MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

Monoculture tree plantations are a false climate solution

Published

5 years ago

September 24, 2020

Yesterday was the 16th International Day of Struggle against Monoculture Tree Plantations. In 2004, rural communities in Brazil declared the day to commemorate the resistance against the expansion of monoculture tree plantations in Brazil. Through solidarity statements and actions around the world the day has evolved to become an International Day of Struggle.

This year, a group of organisations from African countries, together with the World Rainforest Movement, has issued an open letter about investments in monoculture tree plantations in the global South, particularly in Africa.

The letter is a response and critique of a June 2019 report titled, “Towards Large-Scale Commercial Investment in African Forestry”. The report was prepared by an outfit called Acacia Sustainable Business Advisors, which was set up by Martin Poulsen, a development banker. One of his co-authors for the study was Mads Asprem, the ex-CEO of Green Resources, a Norwegian industrial tree plantation and carbon offsets company. Green Resources’ land grabs in Mozambique, Tanzania, and Uganda have resulted in loss of land, evictions, loss of livelihoods and increased hunger for local communities.

The study was produced for the African Development Bank and WWF Kenya, with funding from the World Bank’s Climate Investment Funds.

The Open Letter (signed by 117 organisations and people) is posted here in full:

International Day of Struggle against Monoculture Tree Plantations

Open Letter about investments in monoculture tree plantations in the global South, especially in Africa, and in solidarity with communities resisting the occupation of their territories.

September 21st is the International Day of Struggle against Monoculture Tree Plantations. Unlike others, this Day was not created by the United Nations (UN) or by governments. The Day was created in 2004 by rural communities, gathered in the Brazilian hinterland, to denounce and shed light on the impacts of monoculture tree plantations on their territories, and affirm their determination to resist such plantations and take back their territories from the hands of corporations.

16 years later, the Day remains as relevant as ever: there is a real danger of a gigantic, worldwide expansion of monoculture tree plantation. This is promoted as a solution to prevent climate chaos and to the industrialized world’s dependence on oil, gas and coal. A group of governments, corporations, consultants, investors and major conservationist NGOs have come together to put their mega-plans[1] for tree plantation expansions on the table.

Although highly questioned, a forest as defined by the FAO (UN Food and Agriculture Organization) and several national governments mistakenly includes monoculture tree plantations. In their eyes, plantations are “planted forests”. This definition favours only the plantation corporations, thus guaranteeing their main objective: generating profits.

Africa is the continent with “the most profitable afforestation potential worldwide”, according to a report produced in 2019 by consultants for the African Development Bank (AfDB) and the conservationist NGO WWF-Kenya. “The study has identified around 500,000 ha of viable plantation land in ten countries: Angola, Republic of Congo, Ghana, Mozambique, Malawi, South Sudan, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia and Zimbabwe.” The study proposes the speedy creation of a Fund, headquartered in a tax haven (Mauritius), to finance the planting of the first 100,000 hectares of trees.

In order for these plantations to generate profits for private investors, the study claims that aid will be necessary from European public international cooperation agencies, i.e., taxpayers’ money from Northern European countries, namely, Finland, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Iceland, the United Kingdom and The Netherlands, as well as from the World Bank via the International Finance Corporation (IFC), which makes loans to private companies.

The study and its recommendations leave us perplexed and indignant, given the false assumptions and inconsistencies on which it is based (see Annex I for a more detailed description). Below, we present a summary of our main criticism.

The study repeats the same treacherous and false promises that corporations and their advocates always make. It states that plantations improve communities’ living conditions, create jobs, improve the soil and the quality and quantity of water. The corporations’ ‘social’ projects would be attractive to the communities. However, plantations lead to a large number of violations of rights, create very few poorly-paid and dangerous jobs, destroy forests and savannas, degrade soils, contaminate and dry up water sources and destroy communities’ way of life. With the plantations, guards arrive who will restrict communities’ freedom of movement; cases of abuse, sexual violence against women and HIV/AIDS infections increase in number. The promise of ‘social’ projects, often not fulfilled, is the main bargaining chip for corporations to gain access to communities’ lands.

The study refers to land conflicts only as “challenges” and the proposed solution is to “follow FSC and other best practises”. Firstly, the 500,000 hectares that the study suggests corporations should plant as monoculture tree plantations are not abandoned or degraded lands. Corporations always want fertile lands, usually flat and with availability of water – in other words, lands that tend to be used by communities. By recommending the FSC, the study ignores ample documentation that proves that the FSC does not solve plantations’ structural problems, and land conflicts even less. The FSC deceives consumers by considering the model of large-scale monoculture plantations “sustainable”, for it always leads to large tracts of land being controlled by corporations and to the intensive use of agro-chemicals and synthetic fertilizers. So far, compensation for the populations that have lost their lands and means of subsistence has always been derisory or inexistent. Meanwhile, the social, environmental, economic and cultural damage caused by monoculture tree plantations in rural areas of African countries has never been compensated by corporations. There exists no way to calculate the damage and much of the harm done is irreparable.

The study references a World Bank/IFC project in Mozambique, stressing that “one important element of the IFC approach will be to define and register land rights”. In fact, the World Bank, as well as financing plantations, has a policy of encouraging governments in countries of the South to speed up the granting of individual deeds and, therefore, the privatization of land, in an attempt to prevent its collective recognition as community land. The World Bank has been promoting the handing over of community lands to private capital all over the world. It is important to highlight the fact that in recent years, the government of Mozambique has put in place a number of reforms in the forestry sector. These include a review of the Forestry Policy and its Implementation Strategy and, very recently, a public consultation process with a view to also reviewing the National Land Policy. In all of these processes the World Bank is the common denominator in terms of promotion and financial “support”. This review is taking place under the pretext of improving transparency and efficacy in land management and policies, and will inevitably force an alteration of the Land Law and respective Regulation, thus legitimizing the occupation of community lands which provide living conditions for communities and peoples.

The study states that the tree plantations would be “a stable, long-term carbon sink”, and result in “substantial adaptation benefits” vis-à-vis climate change at the local level. By stating this, the study ignores a growing body of scientific work showing that monoculture tree plantations are a false climate solution. The experiences of communities all over the world with monoculture tree plantations show that they create a local environment even less prepared for responding to the ever more perceptible impacts of climate change.

The study states that “Global oil and industrial companies” want to “become part of the solution rather than a major part of the problem. They are beginning to see the potential of forestry investments.” Oil and gas companies are an integral part of the climate crisis, regardless of such proclamations. They have not shown any interest in solving it; on the contrary, they intend to invest first and foremost in false solutions – after all, profits are above all else.

Other false statements include: “the world will need the type of intensive afforestation (…) that the Brazilian forestry industry is implementing”; and that Brazil’s neighbour, Uruguay, is “the world’s most recently developed forestry country”. The truth is that the Brazilian experience with industrial tree plantations over the course of the last few decades has led to numerous land conflicts and environmental degradation. Municipalities with the highest concentrations of plantations are among the poorest, compared with those with diversified agriculture based on smallholders. In Uruguay, the same negative impacts occur. Rural areas have seen a massive exodus of people, with the rural population reduced by half. Furthermore, citizens of Uruguay have taken on an enormous debt, owing to a recent contract between its government and Finnish multinational UPM. According to this contract, the government agreed to carry out multi-million dollar infrastructure works to service UPM and the export plans of its second pulp factory.

The study also states that “The main barrier to successful investments in African greenfield planting is low historic returns. New planting by private companies has ground to a halt in recent years.” This not only reveals that profits are what really matters to private investors, but also that the authors of the study deliberately ignore the main reason why the expansion of industrial plantations has been impeded in various African countries: the resistance of communities against such monoculture plantations.

The study also seeks to attract investors, suggesting “the possibility of planting [trees] at significantly lower costs (…), more or less half of 10 years ago (…)”. Promising companies that they will have to spend less means that the weight of the industrial plantation projects from the proposed fund will fall even more upon already indebted African countries and, consequently, on their populations, particularly rural communities that run the risk of losing their most fertile lands.

It is important to stress that a “conservationist” NGO is a co-producer of this study that promotes investments that will benefit first and foremost private companies. The study itself reveals how NGOs like WWF should no longer be considered NGOs since they function and act as the ‘right hand of the plantation industry’.

The report refers to a non-public version of the study which has not been disclosed to the public as far as we are aware. The report also notes that “(…) there is a clear coalition of DFIs [development finance institutions] interested in further discussion on this topic [creation of the Fund], including: CDC [United Kingdom], Finnfund [Finland], IFC [World Bank], NDF [Nordic countries: Finland, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Iceland] and FMO [The Netherlands]”. This demonstrates that decisions about investments are being made without the participation of the communities and other civil society organizations and social movements from the regions in question, i.e., the parties most affected. How can it still be acceptable in the 21st century that public international cooperation agencies use money from their taxpayers in this way? Hiding their decisions from their own citizens and from the populations that will be affected? When plantation corporations and their investors, after everything has been decided, state that they are applying the principle of communities’ “free, prior and informed consent”, does this merit any credibility?

We demand that the non-public version of this study be published immediately by the AfdB and WWF-Kenya, so that its content may be known to the communities and organized civil society in the countries where they intend to implement their plans.

We reiterate our indignation with regard to the channelling of public resources towards private investments, through tax havens, to be invested in highly damaging activities, such as large-scale monoculture plantations.

We further demand a wide-ranging review of the process of allocation of land to plantation corporations, ensuring the return of land to the communities that depend on this land, today and in the future. In Mozambique, for example, peasant agriculture constitutes the main guarantee of subsistence for more than 80% of the population, and the land is the only thing to which communities can resort to ensure food safety and sovereignty.

We reiterate our solidarity on this September 21st with the legitimate and just struggles of communities around the world that resist the advance of plantations and strive to take back their lost lands. They must be remembered and made visible every day. And they will certainly resist this new and insane expansion plan proposed in the AfDB and WWF-Kenya study and commented on in this Open Letter.

We appeal to the solidarity and unity, so that together we may demand the immediate abandonment of any and every afforestation programme based on large-scale monoculture plantation.

The Struggle Continues!
Plantations Are Not Forests!

Signed by:

ADECRU (Mozambique)
Justiça Ambiental (Mozambique)
Missão Tabita (Mozambique)
SUHODE Foundation (Tanzania)
WRM (International)

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

80-year-old widow evicted from her land, detained for five months on trespass charges

Published

1 day ago

April 26, 2025

witnessradio.org

Ms Elivaida Mugala (C) and her children pose next to the grave of her husband on disputed piece of land in Nawaka village, Ikumbya Sub-county in Luuka District. PHOTO/DENIS EDEMA.

Ms Elivaida Mugala, a resident of Nawaka village, Ikumbya Sub-county in Luuka District, Eastern Uganda, is fighting to reclaim her 36-acre piece of land allegedly stolen by a grabber who accused her of trespass, yet she has lived on it for five decades.
Armed with what Ms Mugala believes are forged documents and backed by some local authorities, the alleged land grabber, Mr Fred Bahati, has left the 80-year-old widow and her family frustrated and helpless.
Her neighbours and other community members are also outraged and now worried that their land could be targeted next.

Neighbours who witnessed her eviction described the scene as chaotic and traumatising to watch after the suspected grabber allegedly hired police and suspected goons to eject the elderly Ms Mugala from the peoperty she inherited from her late husband, Yowasi Kintu who died in 2022.

“Mr Bahati took advantage of our vulnerability after my husband’s death. He used his power and influence to forge documents to claim ownership of my land. But I won’t back down. I’ll fight for justice, no matter what it takes,’’ Ms Mugala vowed.

A maize garden in front of one of the houses that belonged to Ms Elivaida Mugala

Ms Mugala recounted eviction experience, saying: “When I resisted the forceful eviction from the land we’ve occupied since the 1970s, I was accused of trespassing on my own land and home. I was arrested along with my grandchildren and daughter, and we were imprisoned in Iganga for five months without clear charges or legal representation.’’
“He came with an army of security personnel, threatening us with firearms and intimidating our entire community. His hired thugs destroyed my home and crops, then accused me and my grandchildren of causing the damage. At my age, what energy do I have to inflict such harm?” Ms Mugala recounted.

“It’s a grave injustice, and I demand accountability. It’s clear that some local leaders are colluding with the grabber. They’re taking advantage of the family’s vulnerability, but the community won’t stand for it. We’re calling on district leaders to intervene and bring justice to this elderly woman,” Defence Secretary of Nawaka B Village, Mr Francis Balwaine said.
According to Mr Balwaine no leader has visited to investigate, nor police picked interest in investing this case.
“It’s clear that the lack of action is due to the family’s inability to bribe their way to justice. This injustice will have consequences, and it will likely cost the ruling party votes,’’ he added.

When this reporter visited the scene, Ms Mugala’s two-roomed house was found damaged, with windows shattered and doors plucked out.

The trees she had planted around the home were also cut down.

Ms Mugala showed us a maize garden prepared by the suspected land grabber during the five months she was reportedly detained by police no clear charge.

Mr Christopher Matindo, a 76-year-old retired teacher and current information secretary of Nawaka Parish, who shares a boundary with Ms Mugala, said he was worried he could be the next target for the land grabbers.

“Mr Bahati hasn’t lived around here since he was a child. What basis does he have for claiming ownership of this land?’’ Mr Matindo wondered.

Mr Matindo revealed that his land is adjacent to the disputed piece of land, making him a concerned neighbor.
“I’m worried that if they succeed in grabbing Ms Mugala’s land, mine could be next. What’s more troubling is the silence from local leaders. Why are they quiet on this matter?’’ he wondered.

One of Ms Mugala’s sons, Mr Moses Nsandha, 37, said they have sought help from various offices, including the police, but they have not been helped.

“It’s like the land grabber has bought off the entire Luuka district leadership, leaving us with nowhere to turn,’’ he alleged.

“We’ve been loyal NRM voters for decades, but this incident has opened our eyes to see the reality. If this is how they repay us – by enabling grabbers to steal from the vulnerable – then they shouldn’t expect our votes again if there is no justice for the old woman,’’ said Mr Godfrey Mulwa, Councilor for Nawaka Parish.
When contacted, Mr Bahati said the case was in court and denied any involvement in destroying the elderly woman’s property.
He claimed that he purchased the land through the rightful channels, arguing that the house he demolished was his workers’ quarters on his property.

Mr Bahati claimed he’s in possession of genuine documents proving his ownership of the land, which he said spans between 8-10 acres.

He dismissed Ms Mugala’s claim that the disputed land measures 36 acres, arguing that she exaggerated it.

According to the district Police Commander, Mr Moses Akena, land fights are increasingly becoming a challenge in Luuka.

A house belonging to the daughter of Ms Mugala, which was destroyed by a suspected land grabber in Luuka district.PHOTO/ ENIS EDEMA.

“A common scenario is when family members, particularly brothers, grab property from widows or orphans after the death of the family head,’’ he said.
Mr Akena acknowledged a high level of moral decay in the community, contributing to the rise in land disputes.
However, he noted that the police are collaborating with Redeem International, an NGO that advocates for widows’ and orphans’ rights. Through this partnership, they’re working to restore grabbed property to its rightful owners through court proceedings.

Police have over time been accused of enabling land grabbing through corruption.
Mr Hassan Ssembarirwa, Deputy Resident Commissioner of Luuka, said Ms Mugala, whose land is allegedly being grabbed by Mr Bahati, is currently before the RDC’s office.
He noted that Mr Bahati has filed five cases against Ms Mugala in different courts.
Ironically, Mr Ssembarirwa revealed that Redeem International, an organisation dedicated to protecting the property rights of widows and orphans, is handling Ms Mugala’s case in court with the support of the RDC’s office. Their goal is to ensure the elderly woman regains her land.

“The police forensic investigations indicated that he had forged agreement documents and the matter is before the court, being followed up by Redeem International and the office of the RDC to ensure the old woman gets justice,’’ Mr Ssembarirwa said seemingly affirming that the responsible government officials have folded their hands instead of helping Ms Ms Mugala who also claim to be a longtime supporter of the ruling National Resistance Movement (NRM) which has been I power for nearly four decades.

Ms Damalie Nyafwono, a lawyer with the NGO, said her team had successfully secured bail for three individuals accused in a land dispute case filed by Mr Bahati at Kiyunga Magistrate Court in Luuka.

“Mr Bahati has filed multiple cases against Ms Magala in different courts in Iganga. It’s clear he’s trying to harass and intimidate her. But we’re prepared to fight her case in every forum until she gets justice,’’ the lawyer said.

Corruption among public servants and land grabbing have become a common and permanent feature in almost every part of the country, with the most vulnerable being women and ordinary/ poor Ugandans who cannot bribe their way to get justice.
Police said in their latest annual crime report that a total of 397 cases of land-related crimes were reported in 2024, compared to 271 cases reported in 2023, giving a 46.5 per cent increase in the crimes reported under this category.

Source: monitor.co.ug

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

Forced Land Evictions in Uganda: who’ll bring reparation for victims.

Published

4 days ago

April 23, 2025

witnessradio.org

By Witness Radio team.

Vivian Nandyose, a bright student, should have been in Senior Five this year. However, her dreams were shattered when her parents, the pillars of her education, were unjustly imprisoned over land-related criminal charges. With both parents in prison for eleven months, on what the family claims were false accusations, Vivian was forced to put her education on hold and take care of her five younger siblings.

In Uganda, Senior Four is the fourth and final year of lower secondary school, also known as the O-Level period. It’s the equivalent of grade 10 in the United States. Students in Senior Four take their O-Level exams, known as the Uganda Certificate of Education (UCE) at the end of the year.

“This is the life that we are experiencing because some greedy rich man caused my parents to be imprisoned. I didn’t go for senior four because I didn’t have school fees, and no one could care for the young ones while I was away,” Vivian painfully revealed in an interview with Witness Radio Uganda in December 2024.

The horrific arrest of her parents from their home in Kabubbu-Kabonge village, Nansana Municipality, Wakiso District, on January 10, 2024, is something that 17-year-old Vivian will never forget. At 1:00 a.m., police officers from the Luwero Police Station broke into their home. They took her parents, Mr. Ssebaggala Richard, his wife, Namande Prossy Kanabi, and their relative, Anania Ngabirano, into custody. The incident happened without prior notice of the reasons surrounding their arrest.

Vivian stated, “We have no peace; we can’t do anything now. Because the people who used to help us are no longer with us, I cannot afford to care for my younger siblings.”

The trio faces accusations of aggravated robbery related to a one-acre land dispute with businessman Benon Ntambi. The family claims that Ntambi illegally seized their land, destroyed all their crops, and orchestrated their violent arrests. However, Ntambi’s representatives argue that the land was legally acquired, and the family’s allegations are unfounded.

Nandyose’s loss of education is not an isolated case but a growing trend among many youths and children who face significant challenges due to forced land evictions. The Uganda Bureau of Statistics (UBOS) 2023 report paints a stark picture, with 45% of primary school pupils and 30% of secondary school students failing to complete their education due to forced displacement and instability.

In Uganda, unabated land grabbing, mainly for business interests, has had a detrimental effect on millions of people. Vivian’s case is one of 90 unlawful land evictions that Witness Radio—Uganda documented in the first half of 2024.

During the release of Witness Radio’s latest report titled Forced Evictions in Uganda, presented on Tuesday, November 5, 2024, at the 6th Symposium on Business and Human Rights, Mr. Christopher Kiwanuka, Director of Programs at Witness Radio, revealed the staggering figure of over 360,000 people affected by land grabbing between January 1, 2024, and June 30, 2024.

According to the research report, the 90 documented cases involve 121,442.83 hectares of land threatened to be grabbed, affecting at least 363,021 Ugandans. Completed forced land evictions were thirty-one (31) 31 cases, leaving 22,962 people homeless and seizing 7,150.7 hectares of land.

In the remaining cases, while the land has not been fully seized, residents continue to face persistent and violent threats of eviction, impacting 340,059 people and placing an additional 114,292.13 hectares of land at risk.

The report reveals a staggering reality: four cases of land evictions are reported weekly, affecting approximately 15,126 people and threatening 5,060.12 hectares of land across the country. This daily displacement of an estimated 2,160 Ugandans due to forced land evictions, while 723 hectares of land are at risk of being grabbed, underscores the urgent need for intervention.

The results show that, with sixty-seven (67) out of 90 recorded incidents, corporate businesses are the leading cause of forcible land evictions in Uganda. Eleven (11) cases include tribe and family land conflicts, and twelve (12) cases involve government entities. Key findings from the monitoring of these cases majorly involve multinational companies such as Agilis Partners Ltd., Great Seasons Ltd., East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP), and Formosa Ltd, a subsidiary of Quality Parts Limited, as well as local investors, wealthy and bigshots with extensive power-connection to government involved in land grabbing and the criminalization of landgrab critics.

The Central region’s proximity makes it a desirable target for land grabbers, which leads to a concerning trend of land evictions, according to the report’s conclusions. With 52 documented occurrences, the region routinely has the most eviction cases, followed closely by the Western region with 24. The Northern region has 8 cases, and the Eastern region has the fewest cases, with six incidences.

Mr. Kiwanuka highlighted the rigorous process of data collection, which involved a variety of sources including Victims, the Witness Radio Land Eviction Portal, call-ins, newspapers, CSO reports, official reports, personal observations and contacts, court documents, law enforcement and security personnel, and pertinent service providers. This comprehensive approach ensured that the cases were thoroughly monitored, investigated, and documented by the research team of Witness Radio.

Accordingly, during the same period, Witness Radio documented 65 cases of attacks against community land and environment rights defenders (LEDs), as well as climate activists challenging illegal land evictions and corporate harm to the environment in Uganda. Attacks recorded include arbitrary arrests and unlawful detentions, confiscation of property, cattle in particular, intimidation and threats, and others.

Mr. Kiwanuka further noted the growing concerns of increased violence in forced land evictions, where armed gangs enforced 37 evictions on behalf of evictors, 25 cases by Uganda police, 5 cases involved the participation of some soldiers of the Uganda Army, whereas 4 cases involved the private security companies.

“Most of the evictions have been characterized by violence, including killings, criminalization, judicial harassment, and torture. Additionally, those who master the courage to defend others or their communities face the wrath of these powerful land grabbers. They act with impunity and often disregard government orders on forced land evictions.” Mr. Kiwanuka revealed this during the report launch.

Witness Radio calls on the government to ensure victims’ justice, protect local communities, and enforce adherence to existing land laws and regulations. It further calls for an end to corruption and abuse of power, particularly in the land registries, army, and police, where the rights of underprivileged groups are routinely subordinated to the interests of wealthy people.

It also exhorts companies to follow responsible investing guidelines and other pertinent business frameworks to prevent corporate harm to communities.

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

New report: EACOP threatens tourism and biodiversity in Greater Masaka.

Published

2 weeks ago

April 16, 2025

witnessradio.org

By Witness Radio team.

A new report urgently warns about the imminent threats posed by the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP) to the tourism sites of the Greater Masaka subregion, demanding immediate attention and action.

In a recently released research brief by the Inclusive Green Economy Network-East Africa (IGEN-EA), “Tourism Potential of Greater Masaka vis-à-vis EACOP Project Risks,” IGEN-EA reveals the area’s diverse tourism prospects. These prospects bring massive wealth to the country as a result of its rich biodiversity and tourist attractions, but they are at risk of destruction by the EACOP project.

The EACOP project involves the construction of a 1,444km heated pipeline from Hoima in Uganda to Tanga in Tanzania, which will transport crude oil from Tilenga and Kingfisher fields. The project has been widely criticized for its environmental and social concerns. The pipeline has displaced at least 13,000 people in Uganda and Tanzania.

Experts say the Masaka subregion has sustainable tourism potential. However, the EACOP could negatively impact it by further fueling the climate crisis, causing biodiversity loss, and driving a population influx, among other things.

The Inclusive Green Economy Network-East Africa (IGEN-EA) is a network that unites over thirty-six (36) private sector players and civil society organizations (CSOs) from Uganda, Kenya, and Tanzania. The organizations undertake research, raise stakeholder awareness, and advocate to promote green economic alternatives, including clean energy, sustainable tourism, organic agriculture and fisheries, forestry, and natural resources management.

Located in southern Uganda and bordering Tanzania, Greater Masaka comprises nine districts: Kalungu, Masaka, Rakai, Sembabule, Lwengo, Kalangala, Lyantonde, Bukomansimbi, and Kyotera. Four of these, Kyotera, Rakai, Sembabule, and Lwengo, are crossed by the eacop mega project, which transports crude oil from Hoima to Port Tanga of Tanzania.

The research study’s findings reveal that the 1,443km EACOP is set to affect River Kibale/Bukora in Kyotera and Rakai districts. The river is one of the most important in the Sango Bay-Musambwa Island-Kagera (SAMUKA) Ramsar Wetland System, renowned for hosting 65 mammal species and 417 bird species. Further, the EACOP is set to affect River Katonga, the water body on whose banks Bigo by Mugenyi, a UNESCO World Heritage site, is located.

According to the Uganda Bureau of Statistics Report 2024, tourism contributed approximately 4.7% to Uganda’s GDP, and the sector has experienced significant recovery and growth. However, destroying essential tourism sites poses substantial risks to the industry.

The report underscores that the construction, operation, and decommissioning of the EACOP could lead to the irrevocable loss of the biodiversity mentioned above. This grave concern could significantly diminish Greater Masaka’s tourism potential.

“The proposed construction method of the EACOP, the open cut method, as well as the planned monitoring of the EACOP, including at river crossings, every five years and using the pigging method, instead of cathodic protection for corrosion control purposes, puts rivers and Ramsar sites at risk of oil pollution among other impacts. This could cause biodiversity loss and affect scenic views, negatively impacting tourism potential”. The report further reads.

Research report also estimates that the full value chain carbon emissions of the EACOP, which includes emissions from all stages of the pipeline’s life cycle, including extraction, transportation, and refining, are projected at over 379 million metric tonnes over 25 years.

“Carbon emissions are a driver of climate change, which has been implicated in contributing to biodiversity loss, including in Uganda. The climate risks of the EACOP thereby present a risk to eco- and agro-tourism in the Greater Masaka sub-region.” The research adds.

However, the report further implored the Ministry of Tourism, Wildlife, and Antiquities, through the Uganda Tourism Board (UTB), to prioritize the development of highlighted sites and promote cultural tourism in the subregion.

According to Mr. Dickens Kamugisha of the Africa Institute for Energy Governance (AFIEGO), the government claims that projects like EACOP are aimed at addressing poverty are unrealistic.

He noted that such projects have instead triggered biodiversity concerns, contributed to climate change, and posed significant social risks, such as increased crime rates and disruption of local communities. He emphasized that investing in sustainable economic activities such as tourism would benefit the government and private sector more.

Mr. Paul Lubega Muwonge, a member of IGEN-EA, emphasizes the crucial role of research in tourism product development and its value in laying a strong foundation for all operations.

“Research is an important and desired step in tourism product development; it sets a stronger foundation in all operations. We hope that the Ugandan government and development partners will use this research to harness the benefits of tourism by launching tourist activities in the Greater Masaka sub-region, Masaka.” He said.