Evaluating synergies and disparities in South Africa’s disaster and climate governance frameworks

As climate-related risks intensify on a global scale, there is an increasing acknowledgment of the necessity for harmonized legal frameworks that integrate disaster risk reduction (DRR), climate change adaptation (CCA), and sustainable development. In South Africa, this imperative is particularly pressing due to the nation’s high exposure to both sudden-onset and slow-onset hazards. The recent enactment of the Climate Change Act 22 of 2024 represents a significant policy advancement, complementing the Disaster Management Act 57 of 2002 and aligning domestic legislation with the international Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030. This study sought to identify areas of synergy, misalignment, and legal fragmentation among these three instruments, providing insights into how integrated governance could enhance South Africa’s capacity for coordinated disaster response and climate resilience. Employing thematic document analysis, the study critically examined these three documents to systematically identify patterns of convergence and divergence across nine governance dimensions. The analysis revealed substantive synergies in multi-hazard planning, institutional coordination, and stakeholder inclusion, which collectively establish a baseline for cross-sectoral alignment. However, significant disparities remain. The Sendai Framework, while strategic and comprehensive, is a non-binding global instrument, whereas the DMA and CCA operate under domestic legislative authority. Institutional arrangements differ markedly: the DMA mandates the establishment of disaster-specific centers, while the CCA introduces climate-specific governance bodies. Furthermore, the DMA lacks provisions related to climate adaptation, in contrast to the CCA’s detailed obligations. Monitoring and evaluation approaches also diverge, resulting in disjointed metrics and fragmented reporting systems. These findings highlight the necessity for legislative harmonization to address implementation gaps and enhance institutional coherence. The study therefore advocates for policy alignment, integrated planning, and regulatory reform to foster coherence across DRR and climate governance frameworks. It is recommended that South Africa pursues a unifying legal architecture capable of translating global commitments into actionable national policies, thereby strengthening resilience and ensuring more effective disaster and climate governance.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Human Science Research Council SA
Published
2026-03-31
DOI
https://doi.org/10.14749/31907635
Primary Topic
Disaster Management and Resilience
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Evaluating synergies and disparities in South Africa’s disaster and climate governance frameworks

Human Sciences Research Council
Human Science Research Council SA
Disaster Management and Resilience
article

Evaluating synergies and disparities in South Africa’s disaster and climate governance frameworks

Human Sciences Research Council
article en

Abstract

As climate-related risks intensify on a global scale, there is an increasing acknowledgment of the necessity for harmonized legal frameworks that integrate disaster risk reduction (DRR), climate change adaptation (CCA), and sustainable development. In South Africa, this imperative is particularly pressing due to the nation’s high exposure to both sudden-onset and slow-onset hazards. The recent enactment of the Climate Change Act 22 of 2024 represents a significant policy advancement, complementing the Disaster Management Act 57 of 2002 and aligning domestic legislation with the international Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030. This study sought to identify areas of synergy, misalignment, and legal fragmentation among these three instruments, providing insights into how integrated governance could enhance South Africa’s capacity for coordinated disaster response and climate resilience. Employing thematic document analysis, the study critically examined these three documents to systematically identify patterns of convergence and divergence across nine governance dimensions. The analysis revealed substantive synergies in multi-hazard planning, institutional coordination, and stakeholder inclusion, which collectively establish a baseline for cross-sectoral alignment. However, significant disparities remain. The Sendai Framework, while strategic and comprehensive, is a non-binding global instrument, whereas the DMA and CCA operate under domestic legislative authority. Institutional arrangements differ markedly: the DMA mandates the establishment of disaster-specific centers, while the CCA introduces climate-specific governance bodies. Furthermore, the DMA lacks provisions related to climate adaptation, in contrast to the CCA’s detailed obligations. Monitoring and evaluation approaches also diverge, resulting in disjointed metrics and fragmented reporting systems. These findings highlight the necessity for legislative harmonization to address implementation gaps and enhance institutional coherence. The study therefore advocates for policy alignment, integrated planning, and regulatory reform to foster coherence across DRR and climate governance frameworks. It is recommended that South Africa pursues a unifying legal architecture capable of translating global commitments into actionable national policies, thereby strengthening resilience and ensuring more effective disaster and climate governance.

Human Science Research Council SA
Climate action
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Disaster Management and Resilience
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.