Active Citizenship and Climate Justice in Africa: Challenges and Prospects for Inclusive Climate Governance

Active Citizenship and Climate Justice in Africa: Challenges and Prospects for Inclusive Climate Governance

Dr. Dieudonne Mbarga

Monitoring & Evaluation Specialist | Public Policy Analyst | Independent Researcher

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.906000150

Received: 27 May 2025; Accepted: 03 June 2025; Published: 04 July 2025

ABSTRACT

The impacts of the climate crisis felt most acutely by African countries that contribute the least to global emissions underscore the urgent need for strategic, concerted, and inclusive action. These countries, already grappling with structural poverty and governance challenges, require a climate response that transcends technocratic solutions. This article argues that such a response must be grounded in the paradigms of active citizenship and climate justice, positioning citizens especially youth, women, and local communities as co-creators of solutions. Anchored in a systemic and socio-constructivist approach, the study explores how the correlation between active citizenship and climate justice, when properly theorized and implemented, can foster inclusive climate governance in Africa. By critically examining power dynamics, inclusion mechanisms, and recognition struggles within climate governance frameworks, the article highlights both the transformative potential and inherent limitations of citizen participation. Ultimately, it advocates for a structural shift toward participatory, context-sensitive, and justice-oriented climate policies on the continent.

Keywords: Active citizenship, climate justice, inclusive governance, Africa, youth and women, systemic approach, participation

INTRODUCTION

The climate crisis is a defining challenge of our time, with disproportionate impacts on African countries that contribute the least to global greenhouse gas emissions—barely 3%, according to the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP, 2019). Despite numerous global and regional efforts—including the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), the Paris Agreement, the African Union’s Agenda 2063, international climate summits, and national climate policies—the African continent remains acutely vulnerable. Climate impacts such as prolonged droughts, catastrophic floods, food insecurity, desertification, soil degradation, forced displacements, land and pastoral conflicts, and rampant urbanization are severely straining environmental, economic, and social systems.

These complex and interrelated issues pose adaptation and mitigation challenges, revealing deep-seated inequalities in the distribution of climate-related risks, resources, and decision-making power. This is where climate justice emerges as a critical framework—one that highlights not only the need to curb emissions, but also the imperative to ensure that all people have the right to live with dignity in a healthy environment (Larrère, 2015; AACJ Project, 2020). At its core, climate justice calls attention to systemic socio-economic disparities and the vulnerability of marginalized populations in the face of environmental change.

Active citizenship defined as the ability of individuals and groups to organize, claim rights, and influence public policy has gained prominence as a pathway to advance climate justice. It emphasizes the rights and responsibilities of all social actors, beyond states, to participate in public affairs and collective action (Hawthorn, 2021). Particularly in Africa, where youth, women, and local communities are among the most affected yet least represented in climate governance, active citizenship can help rebalance power relations and foster inclusive, equitable solutions.

However, the realization of this potential remains constrained. Participation frameworks in Sub-Saharan Africa often confront significant barriers: centralized governance systems, weak political openness, limited resources for community-based organizations, and international mechanisms that lack sensitivity to local realities. Existing climate governance mechanisms are frequently dominated by top-down, technocratic approaches that marginalize indigenous knowledge, alternative practices, and dissenting voices (Berger & Luckmann, 1966; AACJ Project, 2020).

This paradox raises a critical question: How can active citizenship contribute to advancing climate justice in Africa, and to what extent can it transform current climate governance structures to make them more inclusive and responsive to local needs? This article seeks to address this question by adopting a systemic and socio-constructivist approach grounded in public policy analysis. The systemic lens, as theorized by Easton, highlights the interplay of factors and actors within a governance system viewed here both at the state and continental levels. The social constructivist perspective, building on Berger and Luckmann (1966), treats climate justice not as a given, but as a social construction shaped by the interactions and agency of multiple actors across different scales.

This research combines an in-depth literature review with empirical insights to both identify emerging expressions of climate citizenship in Africa and examine the enablers and barriers to participatory, transformative climate governance. In doing so, the article seeks to reframe climate justice in the African context not as a solely technical or economic issue, but as a fundamentally political and relational process rooted in distinct social, cultural, and historical realities. It reconceptualizes citizenship beyond its formal legal or institutional dimensions, presenting it instead as a dynamic and transformative practice—one with the potential to reshape environmental democracy and foster grassroots-driven responses to the climate emergency.

Conceptual framework for the correlation between active citizenship and climate justice

Climate justice is both a field of research and a social movement that highlights the historical, economic, political and social dimensions of climate change (Bernardo and Martin, 2022: 138). It is based on three fundamental pillars: recognition of inequalities, participation of affected populations and equitable redistribution of resources. This approach is not limited to technical or economic climate management, but is resolutely political and ethical.

In Africa, this paradigm takes on particular significance. Although the continent contributes only 3% of global greenhouse gas emissions, it suffers disproportionately from their effects (WMO, 2021). Droughts, floods and other extreme weather events severely affect already vulnerable populations, particularly young people and women, who often face poverty, unemployment and precarious living conditions (AU, 2022). Added to this are inequalities in access to climate finance, green technologies and decision-making spaces (Laurent, 2020; Oxfam, 2022).

Active citizenship, for its part, refers to the involvement of individuals in public life through various forms of mobilisation: electoral participation, advocacy, volunteering, civic education or social innovation (FES, 2017). It aims to expand civic space and redistribute decision-making power, particularly in African contexts often characterised by state centralisation and low inclusion of non-state actors (Hawthorn, 2021; Benson, 2014).

The intersection between climate justice and active citizenship suggests inclusive governance, where citizens – particularly marginalised groups – are co-designers of climate policies, rather than mere beneficiaries. This implies mechanisms for inclusion, spaces for deliberation, and a redistribution of decision-making power.

Structural and contextual challenges to active citizenship in climate governance

Governance deficits and institutional lock-in

Many African countries suffer from a structural democratic deficit that manifests itself in centralised and uninclusive governance of climate policies. As Clark and Taplin (2012) point out, Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) are often developed without effective consultation with the local communities concerned. This institutional lock-in limits the expression of the real needs of vulnerable populations, thereby reducing the relevance and effectiveness of the policies implemented.

Furthermore, the lack of transparency and accountability on the part of the authorities hinders citizen participation. The absence of mechanisms enabling citizens to demand accountability undermines trust in institutions and transforms participation into a mere symbolic exercise. This institutional deficit restricts local ownership of climate measures, compromising their sustainability and real impact (Clark and Taplin, 2012).

Exclusion of marginalized groups

Women, young people and indigenous populations, despite being among those most affected by climate change, remain largely excluded from decision-making spaces, as demonstrated by Bernardo and Martin (2022). Their absence from climate governance bodies perpetuates technocratic management that is disconnected from the realities experienced at the local level and reinforces existing systemic inequalities.

This institutional exclusion leads to the marginalisation of local knowledge and the specific needs of vulnerable groups, which compromises climate justice. The low representation of these groups prevents the integration of solutions adapted to their conditions, thereby reinforcing the negative effects of climate change on these populations (Bernardo and Martin, 2022).

Lack of capacity and resources

Civil society organisations (CSOs), which often drive citizen initiatives, face a significant shortage of financial, technical and institutional resources, limiting their influence in climate debates (Fouquet, 2009). Without adequate support, these CSOs struggle to structure their actions, ensure their sustainability and effectively influence climate governance.

This lack of resources forces these organisations to operate in a fragmented and ad hoc manner, reducing their ability to mobilise populations in the long term and influence public policy. The institutional weakness of CSOs thus limits citizen participation and, consequently, the inclusiveness and fairness of climate policies (Fouquet, 2009).

Dynamics and levers of active citizenship for inclusive climate governance in Africa

Recognition of local knowledge and co-construction of policies

The integration of endogenous knowledge is essential to improving the effectiveness of climate policies in Africa. Fortin et al. (1994) emphasise the crucial role that this knowledge plays in local adaptation, which is often based on proven traditional practices. Co-constructing policies with the communities concerned values their expertise and legitimises their place as key players in climate governance.

This recognition promotes a more equitable and contextualised approach to adaptation policies, thereby strengthening the resilience of vulnerable communities. It also makes it possible to move beyond top-down approaches and establish shared and democratic governance, which is essential for true climate justice (Fortin et al., 1994).

Digitalisation and citizen engagement

Digital technologies are playing an increasingly important role in boosting citizen participation in Africa. For example, the Ushahidi platform in Kenya has made it possible to collect and disseminate real-time information on crises, facilitating citizen engagement in monitoring public policies (NP Action, 2010). Similarly, reforestation campaigns led by young people in Cameroon illustrate how digital technology can be used as a lever to mobilise and empower populations to address climate issues.

Digital technology thus contributes to democratising access to climate information and enhancing the transparency of decision-making processes. It is a powerful tool for expanding civic space, particularly for young people and marginalised groups, by providing them with innovative means of expression and advocacy (NP Action, 2010).

Strengthening participatory legal frameworks

To ensure truly inclusive climate governance, it is essential to strengthen legal frameworks that enshrine citizen participation as a fundamental right. Clark and Taplin (2012) emphasise the importance of establishing formal institutional mechanisms to ensure the inclusion of CSOs in national and local decision-making processes.

The creation of permanent spaces for dialogue between governments, civil society and local populations, as is already the case around and/or in the run-up to various climate initiatives and events such as subsequent COPs, not only promotes transparency and accountability, but also ensures that climate policies respond to the real needs of communities. These institutional reforms are an essential lever for democratising climate governance and strengthening social justice (Clark and Taplin, 2012).

CONCLUSION

Faced with the systemic and multifaceted challenges of the climate crisis in Africa, active citizenship is an essential strategic lever for achieving fair, inclusive and sustainable climate governance. In this context, the state, as a central player in public policy-making, must act as a regulator and facilitator. It is responsible not only for defining national climate priorities, but also for guaranteeing the conditions necessary for the effective and meaningful exercise of civil rights, in particular the right to a healthy environment and a decent life.

The implementation of active citizenship implies pluralistic participation: contribution, enjoyment, monitoring and evaluation, and accountability requirements for public, private and international actors. This dynamic and iterative process relies on mobilising citizens around the common good of the climate and consolidating collective well-being in the face of the scale and brutality of environmental change. It also involves anchoring this mobilisation in local realities, by promoting endogenous knowledge, community innovations and digital activism.

Continental initiatives such as those led by the Pan-African Climate Justice Alliance[1]  (PACJA) and the African Youth Commission[2] (AYC) demonstrate that it is possible to develop climate governance centred on justice, equity and solidarity. By combining citizen engagement, institutional pressure and collective intelligence, Africa can chart its own path towards a resilient, democratic and inclusive ecological transition.

REFERENCE

1. Carbo Academy, Justice climatique : définition, enjeux et perspectives, https://www.hellocarbo.com/blog/communaute/justice-climatique/, Avril 2022.
2. Hernandès, Bernardo, et Ana M. Martin. « 52. Justice climatique », Dorothée Marchand éd., Psychologie environnementale : 100 notions clés. Dunod, 2022, pp. 138-139.
3. Orygeen, JUSTICE CLIMATIQUE : LUTTER CONTRE LE CHANGEMENT CLIMATIQUE ET SES INÉGALITÉS, https://www.orygeen.eu/docs-actus/glossaire/justice-climatique/#:~:text=La%20justice%20climatique%20est%20une,contre%20des%20%C3%89tats%20ou%20entreprises, 2021
4. Déclaration de S. E. Moussa Faki Mahamat Président de la Commission de l’Union Africaine lors du sommet d’adaptation GCA, le 5 septembre 2022 à Rotterdam au Pays-Bas. https://au.int/en/node/42153
5. Tom Hawthorn, Citoyenneté active, https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/fr/article/citoyennete-active, 2021
6. Special Report on Climate Change and Land. (n.d.). Special Report on Climate Change and Land. Retrieved March 19, 2021, from https://www.ipcc.ch/srccl/.
7. Okonjo-Iweala, N. (2020, January 30). Africa can play a leading role in the fight against climate change. Brookings. https://www.brookings.edu/research/africa-can-play-a-leading-role-in-the-fight-against-climate-change/.
8. Laurent, É. (2020). Introduction. La transition juste: Un nouvel âge de l’économie et de l’environnement. Revue de l’OFCE, 165, 5-20. https://doi.org/10.3917/reof.165.0005
9. The Just Transition Mechanism: making sure no one is left behind”. European Commission.
10. Financing the green transition: The European Green Deal Investment Plan and Just Transition Mechanism”. ec.europa.eu. Retrieved 14 November 2020.
11. Climate finance Short Changed” (PDF). OXFAM. Retrieved 24 October 2022.
12. Debt-for-Climate Swaps Can Help Developing Countries Make a Green Recovery”. Sustainable Recovery 2020. November 13, 2020. Retrieved 2020-12-01.
13. MOFA, PACJA, AFRICAN ACTIVISTS FOR CLIMATE JUSTICE, 2020
14. Hope, Sr, K. R. (2009). Climate change and urban development in Africa. International Journal of Environmental Studies,66(5), 643–658. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207230903367955
15. CITOYENNETÉ ACTIVE AU CAMEROUN : ENJEUX, DÉFIS ET PERSPECTIVES, Friedrich Ebert Stiftung. 2017. 135p.
16. Andrew Boyd & Dave Oswald Mitchell, Joyeux bordel. Tactiques, principes et théories pour faire une révolution, New York, Les Editions Les Liens qui libèrent, 2015, 245p.
17. Hansotte, Majo. « Introduction », , Les intelligences citoyennes. Comment se prend et s’invente la parole collective, sous la direction de Hansotte Majo. De Boeck Supérieur, 2005, pp. 7-12.
18. WMO, State of the Climate in Africa, https://public.wmo.int/en/our-mandate/climate/wmo-statement-state-of-global-climate/Africa, 2021.
19. Responding to climate change. (n.d.). UNEP – UN Environment Programme. Retrieved March 19, 2021, from https://www.unep.org/regions/africa/regional-initiatives/responding-climate-change
20. Oxfam International. (2020, July 9). The hunger virus: how COVID-19 is fuelling hunger in a hungry world. https://www.oxfam.org/en/research/hunger-virus-how-covid-19-fuelling-hunger-hungry-world
21. Peter L. Berger et Thomas Luckmann, The Social Construction of Reality : A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge, Anchor, 1966, 240 p.
22. David Easton, The Political System, New York, Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., 1953, chap. 11.
23. David Easton, A system analysis of the political life.   John wiley & Sons, 1965
24. Annick Percheron, Les applications de l’analyse systémique à des cas particuliers [article], Revue française de sociologie, Année 1971  12-1  pp. 195-212
25. Maryse Bresson, « La participation : un concept constamment réinventé », Socio-logos [En ligne], 9 | 2014, mis en ligne le 04 mars 2014, consulté le 02 mai 2018. URL :http://journals.openedition.org/sociologos/ 2817.
26. Larrère, Catherine. « Inégalités environnementales et justice climatique », Annales des Mines – Responsabilité et environnement, vol. 79, no. 3, 2015, pp. 73-77.
27. Bourban, Michel. « Justice climatique et négociations internationales », Négociations, vol. 27, no. 1, 2017, pp. 7-22.
28. Creswell, J.W. and Plano Clark, V.L. (2011) Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research. 2nd Edition, Sage Publications, Los Angeles.
29. Lobbying Versus Advocacy: Legal Definitions”. NP Action. Archived from the original on 2 April 2010. Retrieved 2 March 2010.
30. DUTOIT Martine, DEUTSCH Claude, « L’advocacy, au service de la dignité de la personne. La citoyenneté des usagers en santé mentale Empan, 2006/4 (n^o 64), p. 97-104. DOI : 10.3917/empa.064.0097. URL : https://www.cairn.info/revue-empan-2006-4-page-97.htm
31. H. Clark and D. Taplin, « Theory of Change Basics: A Primer on Theory of Change » [archive], ActKnowledge, march 2012
32. FOUQUET, Annie. L’Évaluation des politiques publiques. Concepts et enjeux In : Évaluer les politiques publiques pour améliorer l’action publique : Une perspective internationale [en ligne]. Vincennes : Institut de la gestion publique et du développement économique, 2009 (généré le 18 janvier 2023). Disponible sur Internet : <http://books.openedition.org/igpde/1278>. ISBN : 9782821828285. DOI : https://doi.org/10.4000/books.igpde.1278.
33. ROSA, Sylvie (dir.). Évaluer les politiques publiques pour améliorer l’action publique : Une perspective internationale. Nouvelle édition [en ligne]. Vincennes : Institut de la gestion publique et du développement économique, 2009 (généré le 18 janvier 2023). Disponible sur Internet : <http://books.openedition.org/igpde/1267>. ISBN : 9782821828285. DOI : https://doi.org/10.4000/books.igpde.1267.
34. Tsayem Demaze, Moïse, et Claire Philippe. « Repères et caractéristiques épistémiques de la justice climatique », Natures Sciences Sociétés, vol. 30, no. 1, 2022, pp. 14-30. Anita van der Laan, How to design a Theory of Change, Akvo, 2019
35. Roberts, J.T. & Parks, B.C. (2007). A Climate of Injustice: Global Inequality, North-South Politics, and Climate Policy. MIT Press.
36. Schlosberg, D. (2007). Defining Environmental Justice: Theories, Movements, and Nature. Oxford Universi ty Press.
37. Djoudi, H., Locatelli, B., Vaast, C., Asher, K., Brockhaus, M. & Basnett Sijapati, B. (2016). Beyond Dichotomies: Gender and Intersecting Inequalities in Climate Change Studies. Ambio, 45(S3), 248–262.
38. Gaventa, J. (2006). Finding the Spaces for Change: A Power Analysis. IDS Bulletin, 37(6), 23–33.
39. O’Brien, K. (2012). Global Environmental Change II: From Adaptation to Deliberate Transformation. Progress in Human Geography, 36(5), 667–676.
40. Ribot, J.C. (2014). Cause and Response: Vulnerability and Climate in the Anthropocene. Journal of Peasant Studies, 41(5), 667–705.
41. Jasanoff, S. (2004). States of Knowledge: The Co-production of Science and Social Order. Routledge.
42. Fraser, N. (2009). Scales of Justice: Reimagining Political Space in a Globalizing World. Columbia University Press.

The Pan-African Climate Justice Alliance (PACJA) is a continental coalition of African civil society organizations united by a common goal: to promote and advocate for climate-resilient and equitable development across the continent.  https://pacja-ci.org/

The African Youth Commission (AYC) is a pan-African, youth-led non-governmental organization headquartered in The Gambia, with a regional office in Kenya. Established as a dynamic platform for youth engagement and empowerment, AYC is committed to advocating for and promoting transformative leadership among young people across the African continent. Its mission is to amplify the voices of African youth, strengthen their capacities, and foster meaningful participation in development processes at local, national, regional, and continental levels. http://ayc.org/