INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

Digital Pathways forYouth Empowerment in Climate Mitigation and

Resilience: ParisAgreementAlignment in Nigeria and Rwanda

Odunola Motunrayo Aikomo^*, Abidemi Abiola Isola, PhD, Chibuzor Ayodele Nwaodike, PhD

Department of Political Science and Public Administration, Babcock University, Nigeria

*Corresponding Author

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.910000708

Received: 02 November 2025; Accepted: 10 November 2025; Published: 21 November 2025

ABSTRACT

The Paris Agreement (2015) establishes a global framework for coordinated climate action, focussing on

mitigation, adaptation, and capacity building. Article 12 emphasises the importance of education, public

participation, and access to information, highlighting the pivotal role of youth in transformative climate

governance. This study analyses the convergence of youth empowerment, digitalisation, and the execution of

the Paris Agreement in Nigeria and Rwanda. The study assesses the impact of the Agreement's domestication

on youth engagement in climate mitigation and resilience, as well as the role of digital governance innovations

in improving effectiveness across various national contexts. Grounded in Empowerment Theory,

Transformative Governance Theory, and Digital Era Governance, the study employs a qualitative comparative

case study design, integrating document analysis and comparative policy review to elucidate contextual

differences between Nigeria and Rwanda. The findings indicate that both countries have shown increasing

institutional commitment to youth inclusion and digital innovation via initiatives such as Nigeria’s Investment

in Digital and Creative Enterprises (iDICE) and Three Million Technical Talent (3MTT) programmes, along

with Rwanda’s Digital Ambassadors Programme (DAP). The effectiveness of these initiatives is influenced by

socio-economic inequalities, varying political cultures, and historical legacies that affect policy

implementation. Ongoing challenges, such as inadequate Measurement, Reporting, and Verification (MRV)

systems, institutional fragmentation, and disparities in digital access, persistently hinder transformative

outcomes. The study concludes that aligning the implementation of the Paris Agreement with inclusive digital

policies, enhancing inter-ministerial coordination, investing in youth digital competencies, and promoting

multi-stakeholder collaboration will improve adaptive governance and facilitate equitable, technology-driven

climate transitions in both countries.

Keywords: Rwanda and Nigeria, Paris Agreement, youth empowerment, climate governance, digital

transformation.

INTRODUCTION

Climate change constitutes a complex and pressing challenge of the twenty-first century. The extensive

repercussions—escalated droughts, increased sea levels, loss of biodiversity, severe flooding, and compelled

migration—present considerable threats to environmental stability, economic progress, and global social

structures (IPCC, 2023). The crisis is universal; however, developing nations, especially in Sub-Saharan

Africa, face a disproportionate burden owing to limited adaptive capacities, fragile economies, and reliance on

climate-sensitive livelihoods (World Bank, 2020). In this regional context, youth hold a contradictory role:

they are highly vulnerable to the impacts of global warming, while simultaneously representing a vital

demographic for fostering innovation, advocacy, and resilience in climate action (UNDP, 2013; Mulikita,

2024).

Globally, youth are becoming significant participants in climate governance by mobilising transnational

campaigns, utilising digital platforms for activism, and developing technology-driven solutions (Andresen et

al., 2021). Nonetheless, their involvement frequently appears to be more symbolic than systemic. Institutional

Page 8694

ww w .rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

barriers such as political marginalisation, restricted financial access, and insufficient digital and climate

literacy hinder meaningful participation (Asare-Nuamah & Mandaza, 2020; UNFCCC, 2021). As climate

governance increasingly incorporates technological and data-driven methodologies, it is essential to ensure

equitable digital participation. The development of digital infrastructures, including social media, mobile

technology, and e-participation platforms, provides opportunities for enhancing youth engagement and shifting

governance from hierarchical to networked structures. Without intentional inclusion, the digital divide may

perpetuate existing inequalities in participation and access to climate opportunities.

The Paris Agreement, adopted in 2015 within the framework of the United Nations Framework Convention on

Climate Change (UNFCCC), represents a significant milestone in international climate policy. The hybrid

framework which combines binding and voluntary commitments aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions

and enhancing adaptive capacity (UNFCCC, 2015a). Article 12 emphasises the importance of education,

training, public awareness, and access to information as essential components for inclusive climate action,

establishing a normative basis for youth empowerment and digital engagement (UNFCCC, 2015a; Okegbe,

2025). The implementation of these principles into national frameworks is inconsistent, especially in low- and

middle-income countries (APRI, 2025; Hutagalung, 2023).

Empirical evidence demonstrates this disparity: The 2022 synthesis of Nationally Determined Contributions

(NDCs) by the UNFCCC revealed that few countries explicitly recognise youth as stakeholders in climate

action (UNFCCC, 2022). African states have developed youth and climate strategies; however, these

initiatives often demonstrate fragmentation and insufficient digital and institutional linkages necessary for

cohesive policy and participatory implementation (Ndukwe et al., 2023; Berñe et al., 2023). Youth in Nigeria

constitute over 60% of the population, with digital activism and technological innovation playing crucial roles

in climate advocacy and entrepreneurship. However, these grassroots initiatives are largely unconnected to

established policy frameworks (NGYouthSDGs, 2024; Okafor et al., 2024). Rwanda's climate and green

growth policies integrate youth involvement through green employment and capacity-building programs,

which are progressively supported by digital training and e-governance frameworks, though questions persist

regarding the sustainability and inclusiveness of these digitally mediated frameworks (Republic of Rwanda,

2022; Buheji et al., 2024).

Recent literature on climate governance has expanded to include digital transformation, climate justice, and

participatory governance as interconnected aspects of sustainability transitions (UNESCO, 2020; Blaustein,

2024; Connect4Climate & Teach for All, 2024). Digitalisation transforms governance structures and

reconfigures the distribution of knowledge, participation, and empowerment among citizens. There exists a

significant gap in comprehending how digital governance mechanisms can be utilised to promote youth

empowerment within national frameworks that align with the Paris Agreement, especially in Africa, where

digital infrastructures and policy integration are inconsistent. This gap restricts theoretical and practical

understanding of how digital pathways can convert global commitments into climate action that includes youth

(Asare-Nuamah & Mandaza, 2020; Adaptation Fund, 2022).

This research examines the disparity through a comparative policy analysis of Nigeria and Rwanda, two

African nations exemplifying differing governance and digitalisation frameworks. Nigeria's federal structure,

substantial youth demographic, and growing digital landscape present avenues for innovation, yet they also

highlight issues of institutional fragmentation and reliance on fossil fuels (Okafor et al., 2024). Rwanda's

centralised governance and swift implementation of digital public infrastructure illustrate the intersection of

digitalisation and political commitment in improving youth engagement and policy coordination (Republic of

Rwanda, 2022; Buheji et al., 2024). This comparative analysis highlights the ways in which various

institutional and digital contexts influence the adaptation of Paris Agreement commitments via strategies

aimed at youth.

The study utilises a qualitative, desk-based methodology that systematically reviews scholarly literature, policy

documents, and secondary data, informed by three complementary theoretical frameworks: Empowerment

Theory, Transformative Governance Theory, and Digital Era Governance (DEG). Empowerment Theory

emphasises the importance of agency and capacity-building as essential for meaningful participation (Perkins

& Zimmerman, 1995). Transformative Governance emphasises the necessity for adaptive, inclusive, and

Page 8695

ww w .rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

reflexive governance frameworks to address complex socio-ecological challenges such as climate change

(Korhonen-Kurki et al., 2025). Transformative governance requires integrative adaptive and equitable

approaches to manage the complexities of the biodiversity climate society (BCS) nexus. (Pascual et al, 2022).

DEG expands this analysis into the digital realm by investigating the impact of information and

communication technologies (ICTs), online platforms, and digital public infrastructures on governance

processes. This is achieved through reintegration, user-centred design, and data-driven decision-making

(Dunleavy et al., 2006; Margetts & Dunleavy, 2013). These frameworks collectively facilitate a comprehensive

understanding of the intersection between empowerment, institutional transformation, and digital innovation in

shaping youth-inclusive climate governance in Nigeria and Rwanda.

This study aims to achieve three interconnected objectives: (1) evaluating the integration of Paris Agreement

provisions into the national climate policies of Nigeria and Rwanda; (2) examining the empowerment of youth

in climate-related decision-making, innovation, and digital engagement; and (3) identifying institutional,

social, and technological enablers and barriers to youth participation in both contexts. This paper advances

scholarship and practice by positioning youth empowerment at the intersection of global climate governance,

national policy implementation, and digital transformation. The study enhances theoretical clarity by

synthesising Empowerment Theory, Transformative Governance, and Digital Era Governance into a cohesive

analytical framework that connects agency, inclusivity, and technology. It provides practical insights for

policymakers and development actors regarding the reconciliation of rhetorical commitments with structural

empowerment. The primary assertion is that empowering youth in climate action constitutes a moral obligation

and a digital opportunity, necessitating institutional reform, inclusive governance, and investment in digital

infrastructures that facilitate participation and enhance resilience.

METHODOLOGY

This study adopts a qualitative, desk-based research design to examine how the Paris Agreement’s provisions

are incorporated into the national climate policies of Nigeria and Rwanda, with specific attention to the

integration of digital pathways for youth empowerment in climate mitigation and resilience. The qualitative

approach facilitates a thorough analysis of policy frameworks, institutional arrangements, and ICT-based

mechanisms that promote youth participation. A comparative design facilitates the systematic identification of

similarities and differences in the translation of international climate and digital governance principles into

national practice. Nigeria and Rwanda were purposefully chosen due to their differing governance and

digitalisation contexts; Nigeria's federal structure and developing digital ecosystem are significantly different

from Rwanda's centralised governance and sophisticated e-governance systems.

The research relies solely on secondary data sources, encompassing Nationally Determined Contributions,

climate strategies, youth and digital policies, and development plans. Supplementary data were sourced from

reports by the UNFCCC and World Bank, peer-reviewed publications, and grey literature from youth networks

and digital innovation hubs. Documents from the period 2015 to 2024 were chosen based on their relevance. A

comparative policy analysis and qualitative content analysis were conducted to identify digital indicators

integrated into national policies that influence youth-inclusive climate governance.

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK AND REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Youth Empowerment

Youth empowerment is a complex and evolving process that enables young individuals to gain the skills,

authority, and agency necessary to make informed decisions, engage with issues impacting their lives, and

contribute significantly to societal change (OECD, 2021). Empowerment, as defined by the United Nations

Department of Economic and Social Affairs (2012), refers to “increasing the capacity of individuals or groups

to make choices and to transform those choices into desired actions and outcomes” (p. 6). Vorng (2025)

defines youth empowerment as a strategy for civic engagement and social justice, emphasising the role of

youth as agents of change who cultivate critical thinking, leadership, and problem-solving skills in supportive

environments that acknowledge their perspectives. Perkins and Zimmerman’s (1995) empowerment model—

Page 8696

ww w .rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

comprising psychological, organisational, and community dimensions—serves as a foundational framework,

highlighting mastery, participation, and engagement in governance.

This study defines "youth" as individuals aged 18 to 35 years, a range commonly utilised in national youth

policies across Africa (YouthPolicy.org, 2024). The age range of 18 to 35 encompasses a phase characterised

by significant life transitions, such as entering the workforce, participating in civic activities, and developing

leadership skills. This aligns with empowerment frameworks that focus on capacity building, resource

accessibility, and meaningful participation. Youth empowerment is fundamentally contingent upon structural

factors, including education, inclusive policies, and institutional trust, necessitating collaboration among

governments, the private sector, and civil society (UNESCO, 2023).

Ofusori (2025) identifies youth empowerment as a transformative mechanism for marginalised youth through

mentorship, leadership, and resource access while Heath and Moreau (2024) contend that youth empowerment

should be both transformational and sustainable, focusing on overcoming structural barriers to inclusion and

fostering rights-based development via education, equality, and political participation. Fostering these

dimensions establishes empowerment as a fundamental pillar, enabling young people to serve as agents of

change rather than passive recipients of development interventions.

In the context of climate action, empowerment is not solely about inclusion but about enabling young people to

influence and implement climate solutions and Wukelic (2025) emphasises the necessity of balancing

economic empowerment—through entrepreneurship and digital skills—with civic and political inclusion

.Empowering youth through digital literacy, inclusive platforms, and participatory mechanisms is essential for

achieving transformative outcomes and fostering sustainable behaviour change in digital-climate governance.

It is essential for promoting social inclusion, democratic participation, and sustainable development.

Climate Governance

Climate governance involves the institutional frameworks, policy instruments, and decision-making processes

that societies utilise to tackle climate change mitigation, adaptation, and resilience (García-Sánchez et al.,

2024). The phenomenon operates on various levels, encompassing international frameworks such as the Paris

Agreement and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, as well as national, sub-

national, and local contexts. It involves a diverse array of stakeholders, including states, intergovernmental

organisations, private enterprises, civil society, and youth organisations (Dubash, 2021; García-Sánchez et al.,

2024).

Fundamental principles including participation, transparency, accountability, and equity are essential for

effective climate governance, recognising the necessity for fair distribution of burdens and benefits and the

importance of inclusive decision-making (Dubash, 2021). Contemporary scholarship emphasises polycentric

and transformative governance models that facilitate diverse decision-making centres and empower non-state

actors, networks, and grassroots initiatives to operate alongside governments (Marquardt et al., 2022; Kellner

et al., 2024). These models emphasise that governance extends beyond regulatory mandates; it involves

facilitating innovation, enhancing local initiatives, and integrating systemic change within ecological,

economic, and social systems. Effective climate governance necessitates the integration of scientific

knowledge, inclusive policymaking, the empowerment of marginalised groups (notably youth), and the

establishment of adaptive, equitable institutional arrangements focused on long-term sustainability. This is

particularly vital in vulnerable regions where structural inequalities and capacity constraints are prevalent

(Caro-Gonzalez, 2024); Oramah & Olsen, 2021).

Mitigation and Resilience

Mitigation and resilience are two interconnected pillars of climate action that tackle both the causes and effects

of climate change. Mitigation involves intentional actions to decrease greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and

improve carbon sinks, therefore slowing the rate and extent of global warming (Intergovernmental Panel on

Climate Change [IPCC], 2023a). Attaining mitigation objectives necessitates the decarbonisation of energy

systems, a shift to renewable sources, enhancement of energy efficiency, and the promotion of sustainable land

Page 8697

ww w .rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

use and forestry practices (IPCC, 2023b). The IPCC Sixth Assessment Report emphasises that maintaining

global warming under 1.5 °C necessitates swift and substantial emission reductions across all sectors,

underpinned by transformative governance and green innovation (IPCC, 2023a). Conversely, resilience

denotes the ability of individuals, communities, and ecosystems to foresee, endure, adjust to, and recuperate

from climate-induced shocks and stresses (Richard, 2024; Groff, 2022). Resilience is contingent upon

adaptive governance, social learning, inclusive participation, and long-term planning that enhance institutional

and community responses to threats including droughts, floods, and food poverty (McCarthy & Winters, n.d.).

While mitigation addresses the fundamental causes of climate change, resilience concentrates on managing its

effects, especially for vulnerable populations that experience disproportionate exposure and possess limited

adaptive potential. Incorporating both mitigation and resilience into governance frameworks facilitates a

holistic approach to climate policy that promotes environmental sustainability, social justice, and

intergenerational equity (Buheji et al., 2024). This dual emphasis highlights the significance of youth

empowerment and participatory governance in developing locally pertinent and forward-looking climate

solutions. Effective climate governance necessitates not just commitments to reduce emissions but also the

enhancement of social and institutional capacity to endure and recuperate from climatic disturbances, ensuring

that no group is marginalised in the transition to a sustainable future.

Paris Agreement

The Paris Agreement, adopted in 2015 within the framework of the United Nations Framework Convention on

Climate Change (UNFCCC), signifies a pivotal moment in international climate governance, aligning nations

towards a common goal of restricting global temperature increase and promoting sustainable development

(UNFCCC, 2015; Akrofi, 2022). The primary aim of the Agreement, as stated in Article 2, is to restrict the

increase in global average temperature to “well below 2 °C” above pre-industrial levels and to strive for a limit

of 1.5 °C. This target highlights the international dedication to achieving deep decarbonisation and enhancing

resilience (UNFCCC, 2015b). The Paris Agreement contrasts with the Kyoto Protocol's top-down structure by

adopting a bottom-up approach that depends on voluntary national commitments. The framework implements

a coordinated approach with national commitments, referred to as Nationally Determined Contributions

(NDCs), directing collective advancement towards global climate objectives. The Agreement represents a

transition from a prescriptive regulatory model to a governance paradigm focused on inclusivity, transparency,

and long-term resilience (Higham et al, 2021). The Agreement is fundamentally based on three interconnected

pillars: mitigation, adaptation, and means of implementation, which encompass climate finance, technology

transfer, and capacity building (Jones Day, 2015).

The fundamental principles of the Agreement are detailed in its principal articles: Article 2 establishes its

primary objective: to restrict the increase in global temperature to significantly below 2°C above pre-industrial

levels, to strive for a limit of 1.5°C, and to improve adaptive capacity while ensuring that financial flows are

consistent with low-carbon and climate-resilient pathways while Article 4 mandates that Parties communicate

and uphold Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) designed to achieve a balance between

anthropogenic emissions and removals. Article 7 sets forth a global objective for adaptation, emphasising the

importance of resilience and adaptive capacity as fundamental components of sustainable development. The

transparency framework (Article 13) and the global stocktake (Article 14) are intended to evaluate collective

progress and guide future NDCs, thereby enhancing accountability and facilitating learning among Parties.

Researchers emphasise that the flexible structure of the Agreement promotes inclusivity; however, it also

raises issues related to the sufficiency of ambition and equity, particularly concerning the differentiated

responsibilities of developed and developing countries (Santos, 2017). The Paris Agreement presents a

governance model that effectively integrates climate action with development, justice, and intergenerational

equity. The provisions emphasise equity, ambition, and collaboration, establishing the Paris Agreement as a

Page 8698

ww w .rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

transformative framework that enables all stakeholders, including youth, to jointly lead a sustainable, climate-

resilient future (Dong, 2022; UNFCCC, 2015).

SUMMARY OF LITERATURE REVIEW

This study is informed by literature that intersects with five key thematic areas:

1. Transformative Governance and Climate Policy Frameworks,

2. Climate Governance under the Paris Agreement

3. Youth Empowerment and Participation in Climate Action,

4. Digital Pathways and Digital Era Governance, and

5. Youth Empowerment, Digitalisation and Climate Governance in Nigeria and Rwanda

Transformative Governance and Climate Policy Frameworks

Transformative governance serves as a crucial framework for tackling the systemic and multi-scalar challenges

associated with climate change, as it directly addresses the structural factors that hinder significant

sustainability transitions (Korhonen-Kurki et al., 2025; Hölscher et al., 2019). In contrast to adaptive or

sectoral approaches that focus on incremental change, transformative governance aims for structural

reconfiguration. It utilises innovative institutional forms, orchestration capacities, and cross-sector coalitions to

overcome path dependencies and facilitate comprehensive system shifts (Caro-Gonzalez, 2024; Pascual et al.,

2022). Transformative governance is characterised by its focus on inclusion, innovation, and changes in power

dynamics (Carrington et al, 2024).

Empirical research on urban decarbonisation and landscape restoration indicates that transformative outcomes

are significantly linked to multi-actor co-production, experimental governance frameworks, innovative

financing mechanisms, and the institutionalisation of learning processes that enhance the scalability of local

innovations (Pascual et al., 2022; Hölscher et al., 2019). Research indicates that transformative governance is

effective when it integrates scientific knowledge with local values and indigenous practices, resulting in

socially legitimate and technically robust interventions (Pascual et al., 2022). Crucially, transformative

governance emphasises inclusion and power-rebalancing: it requires mechanisms that create voice and

influence for historically marginalised groups rather than merely inviting their consultation.

Empirical reviews indicate a consistent gap: youth, despite being key beneficiaries and catalysts for long-term

transformations, are often marginalised in formal governance structures (Salhi et al, 2025). The omission is

notable in contexts such as Nigeria and Rwanda, where national climate strategies (e.g., Nigeria’s updated

NDC and Rwanda’s Green Growth and Climate Resilience strategy) outline ambitious mitigation and

adaptation objectives but rely on extensive societal engagement to achieve transformative change (Federal

Government of Nigeria, 2021; Republic of Rwanda, 2022). Incorporating youth empowerment through formal

roles in co-design processes, access to finance and innovation hubs, and capacity-building enhances the

legitimacy and sustainability of transformative governance, facilitating intergenerational leadership in the

transition to resilient, low-carbon development pathways (Salhi et al, 2025; Benkenstein et al, 2020).

Climate Governance under the Paris Agreement

Empirical studies highlight the dynamic nature of climate governance under the Paris Agreement, emphasising

the interactions among national institutions, transnational networks, and local actors in achieving climate

objectives. Higham et al. (2021) identified that the Agreement’s bottom-up approach has enhanced national

ownership of climate policies; while transformative governance offers a critical perspective for evaluating

climate policy frameworks, as it emphasises structural change, inclusive power transfers, innovation, and

comprehensive transformations rather than mere incremental modifications. Bambi et al. (2024) empirically

demonstrate this in Sub-Saharan Africa: using panel data from 25 nations (1990–2020), they establish that

institutional quality and effective governance are associated with reduced ecological footprints, although only

up to a specific threshold, beyond which the benefits decline.

Page 8699

ww w .rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

This finding underscores the necessity for governance reforms to surpass fundamental quality standards in

order to enable sustainable transformations. Okafor et al. (2024) analyse mitigation and adaptation strategies

in Nigeria, noting that although policies such as agroforestry, mechanisation of rice production, and methane-

emission reduction exist, their institutionalisation is inconsistent. Governance deficiencies, including issues

related to coordination, resource allocation, and stakeholder engagement, present substantial challenges. Their

analysis highlights that technically feasible initiatives lack effectiveness in the absence of governance

frameworks that empower youth, local stakeholders, and cross-sector networks. Owojori and Anwana (2025)

identify systemic governance challenges, such as fossil-fuel dependency and inadequate policy coherence,

within the BRICS that are similarly evident in African contexts and hinder the transition to net-zero pathways.

Pauw et al. (2019) demonstrated that nationally determined contributions (NDCs) in developing nations often

lack clear mechanisms for accountability and integration into domestic development plans. Ndambwa and

Moonga (2024) examined the challenges and opportunities associated with decentralising climate governance

in the Global South, specifically in the Kafue wetlands of Zambia, and illustrated the effects of decentralisation

and civic participation on climate adaptation outcomes. Key findings emphasised the importance of clear

frameworks, capacity-building, and community engagement in improving climate governance in vulnerable

regions.

The studies suggest that the Paris Agreement offers a flexible framework for multilevel governance. However,

achieving its transformative potential demands inclusive participation, institutional coherence, and sustained

global support.

Youth Empowerment and Participation in Climate Action

Youth empowerment serves as a normative ideal and a crucial policy necessity in climate governance,

transforming young individuals from passive beneficiaries into active agents of change. Research conducted

by Sloam, Pickard, and Henn (2022) classifies youth climate activism into three categories: dutiful, disruptive,

and dangerous. This classification highlights the ways in which youth are increasingly challenging established

paradigms and utilising innovative, and at times radical, methods of engagement. Sanyang (2021) posits that

youth empowerment is crucial for the realisation of the right to development, highlighting the necessity of

engaging young individuals in all phases of the development process. Javeed et al. (2022) illustrate that

structural barriers, including restricted political participation, inadequate employment opportunities, and

diminished social capital, hinder youth entrepreneurship and empowerment in Pakistan, emphasising the

necessity for institutional reform and inclusive policy frameworks.

Despite this evidence, the involvement of youth in global climate governance frequently remains symbolic or

consultative rather than transformative. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

(UNFCCC, 2021) acknowledges youth as stakeholders in global climate discussions; nonetheless, their

involvement is often limited to side events and non-binding declarations, rather than meaningful decision-

making processes.

According to the empowerment theory proposed by Perkins and Zimmerman (1995), intentional youth

empowerment necessitates access to decision-making platforms, significant capacity-building opportunities,

and adequate resource support—dimensions that are often overlooked in the literature concerning the Paris

Agreement. To enhance transformative climate governance, research should investigate the operationalisation

of empowerment dimensions, especially in African contexts with significant youth populations that may serve

as catalysts for change.

Digital Pathways and Digital Era Governance

Digital Era Governance (DEG) represents a unique governance framework wherein digital technologies—

including information and communications technologies (ICTs), data analytics, platform infrastructures, and

automation—play a pivotal role in shaping, delivering, and transforming public sector functions (Ravšelj et al,

2022). Empirical bibliometric evidence indicates that DEG has significantly evolved over the past two

decades, transitioning from e-government service delivery to models of governance that are citizen-centric,

Page 8700

ww w .rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

smart, and participatory (Ravšelj et al, 2022). A case study in Yogyakarta, Indonesia demonstrated that 'e-

leadership'—the ability of senior officials to guide digital transformation—was crucial in converting digital

infrastructure into institutional and policy innovation at the local level (Zuhriyati et al., 2025). An empirical

investigation of digital governance in Indonesia revealed that the digital divide among low-income groups

hinders inclusive governance, as poorer communities have restricted access and consequently remain excluded

from digital public services (Wahyunengseh et al., 2020).

Digital policy experts in developing countries highlight the importance of coordination, regional cooperation,

and capacity building as critical avenues for utilising digital technologies for development. However, power

imbalances and domestic technical barriers persist, hindering progress (Phillips et al., 2020). The evidence

indicates that the relationship between digital technologies and enhanced governance is not automatic or

universal; it is contingent upon factors such as institutional readiness, inclusive access, leadership, and data-

driven practices. While digital pathways hold transformative potential for governance, empirical studies

highlight that realization of DEG requires contextually embedded strategies to avoid reinforcing existing

inequalities and to foster social value from digital government reforms (Ndambwa & Moonga, 2024).

Youth Empowerment, Digitalisation and Climate Governance in Nigeria and Rwanda

Empirical studies indicate that the quality of governance and institutional thresholds significantly influence the

extent to which digital tools result in climate-relevant outcomes. Bambi et al. (2024) reveal that in Sub-

Saharan Africa, enhancements in institutional quality led to reductions in ecological footprints only when

governance exceeds specific thresholds.

Empirical evidence from Nigeria indicates that institutional exclusion, resource limitations, and ineffective

implementation frameworks persistently hinder youth involvement in climate governance (Benkenstein et al.,

2020). Okafor et al. (2024) indicate that despite the presence of mitigation and adaptation policies, inconsistent

institutionalisation and inadequate coordination hinder youth participation in climate entrepreneurship and

policy processes. Pinchoff et al. (2025) reflects that youth encounter climate risks directly and can

significantly engage in locally relevant adaptation when provided opportunities for co-production and

decision-making. Nigeria's Third Nationally Determined Contribution NDC 3.0 (Federal Republic of Nigeria,

2025) recognises youth as a critical stakeholder and indicates diverse areas to cater to their interest and secure

their engagement, a seeming improvement to the Updated Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) - 2021

which dedicated a section to youth and acknowledges that they “represent a tremendous potential” (Federal

Government of Nigeria, 2021 Section 6.3, paragraph 2). Nevertheless, their effectiveness is frequently

hindered by bureaucratic inertia and insufficient political will.

Youth empowerment in Rwanda is integrated into national frameworks via overarching climate resilience and

green growth strategies. Rwanda’s NDC (Republic of Rwanda, 2020) lacks a dedicated section on youth

empowerment; however, its integration with the Green Growth and Climate Resilience Strategy (GGCRS), the

National Strategy for Transformation (NST1), and Vision 2050 establishes institutional frameworks for youth

inclusion. However, empirical research has also identified the digital divide and rural connectivity gaps that

restrict equitable youth participation (Ahishakiye & Nizeyimana, 2024), despite reports that emphasise

government-driven investments in green jobs, climate education, and youth-led innovation (Republic of

Rwanda, 2022).

The intersection of youth empowerment, digitalisation, and climate governance can either enhance or limit

national climate ambitions, influenced by factors such as institutional capacity, digital access, and inclusive

governance structures. This suggests that digital interventions should be integrated within adequately strong

institutions to achieve effectiveness. Digital tools, including e-participation portals, mobile learning, and social

media campaigns, have enhanced youth engagement in environmental policy dialogues in Nigeria and Rwanda

(APRI, 2025; Bermeo & Santoro, 2025), nonetheless, digital divides, resulting from disparities in access to

technology, education, and infrastructure, restrict participation in both nations.

Page 8701

ww w .rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

Gap in Existing Literature and Contribution to Scholarship

Despite the growing body of research on youth, digitalisation, and climate governance, significant theoretical

and contextual gaps persist. The Paris Agreement has shifted global climate governance towards a more

participatory and facilitative model; nonetheless, mechanisms for youth engagement remain underdeveloped

and insufficiently theorised. Research on transformative governance underscores the importance of inclusivity

and systemic change yet often overlooks the role of youth as key participants in these transitions. A

considerable amount of literature highlights administrative efficiency (Dunleavy et al., 2006; Margetts &

Dunleavy, 2013) rather than the transformative and participatory potential of digitalisation for youth inclusion.

Empirical studies from Nigeria and Rwanda reveal both opportunities and barriers for youth in climate action;

however, there is a scarcity of comparative analyses grounded in global policy frameworks. Research (Akrofi

et al., 2022; Connect4Climate & Teach For All, 2024; APRI, 2025; Bermeo & Santoro, 2025) highlights

institutional constraints and resource limitations yet rarely examines the impact of digital infrastructures on

enhancing youth empowerment in climate governance.

This empirical gap highlights the necessity for context-sensitive analysis regarding the role of digital pathways

in enhancing youth empowerment within Africa’s climate governance framework. This study addresses a gap

in literature by synthesising Empowerment, Digital Era Governance, and Transformative Governance theories.

It investigates how digital pathways enhance youth empowerment within the framework of the Paris

Agreement in Nigeria and Rwanda, contributing to inclusive and context-sensitive models of climate

leadership.

This study situates digital pathways to youth empowerment within the context of the Paris Agreement, using

Nigeria and Rwanda as case studies. The study examines the impact of Article 12 provisions on youth

engagement in climate mitigation and resilience efforts, highlighting the contributions of Digital Era

Governance. It offers a substantial contribution to climate governance, youth empowerment policy, and

sustainable development, addressing the urgent need for inclusive and context-sensitive approaches to

transformative global environmental agreements.

DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS

Integration of Paris Agreement Provisions into National Climate Policies in Nigeria and Rwanda

The integration of Paris Agreement provisions into national climate policies reflects how global commitments

are localized to advance inclusive climate governance. Both Nigeria and Rwanda have aligned their Nationally

Determined Contributions (NDCs) with the Paris Agreement’s long-term adaptation and mitigation goals,

emphasizing youth engagement, digital innovation, and resilience. While both countries incorporate Article

12’s focus on education, awareness, and participation, their approaches differ in institutional design and

execution.

Nigeria’s Third Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC 3.0, 2025) enhances the convergence of climate

policy, digital transformation, and youth empowerment. Through initiatives such as the Investment in Digital

and Creative Enterprises (iDICE) program and the 3 Million Technical Talent (3MTT) initiative, Nigeria

integrates digital skills development into climate-smart innovation (Federal Republic of Nigeria, 2025;

National Council on Climate Change [NCCC], 2022). These reflect a Digital Era Governance (DEG) logic

(Dunleavy et al., 2006; Margetts & Dunleavy, 2013), where technology-driven collaboration supports inclusive

climate action. However, implementation gaps persist—particularly in the monitoring, reporting, and

verification (MRV) of youth-led programmes, which remain fragmented across ministries.

Rwanda, by contrast, demonstrates a more coherent and institutionally embedded model. The Green Growth

and Climate Resilience Strategy (GGCRS) and Vision 2050 operationalize Article 12’s principles through

participatory and digital inclusion mechanisms (Republic of Rwanda, 2023). Initiatives such as the Youth

Climate Action Hub, Rwanda Digital Acceleration Project, and ICT for Green Growth Program advance youth

access to climate data, digital learning, and innovation (World Bank, 2024; Howard, 2023). This approach

Page 8702

ww w .rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

exemplifies Transformative Governance Theory (Biermann & Kim, 2020), emphasizing multilevel

collaboration and adaptive learning.

Comparatively, Nigeria’s framework reflects Empowerment Theory (Zimmerman, 2012), focusing on

individual digital capacity, while Rwanda’s structure advances institutional and community empowerment.

Together, these trajectories illustrate that translating the Paris Agreement into locally relevant outcomes

requires integrated digital pathways, participatory governance, and sustained youth inclusion mechanisms.

Digital Transformation and Youth Empowerment in Climate Governance.

Recent developments in Nigeria and Rwanda reflect a growing institutional commitment to leveraging digital

transformation as a mechanism for youth empowerment and climate governance. These efforts align with the

participatory provisions of Article 12 of the Paris Agreement, which emphasises education, awareness, and

public participation in climate action. Both countries have integrated youth engagement within digital and

climate policies, yet their governance models reveal distinct patterns of institutional alignment and

implementation.

In Nigeria, digital innovation has become central to youth development policy through the National Digital

Economy Policy and Strategy (NDEPS, 2020–2030) and the Nigeria Startup Act (2022). Capacity-building

initiatives such as the Three Million Technical Talent (3MTT) and Investment in Digital and Creative

Enterprises (iDICE) programmes aim to establish an inclusive digital ecosystem that enhances youth

competence and entrepreneurship (Federal Ministry of Communications, Innovation and Digital Economy

[FMCIDE], 2023; African Development Bank [AfDB], 2023). These initiatives embody Empowerment Theory

by strengthening youth agency and digital capacity. However, scholars such as Lawal et al. (2025) and Apraku

et al, (2025) note that Nigeria’s digitalisation strategy is primarily economically driven, with limited direct

connection to climate resilience. While Nigeria’s Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC 3.0) integrates

youth engagement and digital innovation, it lacks a robust Measurement, Reporting, and Verification (MRV)

mechanism to track youth-led climate contributions (The Green Institute, 2024; Federal Republic of Nigeria,

2025). This gap limits the transformative potential of digital empowerment within Nigeria’s climate

governance framework.

Rwanda, by contrast, has institutionalised a more coherent model that aligns digital transformation with

climate resilience and youth inclusion. Through flagship initiatives such as YouthConnekt Africa, the Digital

Ambassadors Programme (DAP), and the Priority Skills for Growth and Youth Employment (PSGYE),

Rwanda integrates digital literacy, green innovation, and entrepreneurship into its national sustainability

agenda (Dinika, 2024; World Bank, 2024). This approach reflects the Digital Era Governance (DEG)

framework proposed by Dunleavy et al. (2006) and Margetts and Dunleavy (2013), emphasising networked

governance and citizen co-production. Furthermore, the incorporation of digital strategies into the Green

Growth and Climate Resilience Strategy (GGCRS) and Vision 2050 demonstrates Rwanda’s application of

Transformative Governance Theory, promoting inclusivity and adaptive policymaking (Apraku et al, 2025).

Despite the expansion of digital initiatives, both nations encounter significant digital inequality. In Nigeria,

approximately one-third of youth possess reliable internet access, with disparities between rural and urban

areas, as well as gender differences, hindering equitable participation (Animashaun, 2025; UNDP, 2024). Data

costs in sub-Saharan Africa are among the highest globally, limiting ongoing participation in digital climate

platforms. Rwanda has attained enhanced connectivity; however, financing deficiencies and reliance on donor-

funded infrastructure jeopardise the long-term viability of youth-led technology initiatives (Rwanda Civil

Society Platform, 2023; World Bank, 2024). The disparities highlight the necessity of integrating digital

empowerment with structural investments in affordable access and digital literacy to attain sustainable climate

governance outcomes.

Overall, digital transformation in Nigeria and Rwanda functions not only as a technological advancement but

as a governance framework for participatory and adaptive climate action. Viewed through Empowerment

Theory, Digital Era Governance, and Transformative Governance, both countries illustrate the emerging shift

toward digital participation, where youth act as co-creators of climate solutions rather than passive

Page 8703

ww w .rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

beneficiaries. This evolution marks an important step toward achieving the inclusive and participatory

aspirations of the Paris Agreement.

Enablers and Barriers to Youth Participation in Climate Governance in Nigeria and Rwanda

The institutional, social, and technological dynamics in Nigeria and Rwanda collectively influence the

opportunities and constraints encountered by youth in climate governance. Both countries' institutional

frameworks have developed to acknowledge the significance of youth inclusion in national development and

environmental policy. Nigeria’s National Youth Policy (2019) and the Climate Change Act (2021) recognise

the importance of youth in promoting environmental sustainability. Similarly, Rwanda’s National Strategy for

Transformation (NST1, 2017–2024) and the Green Growth and Climate Resilience Strategy (GGCRS, 2011)

incorporate youth engagement in governance reforms and climate initiatives. Apraku et al. (2025) and UNDP

(2024) highlight that institutional fragmentation and bureaucratic rigidity impede cross-sectoral coordination,

thereby diminishing the effectiveness of youth-led initiatives in both contexts.

The increasing climate awareness among African youth, facilitated by digital activism and global networks like

Fridays for Future Africa and YouthConnekt Africa, has enhanced advocacy for climate justice. In Rwanda,

social mobilisation has resulted in community-based climate action and environmental education programs

(Rwanda Civil Society Platform, 2023). Youth climate movements in Nigeria are active but face limitations

due to restricted policy access and inconsistent government engagement (Lawal et al, 2025). Ongoing socio-

economic inequalities, especially those related to gender and rural-urban divides, persistently marginalise

specific youth groups from decision-making processes, reflecting wider structural issues in governance and

participation (Mweha, 2025).

Technological enablers, including digital literacy initiatives, innovation hubs, and e-governance platforms,

have improved access to climate data and participatory mechanisms. The Digital Ambassadors Programme in

Rwanda, along with Nigeria's iDICE and 3MTT initiatives, offers digital avenues for youth empowerment and

environmental entrepreneurship. The findings indicate that, although digital literacy programs are proliferating,

the climate governance aspect of these initiatives remains marginal in both situations. The lack of clear policy

tools linking digital empowerment to climate resilience constitutes a wasted opportunity to utilise technology

for revolutionary environmental results. Moreover, barriers, such as limited internet access, high data costs,

and low digital literacy, hinder equitable participation among marginalised youth, especially in rural regions

(UNDP, 2024).

Article 12 of the Paris Agreement requires Parties to collaborate on education, training, and public

engagement—fundamental components of young empowerment. However, its domestic implementation in

both Nigeria and Rwanda is still incomplete. Nigeria’s NDC 3.0 has prioritised youth inclusion and

digitalisation; however, the operational framework for capturing, tracking, and verifying youth-digital-climate

outcomes—such as youth empowerment indicators, digital literacy metrics, and youth-led climate innovation

metrics—remains insufficiently developed. Likewise, Rwanda's NDC (2020) does not delineate youth

empowerment as an independent objective but integrates it within wider socio-economic contexts. The

inconsistent implementation of Article 12 in both situations underscores the necessity for more tailored

strategies to integrate digital youth empowerment into climate governance.

From the perspective of Transformative Governance Theory, this inconsistency indicates a superficial shift,

wherein institutions embrace participatory rhetoric without genuinely decentralising decision-making

authority. Institutional recognition, social mobilisation, and digital innovation have collectively enhanced

opportunities for youth participation in climate governance; however, persistent systemic and technological

inequities restrict their transformative potential.

Contextual Factors Affecting Digital Youth Empowerment and Policy Effectiveness

The implementation of youth and digital empowerment policies in Nigeria and Rwanda is significantly shaped

by their socio-economic and political contexts. The oil-dependent economy and federal structure of Nigeria

result in uneven resource distribution and fragmented policy coordination among states, thereby undermining

Page 8704

ww w .rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

the coherence of national digital and climate strategies (World Bank, 2024). High unemployment and rural

poverty intensify digital exclusion, especially affecting women and low-income youth (UNDP, 2024).

Rwanda’s centralised governance model, established during its post-genocide reconstruction, facilitates

enhanced policy alignment and institutional discipline (Republic of Rwanda, 2023). The prevailing top-down

political culture restricts independent youth advocacy and may inhibit the spontaneity of civic participation

(Dinika, 2024).

Historical legacies elucidate these divergences, and these trajectories influence both the administrative culture

and the ability to incorporate digital and climate objectives into policy implementation. Nigeria’s democratic

pluralism creates avenues for youth advocacy while simultaneously subjecting initiatives to bureaucratic

inertia and policy discontinuities due to shifting administrations (Okafor et al, 2024). Socio-economic and

political factors limit the translation of digital empowerment into sustained climate action, despite robust

policy rhetoric regarding inclusion. However, Rwanda's small population, efficient bureaucracy, and state-led

development model have enabled cohesive digital governance reforms (YouthConnekt Africa, 2024).

The comparative analysis indicates that although both nations are committed to youth inclusion and digital

innovation, differences in economic resources, political culture, and institutional design influence the

effectiveness and sustainability of their implementation. Addressing these contextual gaps through enhanced

inter-ministerial coordination in Nigeria and increased civic openness in Rwanda is essential for realising the

transformative potential of digital youth empowerment in climate governance.

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The study indicates that digital transformation serves as a strategic lever for youth empowerment and inclusive

climate governance in Nigeria and Rwanda. Both countries have made tangible progress in integrating youth

participation and digital innovation into national climate strategies, reflecting growing alignment with the

participatory principles of Article 12 of the Paris Agreement. Nigeria’s approach, driven by initiatives such as

the Investment in Digital and Creative Enterprises (iDICE), Three Million Technical Talent (3MTT)

programme, and the National Digital Economy Policy and Strategy (NDEPS 2020–2030), illustrates an

expanding ecosystem for digital inclusion and entrepreneurship. However, the climate dimension of these

interventions remains underdeveloped, as existing policy frameworks—despite commitments under the

Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC 3.0)—lack robust Measurement, Reporting, and Verification

(MRV) mechanisms to track youth-led climate innovation (Federal Republic of Nigeria, 2025).

Rwanda presents a more integrated model that links digital empowerment directly to climate resilience and

sustainability. Programmes such as YouthConnekt Africa, the Digital Ambassadors Programme (DAP), and the

Priority Skills for Growth and Youth Employment (PSGYE) have strengthened the role of youth in

environmental innovation and governance (Dinika, 2024; World Bank, 2024). Rwanda’s Green Growth and

Climate Resilience Strategy (GGCRS) and Vision 2050 institutionalise youth participation within digital and

climate frameworks, embodying principles of Transformative Governance and Digital Era Governance through

cross-sectoral collaboration and adaptive learning (Caro-Gonzalez, 2024).

Despite these advances, both nations face structural and systemic barriers that constrain transformative

outcomes. Persistent digital inequality, limited access to finance, and uneven institutional coordination hinder

the scaling of youth-led climate solutions. The implementation of Article 12 remains partial, with gaps in

translating participatory commitments into measurable outcomes (UNDP, 2024). These challenges underscore

the need for more coherent, data-driven, and inclusive policy instruments that operationalise youth

empowerment within climate accountability systems.

To advance digital-climate synergy, both countries should prioritise the integration of youth empowerment

metrics within NDC monitoring frameworks and strengthen MRV systems to assess the climate impacts of

digital initiatives. Governments and development partners should invest in climate-tech incubators, expand

access to green finance for youth innovators, and promote regional knowledge-sharing platforms that link

digital literacy to climate action. In addition, greater collaboration between ministries of environment, youth,

and digital innovation can ensure policy coherence and prevent fragmentation. Moreover, socio-political and

Page 8705

ww w .rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

economic realities should be incorporated into digital-climate strategies, to enhance subnational coordination

that focus on digital inclusion in rural and economically disadvantaged regions in Nigeria, whereas sustaining

digital empowerment in Rwanda necessitates that youth participation transcends state-led initiatives.

The study contributes to scholarly debates by integrating Empowerment Theory, Digital Era Governance, and

Transformative Governance into a unified analytical framework. It demonstrates that meaningful youth

engagement in climate governance requires not only technological access but also institutional transformation

and participatory inclusion. By embedding digital empowerment within climate policy, Nigeria and Rwanda

can transition from rhetorical inclusion to substantive co-production—realising the transformative potential of

youth as architects of a resilient, low-carbon future.

REFERENCES

1. Adaptation Fund (2022) Youth engagement in climate change adaptation: Lessons from the adaptation

fund

portfolio

of

projects

and

programmes

https://www.adaptation-fund.org/wp-

content/uploads/2022/07/Youth-Report-07.11.22.pdf

2. African Development Bank (2023) Investment in Digital and Creative Enterprises (iDICE) programme

overview. AfDB

3. Africa Policy Research Institute. APRI (2025). Youth Inclusion in green technology in Africa: A

policylandscape analysis of Nigeria, Kenya and Ghana. APRI – Africa Policy Research Institute, Berlin,

Germany. https://doi.org/10.59184/pp025.01

4. Ahishakiye, D. & Nizeyimana, P. (2024) Enhancing Digital Literacy Performance in Rwanda Using

Machine Learning: A Case Study of Irembo. Journal of Intelligent Learning Systems and Applications,

16, 430-447. https://doi.org/10.4236/jilsa.2024.164022

5. Akrofi, M. M., Okitasari, M., & Kandpal, R. (2022). Recent trends on the linkages between energy,

SDGs and the Paris Agreement: a review of policy-based studies. Discover Sustainability, 3(32).

https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621-022-00100-y

6. Andresen, S., Bang, G., Skjærseth, J.B. et al. (2021) Achieving the ambitious targets of the Paris

Agreement: the role of key actors. Int Environ Agreements 21, 1–7 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-021-

09527-6

7. Animashaun, N. (2025). Nigeria’s Climate Agenda: New Directions in Policy and Diplomacy (Policy

paper). Africa Policy Research Institute.

8. Apraku, A., Gyampoh, B. A., Morton, J. F., & Mariwah, S. (2025). Managing climate change through

social justice in Africa: Key lessons from the Libode area of Eastern Cape, South Africa. Scientific

African, 27, e02534. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sciaf.2025.e02534

9. Asare-Nuamah, P. & Mandaza, M. (2020). Youth participation in global climate change and adaptation

governance.https://www.researchgate.net/publication/346448596_Youth_participation_in_global_climat

e_change_and_adaptation_governance

10. Bambi, P. D. R., Batatana, M. L. D., Appiah, M., & Tetteh, D. (2024). Governance, institutions, and

climate change resilience in Sub-Saharan Africa: Assessing the threshold effects. Frontiers in

Environmental Science, 12, Article 1352344. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2024.1352344

11. Benkenstein, A., Chevallier, R., Kosciulek, D., Lebea, D., & Worth, K. (2020). Youth climate action and

the role of government. In Youth Climate Advocacy (pp. 42–63). South African Institute of International

Affairs. http://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep29503.9

12. Bermeo, E., & Santoro, F. (2025, May 14). Bridging the divide: Rwanda’s quest for equitable digital

governance. ICTD Blog. https://www.ictd.ac/blog/bridging-the-divide-rwandas-quest-for-equitable-

digital-governance/

13. Berñe, A.L., Planas-Llado, A., Vila-Mumbru, C., Valdivia-Vizarreta, P. (2023) Factors that enhance and

limit youth empowerment, according to social educators https://www.emerald.com/insight/1443-

9883.htm

14. Biermann, F., & Kim, R. E. (2020). The boundaries of the planetary boundary framework: A critical

appraisalof approaches to define a “safe operating space” for humanity. Annual Review of Environment

and Resources, 45(1). https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-012320-080337

15. Blaustein, S. M. (2024, October 15). Climate, conflict, and girls: Time for action.

Page 8706

ww w .rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

16. WomenStrong International. https://www.connect4climate.org/initiative/climate-conflict-and-girls-time-

for-action Buheji, M., Mushimiyimana, E. & Kwizera, A. (2024) Adapting to change: Understanding

Rwanda's socioeconomic resilience in the face of climate variability. Resources and Environment 2024,

14(2): 51-59 DOI: 10.5923/j.re.20241402.03

17. Caro-Gonzalez, A. (2024). Transformative Governance for the Future: Navigating Profound Transitions.

Springer Briefs in Business. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-43132-6

18. Carrington, S., Park, E., McKay, L., Saggers, B., Harper-Hill, K., Somerwil, T. (2024) Evidence of

transformative leadership for inclusive practice,Teaching and Teacher Education, Vol 141, 2024, 104466,

ISSN 0742-051X, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2023.104466

19. Connect4Climate

&

Teach

for

All.

(2024)

Get

inspired,

get

involved

https://www.connect4climate.org/initiative/three-young-leaders-share-their-insights-climate-action 1/10

20. Dinika, A.-A. T. (2024). A critical analysis of Rwanda’s Digital skills and entrepreneurship training

toward solving youth unemployment. Journal of Business and Enterprise Development (JOBED), 12(1).

https://doi.org/10.47963/jobed.v12i.1526 (Original work published October 1, 2024)

21. Dong, J. (2022). Impact of the Paris Agreement on agriculture, energy, and economy. Department of

Business, University of Nottingham China.

22. Dubash, N. K. (2021). Varieties of climate governance: the emergence and functioning of climate

institutions. Environmental Politics, 30(sup1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2021.1979775

23. Dunleavy, P., Margetts, H., Bastow, S., & Tinkler, J. (2006). Digital era governance: IT corporations, the

state,

and

e-government.

Oxford

University

Press.

https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199296194.001.0001

24. Federal Government of Nigeria. (2021). Nigeria's Nationally Determined Contribution 2021 NDC

update. Federal Ministry of Environment.

25. Federal Ministry of Communication, Innovations and Digital Economy (2023) Three Million Technical

Talent (3MTT) programme brief. NITDA

26. Federal Republic of Nigeria. (2021). Climate Change Act 2021. The Presidency.

27. Federal Republic of Nigeria FGN (2025) Nigeri’a Third Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC 3.0)

National Council on Climate Change. Federal Ministry of Environment.

28. García-Sánchez, I.-M., Aibar-Guzmán, B., Raimo, N., Vitolla, F., & Schiuma, G. (2024). Climate

governance, growth opportunities, and innovation in addressing climate change: Empirical evidence from

emerging countries. Finance Research Letters, 70, 106328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2024.106328

29. Groff, S.P. (2022) The Contemporary Social Contract and Conditions of Climate Policy Intractability.

Global Perspectives 3 February 2022; 3 (1): 38730. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/gp.2022.38730

30. Heath, S., & Moreau, K. (2024). Involving Youth in Empowerment Evaluation: Evaluators’ Perspectives.

Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation. https://doi.org/10.3138/cjpe.73987

31. Higham, C., Averchenkova, A., Setzer, J., & Koehl, A. (2021). Accountability mechanisms in climate

change framework laws. Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment and

Centre for Climate Change Economics and Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science.

https://www.lse.ac.uk/grantham

32. Hölscher, K., Frantzeskaki, N. & Loorbach, D. Steering transformations under climate change: capacities

for transformative climate governance and the case of Rotterdam, the Netherlands. Reg Environ Change

19, 791–805 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-018-1329-3

33. Howard, C. (2023). Digital skills for youth employment in Africa: Fostering digital transformation for

social inclusion, gender equality & development (Evidence Synthesis Paper No. 13/2023). INCLUDE

Knowledge Platform on Inclusive Development Policies. https://includeplatform.net

34. Hutagalung S. S. (2023). Adaptive capacity in the implementation of disaster response village

programme in Indonesia: Literature review. Jamba (Potchefstroom, South Africa), 15(1), 1470.

https://doi.org/10.4102/jamba.v15i1.1470

35. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change IPCC (2023). Climate change 2023: The physical science

basis. Working Group I contribution to the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report. Cambridge, United

Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. www.ipcc.ch/assessment-report/ar6

36. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). (2023a). Climate Change 2023: Synthesis Report.

Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental

Page 8707

ww w .rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

Panel on Climate Change (Core Writing Team, R. M. Lee et al., Eds.). IPCC.

https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6

37. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). (2023b). Climate Change 2023: Mitigation of

Climate Change. Working Group III Contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report. Cambridge University

Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009325844

38. Javeed, A. Aljuaid, M., Mehmood, S., Yar Khan, M., Zahid, M., Shahid, Duaa., Wali, S. S. (2022)

Factors affecting youth empowerment and entrepreneurial initiatives: Social implications and way

forward. Front. Psychol., Sec. Educational Psychology Volume 13/2022

39. Jones Day. (2015, December). Paris Agreement sets the stage for global greenhouse-gas emission

reductions.

https://www.jonesday.com/en/insights/2015/12/paris-agreement-sets-the-stage-for-global-

greenhouse-gas-emission-reductions

40. Kellner, E., Petrovics, D., Huitema, D. (2024) Polycentric Climate Governance: The State, Local Action,

Democratic Preferences, and Power—Emerging Insights and a Research Agenda. Global Environmental

Politics 2024; 24 (3): 24–47. doi: https://doi.org/10.1162/glep_a_00753

41. Korhonen-Kurki, K., D’Amato, D., Belinskij, A., Lazarevic, D., Leskinen, P., Nylén, E.-J., Pappila, M.,

Penttilä, O., Pitzen, S., Pykäläinen, N., Turunen, T., & Vikström, S. (2025). Transformative governance:

Exploring

theory

of

change

and

the

role

of

the

law.

,

23,

100230.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esg.2024.100230

42. Lawal, Y., Success, A. T., Alabi, S. O., & Idris, A. (2025). Digital governance and inclusive policy

implementation: Challenges and prospects in Sub-Saharan Africa. Global Scientific and Academic

Research

Journal

of

Economics,

Business

and

Management,

4(9),

48–59.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/396738175

43. Margetts, H., & Dunleavy, P. (2013). The second wave of digital-era governance: A quasi-paradigm for

government on the Web. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and

Engineering Sciences, 371(1987), 20120382. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2012.0382

44. Marquardt, J., Fast, C., & Grimm, J. (2022). Non-and sub-state climate action after Paris: From a

facilitative regime to a contested governance landscape. WIREs Climate Change, 13(5), e791.

https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.791

45. McCarthy, N.& Winters, P. (n.d.) Building Resilience to Climate Change in Sub-Saharan Africa through

Irrigation

Investments.

Pulte

Institute

for

Global

Development

https://pulte.nd.edu/assets/493736/merge_finalreport.pdf

46. Mulikita, J. J. (2024) Young People’s Potential, the Key to Africa’s Sustainable Development. United

Nations https://www.un.org/ohrlls/news/young-people’s -potential-key-africa’s -sustainable-development.

47. Mweha, M. (2025). Digital-enabled green economy transformation in Southern Africa: Institutional

innovation, fintech integration, and sustainable development pathways in resource-constrained

environments - A comparative analysis of Zimbabwe, Botswana, and Namibia. International Journal of

Research

and

Innovation

in

Social

Science

(IJRISS),

9(7).

https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.907000499

48. National Council on Climate Change NCCC (2022) The National Council on Climate Change: Leading

Nigeria’s Response to Climate Change. Federal Republic of Nigeria .

49. Ndambwa, B. J., & Moonga, G. (2024). Decentralising climate governance in the Global South: Lessons

from Itezhi-Tezhi and the Kafue Wetlands, Zambia. Journal of Contemporary Governance and Public

Policy, 5(1), 33–54. https://doi.org/10.46507/jcgpp.v5i1.190

50. Ndukwe, C., Offiah, G.A., Okpata, F.O., Odo, S.I., Aluko, H.A. (2023) Good governance and youth

empowerment:

A

recipe

for

sustainable

development.

African

Journal

Online

https://www.ajol.info/index.php/jpds/article/view/253533/239548

51. Network of Youth for Sustainable Initiative NGYouthSDGs (2024, July 18) From policy to action: The

role of youths in Nigeria’s climate action strategy. https://nigerianyouthsdgs.org/from-policy-to-action-

the-role-of-youths-in-nigerias-climate-action-strategy/

52. Ofusori, T. (2025). The Challenge of Youth Unemployment and Its Implications for Democratic

Stability in Africa. https://ddp.org.za/blog/the-challenge-of-youth-unemployment-and-its-implications-

for-democratic-stability-in-africa

Page 8708

ww w .rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

53. Okafor, C. C., Ajaero, C. C., Madu, C. N., Nzekwe, C. A., Otunomo, F. A., & Nixon, N. N. (2024).

Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation in Nigeria: A Review. Sustainability, 16(16), 7048.

https://doi.org/10.3390/su16167048

54. Okegbe, O. (2025). Harnessing digital entrepreneurship for youth empowerment: Advancing sustainable

economic growth in Southeast Nigeria. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social

55. Oramah, C.P., Olsen, O.E. (2021). Equity and Justice in Climate Change Adaptation: Policy and

Practical Implication in Nigeria. In: Oguge, N., Ayal, D., Adeleke, L., da Silva, I. (eds) African

Handbook of Climate Change Adaptation. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-45106-

6_45

56. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development OECD (2021), Empowering Youth and

Building Trust in Jordan, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris,

https://doi.org/10.1787/8b14d38f-en.

57. Owojori, O.M., Anwana, E. Climate governance in the BRICS: pathways toward net-zero emissions.

Discovery Sustain 6, 359 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621-025-01181-1

58. Pascual, U., Donatti, C. I., Harvey, C. A., Hannah, L., & Tschakert, P. (2022). Governing for

transformative change across the biodiversity–climate–society nexus. BioScience, 72(7), 684–704.

https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biac031

59. Pauw, W. P., Castro, P., Pickering, J., & Bhasin, S. (2019). Conditional nationally determined

contributions in the Paris Agreement: foothold for equity or Achilles heel? Climate Policy, 20(4), 468–

484. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2019.1635874

60. Perkins, D.D., Zimmerman, M. (1995) Empowerment theory, research and application

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/14354763

61. Phillips, T., Kira, B., Tartakowsky, A., Dolan, J., & Natih, P. (2020). Digital technology governance:

Developing countries’ priorities and concerns. Digital Pathways at Oxford Paper Series No. 3.

https://www.bsg.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/research/production/

62. Pinchoff, J., et al. (2025). How climate change is shaping young people's health: A participatory, youth

co-led study including Nigeria. BMJ Global Health, 10(1), e016788. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2024-

016788

63. Ravšelj, D., Umek, L., Todorovski, L., & Aristovnik, A. (2022). A review of digital era governance

research in the first two decades: A bibliometric study.

https://doi.org/10.3390/fi14050126

Future Internet, 14(5), 126.

64. Republic of Rwanda ROR (2020) Updated Nationally Determined Contribution. ROR Republic of

Rwanda (2023) Revised Green Growth and Climate Resilience National Strategy for Climate Change and

Low Carbon Development. Republic of Rwanda.

65. Republic of Rwanda (2025) Youth Voices Shape Rwanda’s Updated Climate Action Plan.

https://climatechange.gov.rw/updates/details

66. Richard, M. O. (2024). 21st century climate adaptation strategies for vulnerable communities in sub-

Saharan Africa. 10.13140/RG.2.2.11935.78246.

67. Rwanda Civil Society Platform. (2023). Empowering Rwandan Youth for Climate Action and

Resilience. Kigali, Rwanda. https://undef.my.salesforce.com/sfc/p/

68. Salhi, A., Marin, G., Paglialunga, E., Ramaloko, M.P., Azzi-Achkouti, S., Clauter, N. & Pastorini, A.

(2025) Pathways for effective engagement of the youth in climate and migration advocacy,

Environmental Development, Volume 56, 2025, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envdev.2025.101242.

69. Santos, R. J. Q. (2017). Global justice and environmental governance: An analysis of the Paris

Agreement. Revista Brasileira de Política Internacional, 60(1). https://doi.org/10.1590/0034-

7329201600116

70. Sanyang, R. (2021) Youth empowerment as a tool for implementation of the right to development in

Africa. Research Gate https://www.researchgate.net/publication/354537447

71. Sloam, J., Pickard, S., & Henn, M. (2022). ‘Young People and Environmental Activism: The

Transformation of Democratic Politics.’ Journal of Youth Studies, 25(6), 683–691.

https://doi.org/10.1080/13676261.2022.2056678

72. The Green Institute (2024) Empowering Youth for Climate Action: Insights from the Nigeria Future

Summit 2024 https://greeninstitute.ng/blog1/2024/10/14/empowering-youth-for-climate-action-green-

institute-insights-from-the-nigeria-future-summit-2024

Page 8709

ww w .rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

73. United Nations Development Programme UNDP. (2013). Enhancing youth political participation

throughout the electoral cycle.

74. United Nations Development Programme UNDP. (2024). From Access to Empowerment: Digital

inclusion in a dynamic world. UNDP

75. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization UNESCO. (2020). Integrating Action

for Climate Empowerment into Nationally Determined Contributions: A short guide for countries.

United

Nations

Educational,

Scientific

and

Cultural

Organization.

https://en.unesco.org/themes/education-sustainable-development

76. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization UNESCO (2023) Empowering Youth

for Sustainable Development: The Role of Media and Information Literacy in Promoting Green Skills.

https://www.unesco.org/en/articles/empowering-youth-sustainable-development

77. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). (2015a). Paris Agreement

(2015):United Nations Treaty Series, vol. 3156, I-55133. https://legal.un.org/avl/ha/pa/pa.html

78. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). (2015b). Key aspects of the

Paris Agreement. https://unfccc.int/most-requested/key-aspects-of-the-paris-agreement

79. UNFCCC. (2021) Youth engagement in the UNFCCC process and more ambitious climate action.

https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/ConceptNote-YouthClimateActionInAfrica_18_08_2021.

80. UNFCCC.

https://unfccc.int/documents/619180

81. UNFCCC. (2023) Outcome of the first global stocktake. https://unfccc.int/documents

(2022).

Synthesis

report

on

nationally

determined

contributions.

82. Vorng, P. (2025). Youth empowerment and civic engagement: Best practices for engaging youth in

policy and governance. Governance. Vol. 2025. TBD. 10.1234/2025-VP-006

83. Wahyunengseh, R. D., Hastjarjo, S., Mulyaningsih, T., & Suharto, D. G. (2020). Digital governance and

digital divide: A matrix of the poor’s vulnerabilities. Policy & Governance Review, 4(2), 152-166.

https://doi.org/10.30589/pgr.v4i2.296

84. World Bank. (2020). World Development Report 2020: Trading for development in the age of global

value chains. World Bank Group

85. World Bank. (2024). Rwanda: Priority Skills for Growth and Youth Empowerment Project (Project

Appraisal Document), World Bank Group

86. Wukelic, J. (2025) The Importance of Youth Empowerment: Building a Brighter Future

https://believeinme.news/the-importance-of-youth-empowerment-building-a-brighter-future-

87. YouthConnekt Africa. (2024). YouthConnekt Africa Summit Report: 8-10 November 2024 – Kigali,

Rwanda. YouthConnekt Africa.

88. Zimmerman, M. A. (2012). Empowerment theory: Psychological, organizational, and community levels

of analysis. In J. Rappaport & E. Seidman (Eds. ), Handbook of community psychology (pp. 43–63).

Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-4193-6_2

89. Zuhriyati, E., Pramusinto, A., Kusumasari, B., Agustiyara, A., & Gusmi, A. D. (2025). E-leadership and

public service innovation: A case study of Yogyakarta, Indonesia’s digital governance transformation.

Journal of Governance and Public Policy, 12(3), 279–297. https://doi.org/10.18196/jgpp.v12i3.25891

Page 8710

ww w .rsisinternational.org