Purpose

The PEFA Climate Assessment for Zambia aims to evaluate the extent to which climate-related considerations are integrated into the country’s public financial management (PFM) framework. This assessment is expected to provide a foundation for identifying strengths and weaknesses in mainstreaming climate change into Zambia’s PFM system. The findings will guide discussions on necessary reforms, capacity-building initiatives, and policy enhancements to improve the country’s ability to manage climate change-related fiscal challenges and opportunities effectively. Moreover, it will serve as a baseline for tracking progress over time.  
The assessment was undertaken in accordance with the methodological guidance issued by the PEFA Secretariat. The assessment team applied the official methodology, as well as the templates and tools developed by the PEFA Secretariat.  
This climate assessment was conducted sequentially following the general PEFA assessment and the supplementary PEFA Gender Assessment. Consequently, it covers the same reference period—namely, fiscal years 2021, 2022, and 2023. This timeframe is applicable to all indicators referring to the “last three completed fiscal years,” with 2023 being the most recent year assessed. For indicators requiring reference to “Last budget and budget documentation submitted to the legislature”, the 2024 fiscal year budget was used. In addition, for certain indicators, data were collected "at the time of the assessment," corresponding to the first quarter of 2025.  

The evaluation's scope includes the central government, encompassing extra-budgetary units. It also extends to local governments (LGs) and public enterprises (PEs) engaged in climate-related activities, as specific indicators require.  

The identification and characterization of climate policies were conducted through an initial questionnaire, which enabled the establishment of Zambia’s climate policy profile. This questionnaire was completed by the Ministry of Green Economy and Environment (see Annex 1). The analysis was further substantiated through interviews with relevant government entities and the collection of information during two field missions (see Annex 3).