Connect with us

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

Restoring Our Land: Tackling Degradation for Climate Resilience, Food Security, and Sustainable Development at COP16

Published

on

United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification

Land degradation is not just an environmental problem. It increases risks to human health and the spread of new diseases. It is a driver of forced migration and conflicts over scarce resources. It is a leading contributor to climate change, biodiversity loss, poverty, and food insecurity. In other words, it is at the core of sustainable development.

Up to 40% of the world’s land is degraded. Between 2015 and 2019, at least 100 million hectares of healthy and productive land were degraded every year—a cumulative area twice the size of Greenland. Droughts are hitting more often and harder all over the world, driven or amplified by both climate change and poor land management.

Tree planting
People from Ukamo village in Ethiopia take part in a tree planting project as part of the government’s “Safety Net” programme which gives vulnerable farmers work. (Photo by Mike Goldwater)

Restoring degraded land and soil, and investing in drought resilience, are some of the most cost-effective actions countries can take to reduce the high human, social and economic impacts of drought—simultaneously increasing food, water and energy security while reducing displacement and conflict drivers. Thirty years ago, with the adoption of the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD), countries agreed to walk together down this path.

What Drives Land Degradation and Desertification?

Land degradation is the long-term decline in the quality of land that leads to the reduction or loss of the biological or economic productivity of land. In the drylands, land degradation is known as desertification. According to the Global Land Outlook, drylands cover more than 45% of the Earth’s land surface, provide 44% of the world’s agriculture, support 50% of the world’s livestock, and are home to one in three people worldwide. Experts estimate that, if not reversed, land degradation will drive 700 million people out of their homes by 2050 because they will no longer be able to feed themselves or have access to sufficient water.

The dominant drivers of land degradation include agriculture and related land-use changes, unsustainable management or over-exploitation of resources, natural vegetation clearance, nutrient depletion, overgrazing, inappropriate irrigation, excessive use of agrochemicals, urban sprawl, pollution, mining and quarrying, among others.

Deforestation is one of the most significant causes of land degradation. Tree roots help bind soil particles, thus maintaining their quality. When trees are cut down, the soil particles tend to disperse, negatively impacting the quality of the soil.

Another driver of land degradation is a lack of land tenure security. When people own their land, they are more likely to make the long-term investments needed to sustainably manage land, such as practicing crop diversity and agroforestry. Even though land constitutes the main asset from which the rural poor derive their livelihoods, millions of farmers, especially women, do not own their land. In many countries, the laws or customs hinder women’s ownership of land. In more than 100 countries, women are dispossessed from their land when they lose their husbands. This is a key issue to global land restoration since women are more likely to invest in diverse food systems, which boost soil health, while men focus primarily on cash crops and monoculture.

What is the UN Convention to Combat Desertification?

In 1991, African environment ministers decided to prioritize their proposal for the negotiation of a new convention to combat desertification as one of the concrete recommendations to be adopted at the UN Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED or Earth Summit) to be held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil in June 1992. They hoped a convention would help them gain access to additional funding to combat desertification, land degradation, and drought.

Leading into the final days In Rio, delegates had reached agreement on much of the desertification chapter of Agenda 21, the UNCED outcome, including the definition of desertification: “Land degradation in arid, semi-arid and dry sub-humid areas resulting from various factors, including climate variations and human activities.” However, there was still opposition to a convention. Many developing countries resisted the idea of a special convention for Africa, since they also faced land degradation. Industrialized countries maintained that desertification was a local problem and did not warrant a treaty. It wasn’t until the final hours of the Earth Summit that a deal was finally struck and the call for a convention was included in Chapter 12 of Agenda 21.

Negotiations on the Convention began in May 1993 and were completed in five meetings over fifteen months. At the first session in Nairobi, Kenya, the International Negotiating Committee held a one-week seminar to inform negotiators of the substantive issues related to desertification and drought, demonstrating that land degradation affected people around the world. This led to a serious discussion on how to create a global convention that still gave priority to Africa. When Committee Chair Bo Kjellén suggested including a special annex for Africa under the Convention, other regions insisted on annexes for their regions.

At the second meeting in Geneva, Switzerland, in September 1993, governments agreed to negotiate four annexes simultaneously, while giving special attention to Africa. In the end, the Convention includes regional implementation annexes for Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean, Asia, and the Northern Mediterranean. A fifth annex, for Central and Eastern Europe, was adopted in 2000.

Differences over financial resources nearly caused the negotiations to collapse. Developing countries called for a special fund as the centerpiece of the new convention. Industrialized countries rejected binding obligations to increase financial assistance to affected countries, insisting that existing resources could be used more effectively. The deadlock was broken only after the United States proposed establishing a “Global Mechanism” to improve monitoring and assessment of existing aid flows and increase donor coordination. Many developing countries were not happy, but believed they had to accept the Global Mechanism on the final night because if there was no agreement on finance, there would be no convention. On 17 June 1994, delegates adopted the UNCCD, four regional implementation annexes, and a resolution calling for urgent action for Africa.

The Convention recognizes the physical, biological, and socio-economic aspects of desertification and the importance of redirecting technology transfer so that it is demand-driven. The core of the convention is the development of national, subregional and regional action programmes by national governments in cooperation with donors, local populations, and non-governmental organizations (NGOs). In fact, the Convention was the first to call for the effective participation of local populations and organizations in the preparation of national action programmes. This innovation led the first “sustainable development” convention to also be referred to as a “bottom-up” convention.

The UNCCD was opened for signature in October 1994 and entered into force on 26 December 1996. Today, there are 197 parties, representing universal ratification.

United for Land cover
Released in 2024, Unite for Land provides an overview of the first 30 years of the UNCCD.

Promoting Land Degradation Neutrality

In 2008, a group of scientists was asked by the UNCCD Executive Secretary to examine if the Convention could use the offsetting principle already practiced by the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), and applied to deforestation at one site by planting trees elsewhere. The idea was to use this offsetting principle to lead to zero-net land degradation and expand the reach of the Convention to address land degradation globally, not just in the drylands.

The Secretariat and like-minded countries then advocated for endorsement of this concept of land degradation neutrality (LDN) by the UN Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20) in June 2012 and its inclusion as one of the targets under the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This would enable LDN to gain traction and effectively link land degradation as a driver of poverty, climate change and biodiversity loss, and demonstrate the relevance of productive land to global sustainability. The Rio+20 outcome, The Future We Want, highlights the need for urgent action to reverse land degradation and achieve a land-degradation neutral world.

After Rio+20, the UNCCD pushed forward with LDN on a variety of fronts. First, in 2013, the 11th meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP) established a working group to develop a science-based definition of LDN (Decision 8/COP.11). In late 2014, the Secretariat set up the LDN pilot project, through which 14 affected countries worked to translate LDN into national targets.

Meanwhile, in New York, the UNCCD and its supporters successfully lobbied for including a target on LDN in the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). When the 17 SDGs and 169 targets were adopted by the UN General Assembly in September 2015, they included target 15.3: “By 2030, combat desertification, restore degraded land and soil, including land affected by desertification, drought and floods, and strive to achieve a land degradation-neutral world.” For the first time, the UNCCD had successfully placed an item at the forefront of the international agenda.

Tree planting
Afrormosia growing scheme at the Compagnie Forestiere et de Transformation (CFT) in Kisangani, DRC. (Photo by Axel Fassio/CIFOR (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0))

The following month, UNCCD COP12 convened in Ankara, Turkey, and endorsed the science-based definition of LDN submitted by the working group:

“Land degradation neutrality is a state whereby the amount and quality of land resources necessary to support ecosystem functions and services and enhance food security remain stable or increase within specified temporary and spatial scales and ecosystems” (decision 3/COP.12).

And, in what some viewed as a ‘game changing’ accomplishment, COP12 agreed that striving to achieve SDG target 15.3 is a “strong vehicle for driving implementation of the UNCCD,” and invited countries to set voluntary targets to achieve LDN. The Global Mechanism and the UNCCD Secretariat established the LDN Target Setting Programme to assist countries in setting national baselines and creating voluntary national LDN targets and associated measures. Since then, 131 countries committed to setting LDN targets and more than 100 have already set their targets.

In 2017, the Convention’s Science-Policy Interface (SPI) published the Scientific Conceptual Framework for Land Degradation Neutrality, which provides a scientific foundation for understanding, implementing and monitoring LDN. It was designed as a bridge between the vision and the practical implementation of LDN by defining LDN in operational terms. The SPI developed three indicators, which created a clear pathway for monitoring LDN—both for the Convention and SDG 15.3:

  • trends in land cover;
  • trends in land productivity or functioning of the land; and
  • trends in carbon stocks above and below ground.

But there were concerns. Some countries and members of civil society at COP12 were worried about the focus on LDN as a central UNCCD target. Some likened it to opening a door to land grabs and greenwashing. So while the UNCCD COP called for the restoration of 1.5 billion hectares of land by 2030 to achieve a land-degradation neutral world, it was also essential to acknowledge land rights and inclusive land governance arrangements at the national and sub-national levels. The land tenure decision at COP14 did just that.

Already countries have pledged to restore 1 billion hectares of land, but there is still more work to be done to make these pledges a reality.

2018-2030 Strategic Framework

In 2017, COP13 in Ordos, China, adopted the UNCCD 2018−2030 Strategic Framework, which has three main components: a vision, strategic objectives and an implementation framework.

The vision commits parties to “A future that avoids, minimizes, and reverses desertification/land degradation and mitigates the effects of drought in affected areas at all levels and strive to achieve a land degradation neutral world consistent with the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, within the scope of the Convention.”

The Framework’s five strategic objectives are designed to guide the actions of all UNCCD stakeholders and parties until 2030:

  1. To improve the condition of affected ecosystems, combat desertification/land degradation, promote sustainable land management and contribute to land degradation neutrality
  2. To improve the living conditions of affected populations
  3. To mitigate, adapt to, and manage the effects of drought in order to enhance resilience of vulnerable populations and ecosystems
  4. To generate global environmental benefits through effective implementation of the UNCCD
  5. To mobilize substantial and additional financial and nonfinancial resources to support the implementation of the Convention by building effective partnerships at global and national level

The implementation framework defines the roles and responsibilities of parties, UNCCD institutions, partners and stakeholders in meeting the strategic objectives.

In Abidjan, Côte d’Ivoire, in 2022, COP15 launched a midterm evaluation of the Strategic Plan. The results of this evaluation, overseen by an intergovernmental working group, will be discussed at COP16, which is expected to adopt a decision on enhancing the implementation of the Strategic Framework for its final five years and restoring the necessary hectares of land to achieve a land degradation neutral world.

What’s Next?

UNCCD COP16 convenes in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, from 2-13 December 2024, under the theme “Our Land. Our Future.” The COP will commemorate the 30th anniversary of the UNCCD and a special segment will bring together leaders and high-level officials to commit to accelerate action to combat land degradation and desertification and improve drought resilience.

COP 16 social media card
A social media image for UNCCD COP 16 underlines how land degradation is a youth issue.

In addition to the midterm evaluation of the Strategic Plan and adopting the UNCCD’s biennial budget, COP16 is expected to negotiate and adopt decisions aimed at:

  • accelerating restoration of degraded land between now and 2030;
  • boosting drought preparedness, response and resilience;
  • ensuring land continues to provide climate and biodiversity solutions;
  • boosting resilience to sand and dust storms;
  • scaling up nature-positive food production by protecting and restoring grasslands and rangelands;
  • enhancing ongoing efforts to address desertification/land degradation and drought as one of the drivers that causes migration;
  • strengthening women’s right to land tenure to advance land restoration; and
  • promoting youth engagement, including decent land-based jobs for youth.

COP16 is also expected to catalyze new initiatives on land restoration and drought resilience that build on the G20 Global Land Initiative.

For the first time, the COP will include an Action Agenda, which will highlight voluntary commitments and actions and include thematic days:

  • Land Day on 4 December will focus on the importance of healthy land for combating climate change, creating jobs and alleviating poverty, with an emphasis on nature-based solutions, land restoration, and private sector engagement.
  • Agri-food System Day on 5 December will highlight sustainable farming practices for resilient crops and healthy soils while protecting ecosystems.
  • Governance Day on 6 December will address inclusive land governance.
  • People’s Day on 7 December will focus on the role of youth, women and civil society in decision-making.
  • Science, Technology and Innovation Day on 9 December aims to accelerate scientific solutions for land health and resilience.
  • Resilience Day on 10 December will focus on policies and technologies to build societal and planetary resilience in the face of climate change.
  • Finance Day on 11 December will engage financial stakeholders to showcase innovative funding mechanisms and partnerships for land and drought resilience initiatives.

COP16 will also build upon the COPs of the CBD in October 2024 and the UNFCCC in November 2024, improving synergies between the three “Rio Conventions” and promoting the implementation of the SDGs.

As UNCCD Executive Secretary Ibrahim Thiaw said in his foreword to the second edition of the Global Land Outlook report, “Governments and stakeholders cannot stop the climate crisis today, biodiversity loss tomorrow, and land degradation the day after.” The international community needs to tackle all these issues together. Achieving climate, biodiversity and sustainable development goals is impossible without healthy land.

In 1994 the adoption of the UNCCD started the world down the path to reversing land degradation, desertification and drought. COP16 is expected to reaffirm this global commitment for present and future generations.

Pamela Chasek, Ph.D., is the Co-founder and Executive Editor of the Earth Negotiations Bulletin.

Original Source: Earth Negotiations Bulletin (ENB)

Continue Reading

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

“Vacant Land” Narrative Fuels Dispossession and Ecological Crisis in Africa – New report.

Published

on

By Witness Radio team.

Over the years, the African continent has been damaged by the notion that it has vast and vacant land that is unused or underutilised, waiting to be transformed into industrial farms or profitable carbon markets. This myth, typical of the colonial era ideologies, has justified land grabs, mass displacements, and environmental destruction in the name of development and modernisation.

A new report by the Alliance for Food Sovereignty in Africa (AFSA) titled “Land Availability and Land-Use Changes in Africa (2025)” dismisses this narrative as misleading. Drawing on satellite data, field research, and interviews with farmers across Africa, including Zambia, Mozambique, South Africa, and Zimbabwe, the study reveals that far from being empty, Africa’s landscapes are multifunctional systems that sustain millions of lives.

“Much of the land labelled as “underutilised” is, in fact, used for grazing, shifting cultivation, gathering wild foods, spiritual practices, or is part of ecologically significant systems such as forests, wetlands, or savannahs. These uses are often invisible in formal land registries or economic metrics but are essential for local livelihoods and biodiversity. Moreover, the land often carries layered customary claims and is far from being available for simple expropriation,” says the report.

“Africa has seen three waves of dispossession, and we are in the midst of the third. The first was the alienation of land through conquest and annexation in the colonial period. In some parts of the continent, there have been reversals as part of national liberation struggles and the early independence era. But state developmentalism through the post-colonial period also brought about a second wave of state-driven land dispossession.” This historical context is crucial to understanding the current state of land rights and development in Africa. Said Ruth Hall, a professor at the Institute for Poverty, Land and Agrarian Studies (PLAS), at the University of the Western Cape in Cape Town, South Africa, during the official launch of the report.

The report further underestimates the assumption that smallholder farmers are unproductive and should be replaced with mechanised large-scale farming, leading to a loss of food sovereignty.

“The claim that small-scale farmers are incapable of feeding Africa is not supported by evidence. Africa has an estimated 33 million smallholder farmers, who manage 80% of the continent’s farmland and produce up to 80% of its food. Rather than being inefficient, small-scale agro-ecological farming offers numerous advantages: it is more labour-intensive, resilient to shocks, adaptable to local environments, and embedded in cultural and social life. Dismissing this sector in favour of large-scale, mechanised monocultures undermines food sovereignty, biodiversity, and rural employment.” Reads the Report.

The idea that industrial agriculture will lift millions out of poverty has not materialised. Instead, large-scale agribusiness projects have often concentrated land and wealth in the hands of elites and foreign investors. Job creation has been minimal, as modern farms rely heavily on machinery rather than human labour. Moreover, export-oriented agriculture prioritises global markets over local food security, leaving communities vulnerable to price fluctuations and shortages.

“The promise that agro-industrial expansion will create millions of decent jobs is historically and economically questionable. Agro-industrial models tend to displace labour through mechanisation and concentrate benefits in the hands of large companies. Most industrial agriculture jobs are seasonal, poorly paid, and insecure. In contrast, smallholder farming remains the primary source of employment across Africa, particularly for young people and women. The idea that technology-intensive farming will be a panacea for unemployment ignores the structural realities of African economies and the failures of previous industrialisation efforts.”

Additionally, the assumption that increasing yields and expanding markets will automatically improve food access overlooks the structural causes of food insecurity. People’s ability, particularly that of the poor and marginalised, to access nutritious food depends on land rights, income distribution, gender equity, and the functioning of political systems. In many countries, high agricultural productivity coexists with hunger and malnutrition because food systems are oriented towards export and profit rather than equitable distribution and local nourishment. It highlights the urgent need for equitable food distribution, making the audience more empathetic and aware of the issue.

Furthermore, technological fixes such as improved seeds, synthetic fertilizers, and irrigation are being promoted as solutions to Africa’s food insecurity, but evidence suggests otherwise. The Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA) spent over a decade pushing such technologies with little success; hunger actually increased in its target countries.

These high-input models overlook local ecological realities and structural inequalities, while increasing dependence on costly external inputs. As a result, smallholders often fall into debt and lose control over their own seeds and farming systems. It underscores the importance of understanding and respecting local ecological realities, making the audience feel more connected and responsible.

Africa is already experiencing an increased and accelerating squeeze on land due to competing demands including rapid population growth and urbanisation, Expansion of mining operations, especially for critical minerals like cobalt, lithium, and rare-earth elements, which are central to the global green transition, The proliferation of carbon-offset projects, often requiring vast tracts of land for afforestation or reforestation schemes that displace existing land users, Rising global demand for timber, which is increasing deforestation and land competition as well as Agricultural expansion for commodity crops, including large-scale plantations of palm oil, sugarcane, tobacco, and rubber.

“In East Africa, we see mass evictions, like the Maasai of Burunguru, forced from their ancestral territories in the name of conservation and tourism. In Central Africa, forests are cleared for mining of transitional minerals, destroying ecosystems and livelihoods. Women, a backbone of Africa’s food production, remain the most affected, and least consulted in decisions over land and resources and things that affect them.” Said Mariam Bassi Olsen from Friends of the Earth Nigeria, and a representative of the Alliance for Food Sovereignty in Africa.

The report urges a shift away from Africa’s high-tech, market-driven, land-intensive development model toward a just, sustainable, and locally grounded vision by promoting agroecology for food sovereignty, ecological renewal, and rural livelihoods, while reducing the need for land expansion through improved productivity, equitable food distribution, and reduced waste.

Additionally, a call is made for responsible urban planning, sustainable timber management, and reduced mineral demand through circular economies, as well as the legal recognition of customary land rights, especially for women and Indigenous peoples, and adherence to the principle of Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) for all land investments.

Continue Reading

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

Uganda’s Army is on the spot for forcibly grabbing land for families in Pangero Chiefdom in Nebbi district.

Published

on

By the Witness Radio team.

Despite the challenges, the community in Koch Parish, Nebbi Sub-County, in Nebbi District, near the Congolese border, has shown remarkable resilience. The Army seized approximately 100 acres of land, including private buildings, that members of the local Koch community had used for over 150 years to establish an Army barracks. Their resilience in the face of such a significant loss is genuinely inspiring.

The UPDF, as described on its website, is a nonpartisan force, national in character, patriotic, professional, disciplined, productive, and subordinate to the civilian authority as established under the constitution. Furthermore, it states that its primary interest is to protect Uganda and Africa at large, providing a safe and secure environment in which all Ugandan citizens can live and prosper.

However, according to a whistleblower, when the UPDF seized their land, no military chiefs offered prior communication, consultation, compensation, or resettlement. Instead, Uganda’s national Army only occupied people’s land forcefully, and not even the section commanders offered an official explanation.

“Citizens just woke up to a massive Army deployment in their fields,” wrote a whistleblower in an exchange with Witness Radio.

The occupied area in Koch Parish is not just a piece of land, but a home to the members of the Pangero chiefdom. This community belongs to the Alur kingdom, which spans north-western Congo and western Uganda, north of Lake Albert.

The reality and daily life of the Pangero community, which typically lives in a closely connected and communal manner, have been significantly impacted by the loss of both private and communal land. Not only is the cultural identity associated with land and community life at risk, but access to cultural sites, such as the graves of ancestors, is now denied.

Members of the local community who resisted the unlawful seizure of their land were reported to have been harassed and defamed. Despite these challenges, they continue to fight for their rights, making negotiations with the UPDF significantly more challenging.

Beyond the human suffering, the takeover also raises serious legal questions under Ugandan land law. Under Ugandan law, this action by the UPDF constitutes an illegal act. In principle, the government and, by extension, the Army are entitled to take over land if it is in the public interest, and are subject to fairly compensating the landowners.

However, this is subject to the condition that their intention is clearly communicated in advance and that negotiations take place with the previous residents, resulting in a mutual agreement on the necessary and appropriate compensation.

When faced with community resistance, the Army was compelled to conduct a survey and valuation of the land occupied by the UPDF in 2023 and 2024.  However, land defenders in the area claim that the process was marred by irregularities in some cases, against the will and in the absence of many landowners.

“The community was also pressured by the Koch Land Committee responsible for the review. Despite that it was supposed to represent the local population, it was not democratically elected by consensus, as is tradition in Alur communities, and was comprised of an imposed elite.” A local defender told Witness Radio

At an announcement meeting facilitated by officials from the UPDF Land Board, their national surveyor, and the Commander of Koch Army Barracks on September 19, 2025, community members were compelled to sign documents for meager compensation for land that had been seized five years prior.

“Residents whose land was surveyed before were given two choices: To sell their land to the Army by accepting the offered compensation, or to refuse the UPDF’s offer. In the latter case, however, it would be necessary to contact the Army headquarters in Mbuya, which is far away, to assert one’s claims or submit a petition.” Says another defender. Despite signing for this money, as of the writing of this article, the community claims it had never received it, almost two months later.

Mr Opio Okech, who attended the meeting himself, disapproves that this equates to a forced decision to sell, as the further necessary measures seem almost impossible for those affected without legal knowledge or external support.

“The problem here from the government was to enter upon the land, stay for long without adequate awareness creation, then decide we are going nowhere. Come for compensation. This looks, smells, and walks like a forceful eviction, “he mentions.

The effects of forced land acquisition by the UPDF in Koch Parish pose a high risk of home and landlessness, rises in youth criminality, and recurring poverty, primarily affecting women and children. Furthermore, the dispersal of the traditional community of the Pangero chiefdom is most likely to result in a severe loss of cultural heritage.

The Ugandan government has a duty here to look after the needs of this traditional community beyond compensation. This could include providing alternative land on which the traditional communal way of life could continue.

Witness Radio had not received a response from Army spokesperson Mr. Felix Kulayigye regarding the land grab, despite several attempts. However, since the initial takeover in 2020, another land grab by the same agency is looming in the same Kochi community for the expansion of the Army barracks.

According to sources, the UPDF intends to acquire more than 1,000 acres in total, nearly half of Koch Parish, leaving residents in fear and uncertainty.

“People are now panicking because they have heard speculations that more land is being

targeted for expansion. They are concerned about the impunity of the national Army, since the land that was grabbed five years ago has not been paid for, and now there are reports that more than 1,000 acres of community land are being targeted.” Mr. Okello further revealed.

The fate of the Pangero chiefdom is not an isolated case. Across Uganda, communal lands belonging to traditional clans and kingdoms continue to face similar threats from investors and state actors. Although Ugandan law recognizes customary ownership, enforcement often remains weak, and those affected rarely have access to the information or resources needed to defend their rights.

Continue Reading

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

Seed Sovereignty: Most existing and emerging laws and policies on seeds are endangering seed saving and conservation on the African continent.

Published

on

By the Witness Radio team

In Africa, farmers and civil society organizations are urgently warning about the adverse effects of existing policies on agrobiodiversity. These policies aim to erode centuries-old traditions of seed saving and exchange, effectively undermining seed sovereignty and intensifying dependency on commercial seed companies.

The struggle over seed sovereignty, particularly the rights of smallholder farmers, has become one of the most pressing issues for the continent’s agricultural future. As governments introduce new seed laws, such as the proposed East African Seed and Plant Varieties Act Bill of 2024, the preservation of cultural seeds and the rights of smallholder farmers are at stake.

The Communications and Advocacy Officer at Kenya’s Seed Savers Network, Tabitha Munyeri, notes that this has heightened monoculture, thereby significantly reducing the focus on indigenous plant varieties.

“There’s a lot of loss of agrobiodiversity with people focussing on a few foods, a few crops, leaving out so many other essential crops that have sustained humankind for generations and it is also important because it is coming at a time where we are having a lot of also conversations around different seed laws that are coming up for example within the EAC  we see that there is the seed and plant varieties bill of 2024 and we are looking at it as a huge setback and there is need for us to create awareness around even the policies that exist.”

She further argues that there is a need to raise awareness and sensitise farmers to the existing policies so that they can understand their effects on agrobiodiversity.

“Even for Kenya we have been having punitive seed laws for the longest time but now we are happy that courts of law are reviewing the law, but we still think that there is need to create a lot of advocacy around the seed laws and what they really mean to farmers because some of them do not understand, some of them are not even interested but once they get to know what it means and the impacts that the laws have on them then they are also able to become more vocal and more involved in the process.” She says.

Farmers in Africa have been the custodians of agricultural biodiversity, developing and maintaining numerous varieties of crops that are suited to local soils and climates. However, over the last few decades, the focus on farming has drastically declined to a handful of “high-yield” crops and imported hybrid varieties, leaving out the diverse indigenous seeds that have sustained communities through droughts, pests, and diseases.

Munyeri warns that this decline in agrobiodiversity is accelerating, driven not merely by market pressures, but by restrictive laws that criminalise and discourage traditional seed-saving practices.

In Kenya, where smallholder farmers supply more than 80 percent of the country’s food, seed systems have long depended on the informal exchange of seeds within communities. Small-hold farmers have relied on these systems to share, adapt, and innovate with seeds suited to their local conditions. However, existing laws have tended to favour the formal sector, requiring seed certification, variety registration, and compliance with intellectual property protections that most small-scale farmers cannot afford.

The 2024 Seed and Plant Varieties Act Bill, currently under discussion in several East African countries, has sparked significant controversy. It seeks to modernize agriculture and align national systems with international standards. However, smallholder farmers and critics contend that it allows corporate control over genetic resources, limiting farmers’ autonomy and threatening biodiversity. Under such a framework, only registered seed varieties can be legally traded or exchanged, effectively outlawing the informal seed networks that have sustained rural communities for centuries.

If smallholder farmers lose their rights to exchange and cultivate indigenous varieties, they may also lose control over their food systems. Dependence on improved seeds necessitates purchasing new stock each planting season, eroding self-reliance and increasing vulnerability to market fluctuations.

This awareness gap is what the Seed Savers Network hopes to address. Through training programs and advocacy initiatives, including its recently concluded regional boot camp, the organization equips participants from across Africa with knowledge about seed laws, biodiversity, and policy engagement.

Continue Reading

Resource Center

Legal Framework

READ BY CATEGORY

Facebook

Newsletter

Subscribe to Witness Radio's newsletter



Trending

Subscribe to Witness Radio's newsletter