Exploring the Critical Barriers to Successful Community-based Disaster Risk Reduction in the Sanyati District amid Zimbabwe’s Post-Devolution Framework

Imagine the world of disaster management as a giant, high-stakes game of "Save the Village." For a long time, the rulebook said that the people living in the village should be the ones saving it, because they know the terrain best. This idea is called Community-based Disaster Risk Reduction (CBDRR). It's like giving the local team the playbook, the whistle, and the budget to build flood walls or organize fire drills before the storm hits.

But there's a twist in the story. In recent years, Zimbabwe tried a new rule called Devolution. Think of this as a parent handing over the keys to the family car and the wallet to their teenager, saying, "You're in charge now; you know the neighborhood better than I do." The goal was to let local communities make their own decisions about safety and development. However, just like a teenager given a car but no gas money, the local teams in Zimbabwe found themselves stuck. They had the authority to drive, but the central government hadn't filled the tank. This paper explores what happens when you give a team the responsibility to save the day but forget to give them the tools, the cash, or the real power to actually do it.

---

The Story of the Empty Wallet and the Locked Door

In the Sanyati district of Zimbabwe, a team of researchers decided to investigate why the "local team" wasn't winning the disaster game, even though the rulebook said they were supposed to be the heroes. They didn't just look at the rulebook; they went out and talked to 40 real people—mayors, teachers, traditional leaders, and regular neighbors—to hear the truth about what was going wrong.

The researchers found that the system is stuck in a frustrating loop. It's like a video game where the player is told, "You are the boss of this level!" but the game controller is still being held by someone in a different room.

The Money Problem: Planning Without a Budget
The biggest hurdle the team found was a severe lack of cash. The local leaders in Sanyati are told to make plans to stop floods or droughts, but when they look at their budget, it's empty. One local worker described it perfectly: "We only plan, but without a budget there is nothing we can do." Another said, "The government says powers are devolved, but they do not give us the money, so how do we work?"

It's as if the central government handed the locals a blueprint for a lifeboat but refused to give them any wood or nails. Without money, the local authorities can't buy supplies, fix infrastructure, or even hire trained people. They are stuck waiting for handouts or donations from outside, which makes them dependent and slow to react.

The "Fake" Power: Decisions Still Coming from the Capital
The second major barrier is that the "local" power isn't actually local. Even though the constitution says decisions should be made in the village, the researchers found that the big decisions are still being made in Harare, the capital city. One participant put it bluntly: "Decision is said to be local, but it still comes from Harare."

It's like a coach telling the team captain to call the plays, but the coach is still screaming the plays from the sidelines and ignoring the captain's suggestions. The local leaders feel like they are just going through the motions, following rules written in a book that don't match the reality on the ground.

The Skill Gap: Trying to Fix a Plane While Flying It
The third problem is that the local teams often don't have the right training. When a disaster strikes, they need experts who know how to manage emergencies, but the local institutions are short on skilled people. One health worker admitted, "We do not have trained people to run disaster programmes; hence, we depend on outside experts."

It's like asking a group of people to perform heart surgery because they live in the hospital, but they've never actually studied medicine. They might have good intentions, but without the right skills and regular practice (workshops are rare and often forgotten), they can't handle the crisis effectively.

The "Talk Shop": When Community Voices Are Ignored
Finally, the researchers found that the community itself is getting tired of being asked for opinions that are never used. The idea of devolution was supposed to mean that everyone gets to help decide. But in reality, people are invited to meetings just to listen, not to speak. One resident sighed, "People are tired of meetings with no results." Another leader noted, "Communities are invited but their views are not taken into consideration."

This is like a town hall meeting where the mayor asks, "What do you think?" but then immediately ignores the answers and does whatever they wanted to do anyway. When people feel their voices don't matter, they stop trying to help, and the whole system loses its strength.

What the Researchers Found (and What They Didn't)

The study, which used interviews and document reviews, suggests that the gap between the idea of devolution and the reality is huge. The paper doesn't claim that devolution is a bad idea; in fact, it suggests that if done right, it could be amazing. But right now, in Sanyati, it's failing because of four main things: no money, no real power, not enough training, and a lack of genuine listening.

The researchers compared this situation to other places like Kenya and Nepal. They found that in Kenya, once the local counties got actual budget lines for disaster plans, things started to improve. In Nepal, when local authorities were given real money and training, they could teach almost every village how to handle disasters. This suggests that the problems in Zimbabwe aren't impossible to solve; they just need the central government to actually follow through on its promises.

The Path Forward

So, what's the solution? The paper suggests that to fix this, Zimbabwe needs to stop treating local leaders like figureheads and start treating them like real partners. This means:

• Filling the Wallet: Giving local governments their own money so they can act without waiting for permission.
• Unlocking the Door: Letting local leaders make real decisions instead of just waiting for orders from the capital.
• Building the Skills: Training local people so they aren't dependent on outside experts.
• Listening for Real: Making sure community meetings actually change the plans, not just fill time.

The researchers conclude that if these changes happen, communities in Sanyati and beyond could become much stronger and safer. It's about turning the "local team" from a group of people with a playbook and no equipment into a fully equipped, empowered squad ready to handle whatever the future throws at them. Until then, the game remains stuck, and the village remains vulnerable.