16 March 2026 – This article reflects on a recent conversation from The Sustainability Salon, a talk show by 2023 Communications Fellow of the Club of Rome, Nonhlanhla Ngwenya, that brings together system thinkers and experts from the majority of the world to share perspectives on sustainability challenges.
Ana Terra Amorim-Maia and Marta Olazabal on their article said:
“Adaptation is central to how societies adjust in the face of climate change impacts, blending risk reduction with broader development strategies to enable people to maintain dignified lives amid climate-induced disruptions.”
This framing of adaptation resonated with me as I engaged with two adaptation experts from two different regions. Indeed, in much of the world, adaptation is not an abstract technical objective. It is not a line item in a national plan. It is the daily work of endurance.
Talking to Sheela Patel, urban poverty activist and member of the Club of Rome, and Ignatius Kudakwashe Maeresa, environmental lawyer and Executive Director of Earth Coexistence Initiative in Zimbabwe, we examined a persistent paradox: why does adaptation remain rhetorically urgent yet practically absent where vulnerability is greatest? What came out was not simply a critique but a systems-level analysis.
Cities built for extraction, not resilience
Patel began by calling out an uncomfortable inheritance. “All of us who live in the Global South,” she said, “have inherited planning instruments, standards and norms for cities from those who colonised us.” These systems were never designed for the majority now inhabiting urban spaces.
Between 40–70% of residents in many majority-world cities live informally. They build incrementally. They finance their own housing. They survive without formal recognition. Yet, as Sheela observed, “No development investment, no climate change-related adaptation ever reaches these communities, yet they service all of us.”
Mitigation attracts visibility — highways, energy grids and prestige infrastructure. Adaptation demands quieter investments: drainage in informal settlements, incremental housing upgrades, tenure security, and flood-resistant materials.
In Asia, she noted, “92% of all people who live in cities design informally, construct and finance their own homes. No support from anybody.” Zimbabwe mirrors this pattern. Yet what communities build is often labelled illegal or substandard and is sometimes demolished without alternatives.
Where policy breaks down
Zimbabwe, like many nations, has climate-related frameworks in place. The breakdown occurs during implementation. Ignatius was direct: “We have policies that exist on paper… but the implementation frameworks have been weak.
He highlighted unclear institutional mandates, siloed governance structures and limited localisation of national policies at the district and community level.
Land tenure further complicates resilience. In systems where communities lack secure ownership or long-term use rights, investment becomes precarious. As Ignatius explained, when tenure is uncertain, “any intervention is limited.” Why climate-proof a home that can be demolished? Why rehabilitate wetlands when land rights are unstable?
The knowledge divide
Another fault line lies between global adaptation frameworks and indigenous knowledge systems. Climate variability is not new to local communities. What is new is its scale and unpredictability. Yet, as Ignatius acknowledged, “we have not yet managed to comprehensively incorporate these indigenous knowledge systems into our policy frameworks.”
Sheela extended this critique. She noted, “a deep angst… that the issues and challenges marginalised groups face are not part of the debate.” Global discourse often centres on carbon markets and technological transitions, while people in informal settlements contend with floods, heatwaves and displacement.
Urban poverty and political choice
Climate shocks are accelerating rural-to-urban migration. Yet urban infrastructure was designed decades ago for smaller populations. Ignatius pointed to “a lot of pressure, a lot of strain on the limited amount of resources that are already available.” As a result, informal settlements expand, Service delivery falters and vulnerability deepen.
Adaptation finance remains skewed toward mitigation. As Sheela stated plainly, “the allocation of money is a political process.” Drainage in informal settlements may attract less visibility than a solar farm. But, for communities facing rising waters it can mean the difference between loss and continuity.
Adaptation as justice
At its core, adaptation is not a technical gap. It is a governance gap. Addressing it requires secure tenure as part of climate policy, clear institutional mandates, aligned budgets, localisation that goes beyond consultation, the integration of indigenous knowledge and intergenerational collaboration grounded in mutual respect.
Communities living informally are not waiting for perfect frameworks. They are already adapting incrementally, collectively and creatively. The question is whether policy will finally meet them there. Because for millions, adaptation is not about safeguarding 2050. It is about surviving this season.
