneered “social urbanism,” using cable cars, integrated bus systems, libraries, and parks in marginalised neighbourhoods to reduce violence and improve cohesion (Brand & Dávila, 2011).

For East Africa, inclusive mobility must go beyond transport to consider safety for women and girls who have to walk long distances in search of (affordable) water from dawn to dusk, affordability for low-income groups, and universal design for people with disabilities. Investments in public space and mobility that reflect these needs not only enhance equity but also strengthen urban stability.

Finance and governance

Strong governance and stable finance underpin all resilience strategies. Municipalities in East Africa often lack predictable revenue streams and the capacity to plan at scale. Strengthening local taxation, improving intergovernmental transfers, and accessing climate finance are critical (World Bank, 2022). Intersectional approaches also demand participatory governance, where marginalised voices are actively included in decision-making to avoid perpetuating inequality.

Adapting lessons from the Global South

The experiences of Medellín in Colombia and Ahmedabad in India highlight that inclusion, preparedness, and visible improvements are central to resilience. However, these models cannot be copied wholesale; they must be adapted to East Africa’s diverse cultural, political, and resource contexts. By combining slum upgrading, climate resilience, public health preparedness, and inclusive infrastructure—underpinned by intersectional governance—East Africa can transform the risks of rapid urbanisation into opportunities for building stable, livable cities.

References

• Brand, P., & Dávila, J. (2011). Mobility innovation at the urban margins: Medellín’s Metrocables. City, 15(6), 647–661.
• Knowlton, K., Kulkarni, S. P., Azhar, G. S., et al. (2014). Development and implementation of South Asia’s first Heat-Health Action Plan in Ahmedabad (Gujarat, India). International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 11(4), 3473–3492.
• ReliefWeb. (2024). East Africa floods situation report. Retrieved from https://reliefweb.int/
• UN-Habitat. (2020). World Cities Report 2020: The Value of Sustainable Urbanisation. Nairobi: UN-Habitat.
• UN Habitat (2025). World Habitat Day 2025: https://urbanoctober.unhabitat.org/world-habitat-day-2025
• UN Women. (2021). Gender and climate adaptation in urban contexts. New York: UN Women.
• World Bank. (2022). African Cities: Opening Doors to the World. Washington, DC: World Bank.