Climate variations negatively impact municipalities in West Africa. In the municipalities of Zio1 and Zou, climate variations have consequences on the local economy. However, these municipalities are unable to implement climate actions defined at the local level. This research is based on the following hypothesis : in Zio1 as in Zou, the same difficulties in implementing climate planning are explained by choices of carrying out socio-economic development projects to the detriment of implementing climate actions. This article aims to examine the explanatory factors for the difficulties in implementing climate planning in the municipalities of Zio1 and Zou. In this research, climate variables from gridded observed data for the years 1981 to 2022 were used to analyze current climate conditions. For the analysis of future climate conditions, namely from 2021 to 2050, nine general circulation models were used. For socio-demographic data, a survey was conducted among 449 people aged 18 and over, spread across the territories of Zio1 and Zou. The results show that the implementation of climate actions is not a priority in the municipalities of Zoi1 and Zou. Several projects carried out at the local level are not sized to take into account climate variations.

Climate change has a local dimension and must be integrated into the development activities of local authorities. In the case of the municipalities of Zio1 (Togo) and Zou (Benin), the approach consisted of responding to climate issues at the local level. This local climate action planning exercise requires the participation of several local stakeholders in the municipality. The aim of this article is to examine the process of developing Sustainable Energy Access and Climate Action Plan (SEACAP) in Zio1 and Zou. The work is based on the hypothesis that the low level of participation of local stakeholders is a limitation in the planning of climate actions at local level. To verify this hypothesis, a survey was conducted among 449 people in the municipalities of Zio1 and Zou. The results show that municipal administrations, community leaders and civil society organizations were more involved in the process of setting up the SEACAP than state structures and economic stakeholders. Participation at grassroots population level remains very low. The SEACAP development process has limitations.