A community-led anticipatory action pilot in Mbire District, Zimbabwe, in which residents set their own drought priorities and helped design the actions delivered after a forecast trigger in July 2024.
Map
Community-led Drought Anticipatory Action in Mbire District
General Information
ISIG
Before the 2024/25 drought season, farmers in Mbire, Zimbabwe, helped plan and build water and livestock protection measures with Welthungerhilfe and its local partner.
Welthungerhilfe (WHH) Zimbabwe and Farmers Community Trust Zimbabwe (FCTZ), with government agencies, opened the process with the People First Impact Method (P-FIM), an open dialogue format that starts from residents’ own experience and not from an agency agenda. Residents pointed to drought and flooding as their main risks and to water management as the most useful response. WHH’s Anticipatory Humanitarian Action Facility (WAHAFA) then built the anticipatory action plan together with them. When the trigger was reached, the partners provided a piped water supply and extra feed for livestock, with training and veterinary treatment. Residents dug around 1.5 km of trenches for the pipes before the contractor arrived. The WHH case study says the actions aimed to protect about 9,947 people and their livestock, and that 13,000 cattle and 2,000 goats benefited.
Droughts in Zimbabwe are becoming more frequent and more severe, putting food security, water supplies and rural livelihoods under pressure, above all for households that live from crops and livestock. Mbire is a rural district in Mashonaland Central Province, with about 83,700 residents (2022 census) over roughly 4,700 km². WHH reports that when water becomes scarce, people, livestock and wildlife compete for it, which can lead to conflict.
Zimbabwe already has a national drought anticipatory action system, supported by the World Food Programme (WFP) together with the Meteorological Services Department (MSD), built on risk thresholds and pre-arranged financing. The Mbire pilot tested whether early action could also respond to priorities set by the community itself, using P-FIM, and not only to externally defined triggers and packages.
Hazard Type
Geographical Scope - Nuts
Geographical Scope
Population Size
Population Density
Needs Addressed
Droughts in Mbire reduce water for people and livestock and threaten livelihoods built on farming and cattle, and aid usually arrives only after losses have occurred. Water scarcity is also tied to conflict between people and wildlife at shared water sources. In addition, priorities for anticipatory action can be set by agencies, which may leave the support out of step with what communities consider most urgent. The pilot addressed these gaps by acting on forecasts before the drought peaked and by letting residents define the priorities.
The beneficiaries are rural households that depend on farming and livestock. The WHH case study says the new water supply reduces the burden on women and children, who often travel long distances for water, and quotes a participant saying that even a child or a disabled person can now get water.
Disaster risk management in Zimbabwe is led at national level, with drought anticipatory action supported by WFP and developed with the MSD and the Climate Change Management Department. Districts have anticipatory action technical working groups (WFP, 2022). In Mbire, the pilot was run by WHH and FCTZ with government agencies and veterinary services. The MSD and at-risk communities confirmed the alert. No public information on the formal role of district or ward civil protection committees in this pilot was found in the sources reviewed.
A national anticipatory action framework exists. No public information on a pre-existing local drought plan in Mbire was found in the sources reviewed. Based on the available information, it can be concluded the community-level plan was developed through the pilot.
Water infrastructure was insufficient for people and livestock. The main intervention was a new piped water supply.
To shift priority-setting to the community and build local ownership of the anticipatory plan. Residents identified their main risks and asked for better water management, and the plan was developed together with them.
P-FIM was used to hold open dialogue between communities and aid agencies without a pre-set agenda. The plan was then developed with the community. Consultations continued throughout, involving at-risk communities, farmers, government authorities and veterinary services, and community members contributed labour.
Residents set the priorities and took part in designing the actions that followed, namely the piped water supply and the extra livestock feed. When activating, WHH combines the national WFP drought model with local community consultations, and the alert was confirmed by the MSD together with at-risk communities. Residents also dug about 1.5 km of trenches for the pipes before the contractor arrived.
Residents came to see the water scheme as their own project because it answered a priority they had raised. According to WHH, the dialogue method changed how communities, NGOs and government work together, and WHH is using it elsewhere. The WHH 2024 study adds that the approach draws on both local knowledge and scientific data when judging drought risk. The case study mentions training on feeding and storage practices.
Vulnerable Groups
Governance
Emergency Preparedness
Infrastructure Readiness
Engagement Level
Empowerment Level
Implementation
- An open dialogue process (P-FIM) used to set priorities before any planning.
- A plan with the trigger and actions agreed in advance.
- Residents’ own labour on the water infrastructure.
- A combination of local knowledge and scientific forecasting.
The languages used in community dialogue are not stated in the sources reviewed.
Welthungerhilfe (WHH) Zimbabwe, with Farmers Community Trust Zimbabwe (FCTZ), under WHH’s Anticipatory Humanitarian Action Facility (WAHAFA).
WHH is an international humanitarian and development organisation that runs WAHAFA, which is implementing anticipatory action projects in nine countries. FCTZ is the local partner. No public information on FCTZ’s own experience in DRRM was found in the sources reviewed.
WHH Zimbabwe; FCTZ; at-risk communities and farmers in Mbire; Zimbabwe Meteorological Services Department; other government agencies (unnamed); veterinary services; WFP (drought trigger model, developed with the MSD); German Federal Foreign Office (funder).
- Communities took part in dialogue facilitated through P-FIM and identified their risks and priorities.
- WAHAFA developed an anticipatory action plan with the community.
- WHH used the WFP Ready-Set-Go drought model alongside local community consultations to monitor the season.
- A drought alert was issued in July 2024 from the forecast for the 2024/2025 season, indicating a high probability of below-normal rainfall for October to December. The MSD and at-risk communities confirmed it, and the planned actions were triggered.
- The partners delivered the pre-agreed actions: a piped water supply and extra livestock feed, training on feeding and storage, and veterinary treatment for livestock.
- Community members dug pipe trenches, and consultations continued during delivery.
- WHH began applying P-FIM in other contexts.
Donor funding, technical staff from WHH and FCTZ, forecast access through the MSD, materials for the water scheme and livestock feed, veterinary support and community labour.
The pilot was activated in July 2024. The planning timeline and delivery dates are not public. A later report says a drought plan covering Mbire was activated again in 2026.
Experience of the Implementing Organisation in DRM
Target Audience
Resources Required
Timeframe & Phases
Participation Results
Local ownership was strong because the actions answered a priority residents had raised. According to WHH, the dialogue method strengthened working relations among communities, NGOs and government. Outside support was most effective when it built on local effort and did not replace it. The case study reports reduced humanitarian needs, avoided distress sales of livestock and protected livelihoods, supported by testimonies from a partner and farmers. It presents no measured outcome data or independent evaluation, and its cost-effectiveness claim has no supporting figures. WHH recommends more and more varied funding so NGOs and local partners can build and run anticipatory mechanisms, a focus on inclusive, locally led approaches, and closer cooperation between EU institutions, donors and African partners.
Based on the available information, it can be inferred that the main challenges were timing and uncertainty. Forecast-based triggers can produce false alarms or missed events, and construction can be delayed by procurement. The community partly addressed the delay by excavating trenches before the contractor arrived. Water scarcity linked to wildlife conflict is a further pressure on any water scheme.
Implementation risks include dependence on external funding, the upkeep of the water scheme and unequal participation across community members. Based on the available information, mitigation appears to rely on strong local ownership, the involvement of a local partner and government agencies, and WHH’s recommendation to support locally led anticipatory action.
Risk & Mitigation Plan
Scalability and Sustainability
It depends on donor support, local ownership of the infrastructure, and the national anticipatory action system, which uses pre-arranged financing (WFP, 2022). WHH says it is applying P-FIM in other contexts.
P-FIM is a facilitation method that can be used in other districts, and the plan-and-trigger structure follows a national model. The water scheme and livestock actions are site-specific. A replication would need local priorities identified first and would depend on funding.
The forecast trigger is a technical model developed by the MSD and WFP. The community process is largely low-tech, relying on dialogue and manual labour.
The WHH case study gives EUR 150,000 as the funding for the anticipatory actions, with no breakdown by activity. The wider WAHAFA programme is co-financed by the German Federal Foreign Office with EUR 8.65 million over three years.
No public information on recurring costs was found in the sources reviewed. Based on the available information, it can be inferred that ongoing costs include maintaining the water scheme and any later activations of the plan.
Local ownership is the main asset for keeping the work going. Residents treated the water scheme as their own because it answered a priority they had raised, and their labour on the pipes reduced reliance on outside delivery.
Anticipatory action lasts longer when it sits inside a national system. Zimbabwe’s drought framework, built on risk thresholds and pre-arranged financing, gave the pilot a trigger model and a route to funding. WHH argues that anticipatory action should be built into humanitarian, development and climate policies and programmes, not left to project funding, and that donors should increase and diversify their funding for it.