In a recent article, I discussed the need to address the information disorder (defined as mis- and disinformation) through collaborative multi-stakeholder collectives such as Fumbua Kenya. In this article, I take the next step of envisioning the ideal composition for such collectives. However, before doing so, I briefly explore other similar collectives with a view to drawing lessons on building collaboration.

A tried and tested concept? 

For several years now, numerous stakeholders have attempted to address the information disorder in different ways such as fact-checking and conducting media literacy trainings. These solutions were often used in isolation. More recently, stakeholders recognized the importance of collaboration in deploying measures to address the information disorder. As a result, there has been a growing trend towards the establishment of multi-stakeholder collaboratives to address the information disorder as it relates to issues such as the pandemic or democratic processes such as elections.

Collaborative efforts have largely been dominated by media practitioners. For example, in Brazil, during the 2018 elections, a collective of journalists drawn from twenty-four different local media companies was established to debunk rumours, fabricated content, and manipulative content aimed at influencing the polls. This collective is known as Comprova. In the same year, a similar collective was established in Mexico with the same mandate. It was known as Verificado. A year later, Uruguay followed suit and established a collective under the same name. However, Uruguay’s iteration of Verificado broke the mould by incorporating academics, universities, and civil society professionals. With the examples of Brazil, Mexico, and Uruguay, Argentina was able to pull together a collective of more than 100 news organizations under the Re-Verso banner. Much like Uruguay, Argentina’s Re-Verso took the collaboration further by including other disciplines such as forensic scientists who were able to assist the journalists in fact-checking audio messages.

With the experiences of these collectives, recent multi-stakeholder collectives have become increasingly diverse in their composition. For example, the BBC recently launched the Trusted News Initiative which brings together journalists, social media platforms and technology companies, and researchers. The mandate of the Trusted News Initiative is to increase media literacy, develop early warning systems, engage in voter education, and provide a platform for stakeholders to share lessons. Similarly, the Credibility Coalition, which is comprised of researchers, journalists, academics, policymakers, and technologists, aims to foster collaboration around developing common standards for information credibility. One of Fumbua’s members—Meedan—is also a member of the Credibility Coalition.

When these collectives were initially established, they were primarily driven by the recognition of the importance of collaborative journalism, and the need to reach broader audiences. As a result, their composition was heavily biased towards the media. However, subsequent iterations recognized the importance of broadening the pool of collaboration to factor in other disciplines. Some have articulated this importance explicitly. For example, Nordis, a consortium of researchers and fact-checkers funded by the EU Commission, explains that the diversity in their composition is aimed at developing new insights, technological solutions, recommendations for journalistic practice and tools educators can use. Perhaps most importantly, they hope to have concrete policy recommendations for legislators.

Extrapolating the basics 

Based on the examples of multi-stakeholder collectives around the world, one can discern common trends. For one, most collectives seem to be centred around journalistic practice and as such are dominated by media organizations. While there has been a recognition of the role played by other stakeholders such as academic researchers and cognitive scientists, their involvement has not been as robust and deliberate. These collectives also often crop up in response to a major socio-political/socio-economic event such as an election, and this influences their composition and activity.

Most collectives seem to be centred around journalistic practice and as such are dominated by media organizations.

Fumbua has largely conformed to these trends, being comprised of a large number of media organizations, and having been established to address the information disorder around the 2022 general election in Kenya. However, Fumbua’s experience is unique in several ways. For one, Fumbua included a pre-bunking initiative which was the first of its kind in Kenya—StopReflectVerify. Fumbua also relied on social media personalities and performing artists to repurpose some of the core messages developed by the journalists within their collectives. The use of multimedia content enabled the collective to engage audiences in ways that align with the nature of information consumption on social media. Perhaps most crucially, Fumbua was able to use its network to engage with policymakers and regulators to attempt to impact public policy.

One size does not fit all

When one considers the experience of the diverse collectives around the world, it is clear that each iteration was significantly influenced by several factors which were unique to each situation. From the social issue the collective was designed to respond to, to the available resources and organizations willing to participate, it is clear that one cannot define, in absolute terms, what these collectives should look like.

However, what remains clear is the importance of such collectives being intentional about defining the scope of collaboration, the role of each member, and how each member’s activities will feed into the larger collective’s work. In building collaboration, such collectives should also be mindful of the information value chain in their ecosystem. For example, in Kenya, one would be remiss to exclude vernacular radio stations which remain a consequential player in the media ecosystem.

The diversity of these collectives should be informed by the unique issues they are responding to. Fumbua for example was able to engage a large cross-section of its audiences in a way that was familiar to them by deliberately including stakeholders at all levels of the media ecosystem and supporting these stakeholders by amplifying their content and helping them repurpose it. However, at a broader level, these collectives should be designed around changing how the populace interacts with and consumes information. It no longer suffices to raise awareness around the existence of the information disorder, or to flag information as false or misleading. For this reason, these collectives ought to be focused on impacting how information systems are designed. This goal, considered in the context of the particular collectives, should then inform their composition.

As I stepped into the nightly streets of Cape Town’s most dangerous neighborhoods, I sensed that my journey would be an initiation. The goal of my research project was to document the lasting impact of apartheid racism and gender inequalities on tough and street-smart men. Little did I know that I would make every effort to become invulnerable in my own kind of way, trying to prove my masculinity and academic prowess through ethnographic fieldwork.

Just like many of the men I met in South Africa, I was attempting to shed my vulnerability. However, it never fully worked, even for a privileged European white man like me. Ethnography is an art form rather than a science and it makes researchers vulnerable as they continuously affect and are affected by the research subjects. Moreover, the pressure I put on myself to produce something exceptional to gain respect and impress others took a toll on me.

The paradox of (in)vulnerability made both my research participants and I complicit, although on vastly different terms. For me, attempts to become an invulnerable individual with fixed gender identity led to relationship problems, substance abuse, irritability, and suicidal thoughts. The more I sought invulnerability, the more vulnerable I felt. This (in)vulnerability has received little attention in research, which often disregards the gendering of behavior or turns masculinity into both the cause and solution for a range of social, psychological, and medical problems.

Over the course of more than 10 years of research, I could feel the pulse of (in)vulnerability; the throbbing between disconnection and connectivity, rigidity and disorder, closure and openness. Perhaps this pulse is a fundamental aspect of life for everyone, regardless of social and cultural differences. But the struggle for invulnerability takes on different rhythms based on circumstances. I have been witness to the pain and struggles of the men I interviewed. Some committed suicide, others were murdered, had fatal accidents, or died from infectious disease before they reached their 40s.

Although I stayed in contact with some of these men, I retreated to my safe haven after completing my doctoral research. Writing my dissertation and book was draining, filled with anger and shame over my inability to support the people whose stories I documented, and my own shortcomings. I was not living up to the ideals of a compassionate human rights advocate or a productive academic who could be sharp, unyielding, and daring at all times. But the survivor’s guilt was just another manifestation of me believing that I could be an individual savior.

As I delved deeper into my research, I realized I had fallen into a well-worn pattern—a white European male traveling to Africa to prove his masculinity. It dawned on me, most of the behaviors that are associated with toxic masculinity are an outcome of modern individualism rather than tradition in South Africa and elsewhere. White men imported the gendered ideal of a self-made individual. The trope can be traced back to 17th-century English philosophers who defined the individual as the “owner of himself,”” who owes little to others, with a core identity composed of seamless traits, behaviors, and attitudes, rather than an assemblage of contradictory elements adopted through ongoing exchanges with others.

South African psychologist Kopano Ratele argues that well-meaning critiques of gender ideologies tend to homogenize and retribalize African masculinities as if they had no history. From this perspective, contemporary heteronormativity and male power are not necessarily a matter of “‘tradition”’ as a single and fixed structure. Yet, gender development work in Africa often uses the term “toxic masculinity” interchangeably with “traditional masculinity” particularly among low-income Black men.

During my doctoral research, I found that my own assumptions about the dark ages of patriarchy and their continuing effects on South Africans were based on a teleological model of progress that obscures how modern individualism creates toxic masculinity. My pursuit of invulnerability through ethnographic research was an attempt to “be somebody” in a world in which personhood is seemingly no longer defined by mutuality in relationships. For the most marginalized men I met in Cape Town, this pursuit was by far more distressing, in part, because these men were aware of the fact that they always depended on others for their very survival.

–

This post is from a partnership between Africa Is a Country and The Elephant. We will be publishing a series of posts from their site once a week.

The “climate emergency” is without doubt a global concern and, moreover, the science supporting this claim seems reasonably well established.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) predicts that global average temperature may increase by 1.5 to 4.5°C (2.7 to 8.1°F) by the end of the 21st century if nothing is done to drastically reduce the trend and stop any irreversible changes to the earth’s climate systems. However, there is an argument to be made that the burden of addressing this crisis may not have been equitably distributed.

Under the Paris Agreement reached at COP21 in 2015, it was agreed by virtually all countries concerned that collective action must be taken to ensure that global temperature does not increase beyond 2°C above pre-industrial levels.

After agreeing to and formally approving the Paris Agreement, nearly all African countries have shown some level of commitment in tackling the crisis. But looking forensically, how much of the global burden of this crisis has Africa borne so far?

Africa’s share of the burden

Statistics seem to suggest that Africa (which harbours nearly a fifth of the global population), has contributed very little to global greenhouse gas emissions and yet it is very vulnerable to the effects of climate change. According to reports, Africa’s share of global greenhouse gas emissions is approximately 3.8 per cent. By comparison China’s share is 23 per cent, while the US accounts for 19 per cent, and the European Union 13 per cent.

Africa is uniquely susceptible to the effects of climate change because of its geographical sensitivity, a reality that has been confirmed by IPCC scientists. A significant number of African nations are located in regions with low elevation or in coastal areas that can be easily affected by climate-related dangers such as rising sea levels, storm surges, and other related hazards.

The continent’s susceptibility to the consequences of climate change can also be attributed to factors such as its natural resources as well as some distinct social and economic circumstances.

The year 2021 was categorised as either the third or fourth hottest year ever recorded in Africa. Studies suggest that the temperature in Africa will increase at a faster rate compared to the global projections for the 21st century.

It is expected that by 2069 or earlier, the near-surface air temperature in Africa will surpass the projections made for the 20th century. These temperature changes are likely to be unprecedented, especially in more susceptible regions such as West, Central, and East Africa. The projections indicate that the rise in temperature could occur 10-20 years before the anticipated time.

Fifty-three African Parties have recently submitted their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) in line with the requirements of the Paris Agreement. NDC refers to plans at the national level that outline various objectives for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The NDCs indicate that droughts and floods are the primary types of hazards that African Parties are most concerned about. Yet the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) reports that only four countries have the capability to offer end-to-end drought forecasting or warning services at a fully advanced level.

It is expected that by 2069 or earlier, the near-surface air temperature in Africa will surpass the projections made for the 20th century.

Although NDCs employ a “bottom-up” strategy as per IPCC guidelines for reducing emissions, there are still some gaps in this process, as highlighted in the UNEP 2021 report.

The lack of action or slow progress, by developed nations, in reducing their fair share of emissions raises questions regarding the actual burden of negative climate impacts on African countries.

The WMO’s “State of the Climate in Africa” series of reports seem to be the go-to information resource for the continent as they offer authoritative scientific information concerning climate patterns, severe weather events, and their effects on critical vulnerable sectors.

The current incarnation in the WMO series, the State of the climate in Africa 2021, has drawn attention to the most recent consequences of the changing climate on the continent.

Just like the two previous series (2019 and 2020), the aspects of climate change addressed in the report include an increase in temperature, surging sea levels and coastal erosion, severe occurrences, and food security, health, and economic implications. The complete report is anticipated to be released in early 2023.

Although proof of climate change in Africa is undeniable, recent reports by the IPCC indicate that there are still significant gaps in observing some variables in the region, such as precipitation, and some other fundamental ones described in the WMO’s Global Basic Observing Network (GBON).

There are also reports stating that nearly 60 per cent of the African population is not covered by early warning systems to cope with extreme weather events and climate change impacts. The issue of insufficient coverage is partly attributed to the lack of proper functioning of the National Meteorological and Hydrological Services (NMHSs) in the continent. This seems very ironic because 92 per cent of the countries in Africa mention climate services in their NDCs.

NMHSs are a critical element of national infrastructure and play a significant role in supporting essential socioeconomic functions, including disaster reduction, water resources, agriculture and food security, health, transportation, and energy.

One of the key responsibilities of NMHSs is to carry out regular observations and data collection, which forms the basis for monitoring and forecasting weather, water, climate, and other related environmental conditions. Additionally, NMHSs also help in issuing warnings, alerts, and advice.

Reports suggest that there are several obstacles preventing NMHSs from adequately monitoring and reporting actual crises. These include insufficient human expertise, inadequate observation networks in many countries, poor telecommunication facilities for exchanging data and products, limited mechanisms for engaging with users, inadequate characterization of current and future weather, climate, and water outcomes and impacts, as well as the impact of COVID-19 on national economies.

Therefore, given that the current state of NMHSs in the continent cannot comprehensively account for a global concern like climate change, what credibility can one give to the accuracy of the measurements of actual emissions as required by the Paris Agreement through the African countries’ NDC climate action plan? As the common saying goes, that which cannot be measured is unlikely to be effectively controlled or improved.

On the other hand, research carried out by CDP (formerly the Carbon Disclosure Project) in 2019 indicated that eight out of nine states and regions in Africa had been exposed to socio-economic risks due to the effects of climate change. It was also found that six states and regions had significant concerns about their water security in the near, mid-, or long-term due to the impact of climate change.

However, the data reported by CDP only covered 48 African cities which represents a total population of just a little over 150 million citizens. Moreover, the data invariably only covered approximately 31 per cent of the African population living in urban areas.

It was also found that six states and regions had significant concerns about their water security in the near, mid-, or long-term due to the impact of climate change.

From the foregoing it can be seen that, based on current data, the share of Africa’s climate burden is far greater than is presently reported or imagined. There are certainly several worldwide programmes promoting regional action. However, in order to achieve more sustainable outcomes at every scale, there is still a significant amount of work that is required to enhance disclosure at the sub-national level.

Proposed stopgap measure

Although advances in systematic investigations such as those adopted by the WMO, CDP and other related initiatives have provided important inputs in the climate change efforts in Africa, the risks are more severe than has been envisioned. However, these reports are still very crucial in informing significant actions on the way to achieving the goals of the Africa Agenda 2063.

But perhaps in the interim the limitations of climate monitoring techniques and lack of coverage can be mitigated by greater reliance on indigenous knowledge as well as the involvement of local regions and villages. A recent study has provided evidence of the remarkable value of Indigenous and Local Knowledge (ILK) in Africa.

The term “Indigenous and Local Knowledge (ILK)” refers to the knowledge, philosophies, practices, approaches, and skills developed and accumulated by local communities over time through their informal experimentation, experiences and their deep understanding of local contexts. ILK is mainly transmitted through oral and practiced traditions.

There are approximately 50 million indigenous people in Africa, most of whom are pastoralists, agro-pastoralists, farmers, and hunter-gatherers. The importance of further studying Indigenous and Local Knowledge (ILK) has been emphasised because it has been identified as crucial for adapting to climate change in Africa.

ILK has been utilised on a micro-scale to tackle human-induced, natural, and socio-economic risks, such as, hydro-metrological hazards (floods and droughts), and health issues. Given that modern forecasting systems have limitations, combining different types of forecast services could improve the accuracy of the information provided.

Benefits of tackling the crisis and needs assessment

Although African countries are considered as contributing less to global emissions, it is important to recognize the challenges that they face in addressing climate change. These include political instability, widespread poverty, and inadequate infrastructure, which can make it challenging to effectively implement climate change policies and adaptation measures. Moreover, Africa tends to possess the least developed land-based observation network when compared to other continents.

Given that modern forecasting systems have limitations, combining different types of forecast services could improve the accuracy of the information provided.

Despite the challenges faced by many African countries, some regions are taking steps to adapt to climate change while planning for a more resilient future using alternative means. The message of sustainability is also beginning to filter through to the populations in their daily activities, work and business.

However, there is a need for additional resources to support risk and vulnerability assessments, emissions inventories, adaptation planning, streamlined data collection processes and collaboration. It is possible to achieve significant outcomes through the technological and financial assistance of developed nations. This includes generation of employment opportunities, expansion of access to renewable energy, and enhancement of public healthcare services. To enhance its climate change adaptation measures, Africa requires about US$ 7-15 billion annually by 2030; the negative impacts of climate change could cost Africa approximately US$50 billion annually.