Connect with us

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

Monoculture tree plantations are a false climate solution

Published

on

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)

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

The pain and anguish in the Albertine Part II

Published

on

The rural village of Kapaapi, Bugahya county, Hoima district has turned into a crucible of violence after 1,000 families live under the constant threat of being evicted.

They are scared of cartels that often hire rogue UPDF, police, and private security firms to evict communities from their lands in the oil-rich Albertine Graben. In this second and last part, EMMANUEL MUTAIZIBWA spent six months conducting an investigation and discovered several disturbing issues.

A GORY HORROR

Brig Peter Nabasa grazes his cattle on 700 acres of land, which he claims he leased out of 1,235 hectares belonging to the Byangire family. The Byangire family parcelled out another 1,050 acres to kibanja holders who have occupancy rights but do not hold a registered title.

They are protected by the Constitution and the Land Act and cannot be evicted without a court order, and they possess the right to use, sell, inherit, or formalise their occupancy on registered land. Minister Mayanja’s order to resettle the families has been supported by the commander of the UPDF Field Artillery Division, Maj Gen Dan Kakono, whose soldiers are offering protection to families that were previously evicted.

Women in this area, subjected to horrendous torture and sexual abuse during the eviction raids, carry invisible scars. While speaking on condition of anonymity, the doctor who treated these women confirmed that they were still experiencing trauma when he examined them in 2025.

Five women are willing to testify in court, but others choose to remain silent as a result of the stigma associated with rape and threats from the perpetrators of this crime. The deputy Inspector General of Government, Patricia Achan Okiria, on January 15, 2024, filed a petition before the Uganda Police Professional Standards Unit (PSU) calling for the investigation of the former Hoima District Police Commander, Patrick Bogere, on allegations of abuse and improper misconduct.

The letter states that “In February, 2023, the District Police Commander [DPC], together with the assistance of armed goons, invaded seven villages located in Kapaapi, Hoima, at night, tied up several women, and gang-raped them before evicting them from the land.

Consequently, the affected women reported the matter at Hoima rural police station, where Bogere Jackson is the DPC. When the victims followed up the matter, the DPC threatened them with arrest and blocked them from making further appearances at the police station.”

Some of the women who encountered violence during the evictions, including two rape victims, provided these testimonies. Unknown thugs came together in large numbers with police and Magnum security guards.

I was two months pregnant, I fell on a stone and started bleeding, and I had a miscarriage and lower abdominal pain. I am a mother of nine, and we often sleep in the bushes with the children. There is no honour in that if a family member passes away, their corpses are thrown into the bushes,” revealed one of the women who was examined and whose identity was concealed for fear of reprisals.

INCIDENTS OF RAPE

Another victim and mother of eight, whose house was torched and livestock stolen, claimed that her husband was imprisoned and her children are out of school.

“I was raped by two people who covered my eyes with a cloth. I fell while running, and currently I suffer from severe back pain. My oldest son, who was 17 years old, was shot in the shoulder. We now live like destitutes in [the neighbouring] Buliisa district,” she lamented without disclosing her identity.

“I was five months pregnant, and I am a mother of five. I was spared from being raped, but they took my livestock, including a cow, which was roasted and eaten,” revealed another victim who was attacked on February 10, 2024, after her husband fled to hide in the bushes. Another victim, who was three months pregnant, was awoken by noises and silhouettes of soldiers.

“She lost the pregnancy and got retained products of conception, leading to a dilation and curettage [a minor surgical procedure used to open the cervix and remove tissue from the inner lining of the uterus],” reads the summary of a medical report. She claims that her children were beaten and hospitalised, and “one of the attackers was identified as the LC-I chairperson Michael Oketta, Ndahura Gafayo, who was dressed in a camouflage uniform and was armed with pangas and guns.”

Her children’s identity cards, academic records, and a motorcycle were incinerated in the fire. The victim, according to a medical report, “developed peptic ulcers, insomnia, high blood pressure and paranoid delusions”.

On February 10, 2023, at about midnight, while asleep, soldiers and police entered another woman’s house. She was assaulted and taken to the back of the house, and while pregnant, she was raped, and her house was torched. A medical report reveals that “she developed a urinary tract infection and experiences pain in the pelvic area and back and suffers from bouts of insomnia.”

At 1 am, the young woman noticed that their houses were ablaze. “The door was hit, and it fell in and injured a baby. My mother-in-law was in the house and was severely beaten. I was seven months pregnant. I was pushed out of the house naked; I got severe lower abdominal pain and vaginal bleeding, and I was abducted and taken to an unknown place with my four children. All my livestock were stolen, and my children are out of school while my husband was imprisoned for five months.”

Several incidents of rape have been chronicled during evictions in the Albertine Graben. About four women claimed that they were raped in 2014 during evictions in Rwamutonga, Hoima district, when 200 families were evicted to pave the way for the construction of an oil waste treatment plant by McAlester, a US-based firm.

Arinaitwe and Company Advocates, a law firm based in Kampala, has, between 2023 and 2026, filed three separate suits in Hoima High court on behalf of the evicted families. One of the lawsuits is a public interest litigation which is seeking to hold TotalEnergies and the government of Uganda vicariously liable for the abuses the victims suffered during the eviction.

Peter Arinaitwe, the lawyer for the evicted communities in the seven villages of Kapapi, says that “our legal representation of the victims has also come at a high personal cost. We have experienced what we believe to be attempts on our lives, persistent surveillance of our movements, raids on our homes, and intimidation by unidentified individuals in suspicious vehicles. These incidents have created a climate of fear and insecurity for us and our families.”

He said the case has been deeply traumatising.

A HALL OF MIRRORS

The land that Asiimwe Byangire leased to Brig Nabasa was the subject of a legal dispute filed in 2021 before the Masindi District High Court at the time the senior army officer acquired it. Asimwe Byangire, as the plaintiff, had sued the local community in Kapaapi for trespass.

The petitioners claimed that, “As the court process is still ongoing, Asiimwe Byangire, who is the plaintiff, and Brig. Nabasa have decided to come and force the residents to agree and sign a [consent agreement] document to divide the land of the four villages into two parts without any written document from the court allowing them to do so.”

The locals claim that Asiimwe Byangire sought to present a forged document purporting that the defendants had entered into a consent agreement with him. It reads further, “The second part, i.e., the western part [Waaki North and Kiryatete Rukola], will be given to Brigadier Nabasa to pay back his loan, so the residents of the western part will be chased immediately without any compensation.”

The locals claim that Brig. Nabasa acquired the 700- acre leasehold after Asiimwe Byangire failed to pay a loan he acquired from the army officer. The director for complaints, investigations & legal services at the Uganda Human Rights Commission (UHRC), Pauline Nansamba Mutumba, told Vox Populi that UHRC’s officers in Hoima district met the complainants, but they were not willing to cooperate and preferred to wait for the decision of courts of law.

“We agreed that the office of the resident district commissioner would take the lead. I consider it ongoing. We could not interfere because of the sub judice rule, but we did offer to mediate.”

This article was produced as part of the Bertha Challenge Fellowship.

Source: The Observer

Continue Reading

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

Five years after Uganda’s National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights, are local communities hosting land-based investment projects seeing change?

Published

on

By the Witness Radio team.

Five years after Uganda embraced its National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights, uncertainty remains about whether the policy has brought meaningful change to communities affected by business and development projects.

The plan’s final assessment spotlights some progress, such as rising human rights awareness among both communities and businesses. However, it also uncovers stubborn obstacles: inconsistent implementation, limited funding, fragile monitoring, and businesses lagging in embracing human rights practices.

Communities affected by land, agribusiness, mining, infrastructure, and other development projects continue to report being uprooted, excluded from consultations, and pushed to the margins of decisions that shape their land, livelihoods, and rights.

These clashing realities became the focus of a national stakeholder dialogue in Kampala on September 23, 2026, where government officials, civil society, development partners, and local voices gathered to take stock of Uganda’s National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights.

The Ministry of Gender, Labor and Social Development (MGLSD), alongside Witness Radio, convened stakeholders to reflect on five years of action, celebrate milestones, and spotlight the gaps demanding attention as Uganda prepares for the next chapter in its business and human rights story.

Uganda’s National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights is a national framework designed to address human rights concerns arising from business activities and strengthen the responsibilities of government and businesses to protect human rights and provide access to remedy. It was adopted in 2021 and is anchored in the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and their “Protect, Respect and Remedy” framework.

Yet as stakeholders looked back on five years of implementation and progress, grassroots stories kept bubbling up, raising doubts about how much life has really changed for those whose land, livelihoods, and rights hang in the balance.

For 43-year-old Samuel Ssenkinga of Kiyinja Village in Kiruuma Sub-county, Kasolokamponye Parish, Mubende District, the National Action Plan’s impact is not a distant policy debate—it is deeply personal.

Ssenkinga recounts how, in March 2017, he was attacked after being called by a manager from Formosa Farms, a tree-planting project in the area. He had lived on that land for over thirty years.

“I was born on the land and had spent over 30 years on it before being evicted. On 17th March of 2017, their [Formosa] manager called me asking where I was and requested that we meet up because he had something to tell me, which I agreed to,” he said.

On his way to the meeting, he says, workers from the company allegedly ambushed him.

“Before I could reach where I was going, I was attacked by 17 men; they all had knives, and they stopped me, and they beat me, which has caused injuries up to date,” he said.

Nearly a decade on, Ssenkinga still bears the scars of the conflict. Seventeen acres of his land have vanished, and justice remains a distant hope.

“We didn’t know about the project and were not consulted. Seventeen acres of my land were taken, and I was left with nothing,” he said.

Ssenkinga is just one among many Mubende residents raising alarms over land seized for Formosa Farms’ vast eucalyptus, pine, and macadamia plantations. The company has been accused by communities and civil society of evictions, aggressive land grabs, and violence. Formosa Farms is a subsidiary of Quality Parts, both owned by Taiwanese investor Martin Chang and Ugandan Anna Kyoheirwe.

His experience is just one of many that Witness Radio has chronicled while monitoring land evictions and human rights struggles across Uganda. The organization observes that concerns about consultation, participation, land rights, and access to remedy continue to echo through communities touched by development projects.

At the dialogue, Witness Radio’s Executive Director Jeff Wokulira Ssebaggala painted a picture of a nation wrestling with sweeping displacement and land loss linked to development projects, with smallholder farmers shouldering the heaviest burden.

He emphasized that many of these hardships stem from shallow consultations and the failure to genuinely involve communities in shaping the projects that transform their lives.

“The aspect of development tends to be lost along the way. Instead of bringing development, people see these projects as a curse. They do not speak well about these projects, which threatens their sustainability.” He added.

Mr. Ssebaggala added that this issue cuts across sectors such as agribusiness, mining, and infrastructure, where smallholder farmers’ voices are often faint and seldom heard in decision-making.

“Their voices are difficult to hear because they are remote and, as you know, we are NGOs and cannot reach everybody,” he said.

The government’s own assessment, however, highlights areas of progress. At the dialogue, Dekura Caroline, Principal Social Development Officer in the Ministry of Gender, shared findings from five years of the National Action Plan’s implementation. She noted that communities are now more aware of their rights when dealing with businesses.

She explained that communities increasingly understand their rights deserve protection, while businesses are beginning to recognize their duty to respect human rights in their operations and services.

During her presentation, she cited examples from different regions where communities were beginning to see results from efforts to strengthen their rights and access to remedies.

In the Busoga region, she observed that more people are growing sugarcane after earlier worries about fair payment discouraged them. She also highlighted the Albertine region, where workers and communities once faced frequent accidents and poor working conditions.

“In the Albertine region in Kikuube District, people used to get involved in accidents, and the work environment was unfriendly. But today, the community advocates for their rights, and business owners know they must protect people’s rights even while advancing businesses.” She added.

“We have built the capacity of existing structures at local governments. When cases arise, they are reported to local governments or our partners on the ground who report to the Uganda Human Rights Commission. The Equal Opportunities Commission also helps follow up when remedies are not concluded.” She further added.

Mr. Ssebaggala points to a major barrier: genuine participation. He notes some project implementers present agreements and documents in English, even when the intended signatories may not understand the language.

“We have experience where partnerships and MOUs are signed between out-growers and project implementers, but they are in English. When asked if they understand what they signed, they say they were told whatever is there is okay with them.”

He described this language barrier as a major spark for land disputes between communities and project implementers.

“The issue of language is very important because when communities do not understand these projects, they cannot support them or understand how the projects will benefit them,” he said.

The ministry insists it is working to boost community participation and accountability. Mr. Benard Mujuni, Commissioner for Equity and Rights at the MGLSD, said the ministry is crafting a national framework to ensure communities have a real voice in decision-making and that all actors can be held accountable.

He addedHe added that the government has created a community stakeholder engagement guideline to ensure communities move beyond token consultation and truly participate in development processes. The government has developed a community stakeholder engagement guideline to help ensure people aren’t just consulted. But they are effectively consulted to participate in the development process.” He mentioned.

Continue Reading

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

The Fight for Climate Justice: African Women at the Forefront

Published

on

By the Witness Radio Team.

Across Africa, women are the backbone of food systems, households, and rural economies. Yet the land, water, and natural resources they rely on face growing threats from climate change and relentless development.

According to the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), 76 percent of working women in sub-Saharan Africa are employed in agrifood systems, the largest share of any region in the world. In rural areas, women are four times more likely than men to engage in off-farm work. Their contribution goes beyond paid employment to unpaid activities like fetching water, caring for children and older people, and supporting household food security.

As development projects multiply and droughts, floods, land degradation, rising temperatures, and shifting rainfall patterns worsen, the foundations of these livelihoods are becoming alarmingly fragile.

For millions across Africa, climate change is not just an environmental concern. It is a daily struggle for food, land, water, income, health, and survival.

Yet women are not simply bearing the brunt of these impacts. Across the continent, they are mobilizing, crafting their own solutions, and demanding a seat at the table where decisions are made.

From 5–8 October 2026, more than 75 women community leaders, activists, civil society organizations and allies from across West and Central Africa will gather in Yaoundé, Cameroon, for the fourth regional Women’s Climate Assembly (WCA).

Co-hosted by Green Development Advocates, WoMin African Alliance, and partners, the event will unite women in their fight against exploitative industries and misleading climate solutions. Under the banner “Our lands, our voices: African women united for climate justice and reparations,” the Assembly aims to connect struggles over land, forests, water, seeds, food, and natural resources into a powerful movement for climate justice.

This gathering seeks to fortify a Pan-African ecofeminist movement, nurture women’s leadership, forge collective strategies for climate justice, defend food sovereignty and sustainable resource management, and amplify demands for climate reparations.

It will also open space for women to share grassroots solutions, from seed conservation and mangrove stewardship to processing natural products and safeguarding traditional ecological wisdom.

Bela Marie Victorine, a participant from Cameroon, says the Assembly offers women from different countries an opportunity to learn from the experiences of communities affected by major development projects.

“The Women’s Climate Assembly taking place in Cameroon will allow women from other countries to experience firsthand the realities of Cameroonian women’s lives impacted by major projects and how they overcome these challenges.”

The Assembly takes place in Cameroon, where communities have long faced the pressures of large-scale land grabs and sprawling industrial oil palm plantations.

Since the late 2000s, the Cameroonian government has supported the expansion of industrial oil palm cultivation as part of efforts to promote investment, employment and economic growth.

For rural communities where most arable land has been handed over to agricultural industries, these developments bring profound consequences. The loss of land threatens livelihoods and the cultural, social, and political bonds tied to their territories, while raising serious environmental concerns.

Several petitions to the Cameroonian government have reported concerns about the effects of industrial oil palm expansion on women, including abuse, sexual harassment, persecution, and destruction of livelihoods. These effects reach far beyond plantations. Across Africa, communities are grappling with large-scale mining, oil and gas projects, and other forms of resource extraction. For those whose lives depend on land, forests, and water, these projects add new burdens to communities already struggling with climate upheaval.

In Africa, climate impacts are already being felt. The World Meteorological Organization’s State of the Climate in Africa 2025 reported that climate- and weather-related hazards affected at least 13 million people. It caused more than 3,000 reported deaths across Africa in 2025.

The Assembly’s organizers challenge who should bear the financial and social burdens of the climate crisis. They insist African communities must not pay for a disaster they did little to cause. They call for climate finance that delivers real resources for loss and damage, adaptation, ecosystem restoration, and community-driven alternatives. This builds on the legacy of previous gatherings in Nigeria and Senegal. Organizers now envision transforming this platform into a lasting space for action at local, national, subregional, and Pan-African levels.

The goal is to ensure women on the front lines of climate and environmental struggles have a lasting space to organize, share experiences, and shape the climate conversation. The Assembly will feature discussions on the climate crisis and women’s resistance, food sovereignty and seed protection, defending the Congo Basin forests, feminist advocacy, climate debt and reparations, and the expansion of oil and gas.

The Assembly will also feature hands-on education and practical exchanges on seed conservation, mangrove management, processing natural products, and preserving traditional ecological wisdom.

According to Abbie Freeman from Liberia, bringing these lived experiences into climate decision-making is central to the Assembly.

“Participating in the Women’s Climate Assembly gives me a platform to share my community’s experiences and learn from other African women. I believe our voices and lived experiences must be part of climate decisions.” She added.

The Yaoundé gathering is not just about recording the impacts of climate change. It is about building connections among women facing diverse environmental and economic pressures and creating collective strategies for land, livelihoods, and natural resources.

Continue Reading

Resource Center

Legal Framework

READ BY CATEGORY

Facebook

Newsletter

Subscribe to Witness Radio's news and report updates



Trending

Subscribe to Witness Radio's news and report updates