Why Zimbabwe’s Public Finances Can No Longer Ignore

Climate Risk
By Richard Ndebele
Climate change is no longer a distant environmental concern for Zimbabwe. It has become a
fiscal risk, a service-delivery risk and, increasingly, a governance risk.
Recurring droughts, floods and extreme weather events are already placing severe strain on
agriculture, energy supply, water systems and public infrastructure. These shocks are
translating directly into higher public expenditure, disrupted revenues and mounting pressure
on an already constrained fiscus. Yet, in Zimbabwe’s public financial reporting, climate
change still sits largely outside the core fiscal conversation.
That approach is no longer sustainable.
Climate risk has entered the balance sheet
The publication of IPSASB SRS 1: Climate-related Disclosures in January 2026 marks a
decisive global shift in how governments are expected to account for climate risk. The
message from standard-setters is unambiguous: climate change is now a determinant of long-
term fiscal sustainability, not a side issue reserved for environmental policy statements.
For Zimbabwe, this represents both a challenge and an opportunity.
Climate shocks are already fiscal shocks
Recent experience tells the story plainly. Prolonged droughts have weakened agricultural
output and rural livelihoods, increasing demand for food imports and social protection.
Flooding has damaged roads, schools and clinics, triggering unplanned rehabilitation costs.
Climate-linked energy shortages have disrupted industry and essential public services.
These are not isolated environmental events. They directly affect:
 Budget credibility
 Public asset values
 Revenue performance
 Long-term service delivery
IPSASB SRS 1 requires public sector entities to disclose how climate-related risks could
reasonably be expected to affect their ability to deliver services and meet financial
commitments over time. In doing so, it forces climate risk into the heart of fiscal
management.
From climate plans to balance sheets

Zimbabwe already has climate strategies, development frameworks and sectoral plans. What
has often been missing is a consistent requirement to connect those plans to budgets, assets,
liabilities and long-term financial planning.
Under SRS 1, public entities must assess and disclose how climate risks affect:
 Their operational models
 Public infrastructure and other assets
 Revenue streams and expenditure pressures
 Long-term fiscal sustainability
This is especially relevant for state-owned enterprises, local authorities and infrastructure-
heavy agencies, whose assets are among the most climate-exposed in the economy.
Who must act — and how
Implementing climate-related financial disclosures will not fall to a single ministry or
department. It requires coordinated action across government.
The Ministry of Finance, Economic Development and Investment Promotion will play a
central role. Climate risk must be embedded in budget frameworks, public investment
appraisal, fiscal risk statements and debt sustainability analysis. In practical terms, climate
disclosure becomes part of fiscal governance, not environmental reporting.
The Office of the Auditor-General will be critical in ensuring credibility. Once climate
disclosures form part of general-purpose financial reports, they fall within the audit and
parliamentary oversight framework. This strengthens discipline and discourages superficial,
box-ticking reporting.
The Ministry of Environment, Climate and Wildlife provides the technical foundation. While
it does not manage fiscal risk, it supplies the climate data, risk assessments and scenarios that
underpin credible disclosures. Without this input, climate reporting risks becoming
speculative or inconsistent.
Infrastructure-focused ministries — including Transport, Energy, Water and Local
Government — sit at the centre of this shift. They manage Zimbabwe’s most climate-
vulnerable assets and will be required to identify exposed infrastructure, assess impacts on
asset lives and maintenance costs, and disclose implications for service delivery.
State-owned enterprises and parastatals are among the most exposed entities. Utilities,
transport agencies and agricultural institutions face material climate risks to revenues, assets
and operating models. Under SRS 1, these risks must be disclosed with the same seriousness
as any other financial exposure.
Local authorities represent the frontline of climate impact. Flood management, water
provision, waste services and housing are already under strain. Climate-related financial
disclosures will force a clearer picture of municipal risk and long-term service sustainability.

Finally, Parliament and its oversight committees gain a stronger role. Climate disclosures
enable legislators to interrogate whether budgets, investments and policies genuinely reflect
the risks government itself has identified.
Why disclosure matters
Climate-related disclosures are not about compliance for its own sake. They directly affect:
 Investor and development partner confidence
 Access to climate and development finance
 Creditworthiness and fiscal credibility
 Public trust in how resources are managed
As Zimbabwe continues its efforts at economic reform and re-engagement, credible climate-
related financial disclosures will increasingly shape how the country is assessed by
financiers, partners and citizens alike.
An opportunity for reform
Although IPSASB SRS 1 becomes effective from 2028, early adoption offers Zimbabwe a
strategic advantage. It allows government to strengthen fiscal credibility, improve
infrastructure planning and embed climate resilience into ongoing public financial
management reforms.
Most importantly, it enables a shift from reacting to climate shocks to planning for them.
Climate change is already reshaping Zimbabwe’s economic and social landscape. The real
question is whether public finance systems will evolve fast enough to reflect that reality.
IPSASB SRS 1 provides a framework to do exactly that — by pushing climate risk onto the
balance sheet, into the boardroom and onto the public record.
About the Author
Richard Ndebele is Manager: Technical, Research and Quality Assurance at the Chartered
Governance and Accountancy Institute in Zimbabwe (CGI Zimbabwe), and serves as Country
Champion for the PAFA Sustainability Centre of Excellence. He writes on governance,
sustainability and public financial management, with a focus on strengthening decision-
making and institutional performance in African economies.
Contact: rndebele@cgizim.org