Connect with us

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

The African Development Bank and the Tree Plantations Industry

Published

on

“Plantations are not forests”, members of communities from Zambezia province, in Mozambique.

In June 2019, the report “Towards Large-Scale Commercial Investment in African Forestry,”
(1) made a call to development-funding agencies, mainly from Europe, and the World Bank,
to provide aid money to a new Fund for financing 100,000 hectares of (new) industrial tree
plantations, to support the potential development of 500,000 hectares, in Eastern and
Southern Africa. This money, according to the report, would be crucial for private investors to
generate profits from the plantations. The new Fund would be headquartered in the tax
haven of Mauritius.
The African Development Bank (AfDB) and WWF Kenya produced this report with funding
from the World Bank’s Climate Investment Funds. The purpose of the report is to assist the
AfDB “in evaluating and designing alternative private funding models for commercial forestry
in Africa with a view to ultimately establishing, or aiding the establishment of, a specialized
investment vehicle for commercial forestry plantations.” The report declares that the
development agencies from Finland, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Iceland, the United
Kingdom and The Netherlands are interested.
Essentially, the report is a praise to industrial monoculture plantations. It repeats, without
providing any evidence, most of the deceiving arguments that plantations companies use in
their propagandas to cover up the impacts of this devastating industry. The report’s focus is
on outlining the possible financial instruments that would attract companies to this region and
make their investments most profitable.
The report identifies “readily available projects with the potential to establish almost 500,000
ha of new forest (sic) on about 1 million ha of landscape, not including areas that existing
companies and developers are already planning to use for own expansion. It also excludes
early stage or speculative projects.” (italics added) In particular, the report identifies “viable
plantation land” in ten countries: Angola, Republic of Congo, Ghana, Mozambique, Malawi,
South Sudan, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia and Zimbabwe.

The report further affirms that “Africa may be positioned to have the most profitable
afforestation potential worldwide.” And, then, it goes into explaining the possible investment
schemes that can make profit-oriented business and afforestation objectives (from climate or
voluntary targets) to be aligned and, thus, generate more profits for shareholders.
None of the pages in the report mention, however, not even indirectly, the overwhelming
amount of information that evidences the many negative impacts that industrial plantations
cause to communities and their environments. The report’s authors chose to ignore
plantations companies’ destruction of forests and savannahs; erosion of soils; contamination
and dry-up of water sources; overall violence inflicted on communities which include
restriction of movement, criminalization when resistance emerges, abuse, harassment and
sexual violence in particular to women and girls; destruction of livelihoods and food
sovereignty; destruction of cultural, spiritual and social fabrics within and among
neighbouring communities; few precarious and hazardous jobs; unfulfilled “social” projects or
promises made to communities; destruction of ways of living; rise in HIV/AIDS; and the list
goes on.

In front of this, on September 21, 2020, the International Day of Struggle against
Monoculture Plantations, 121 organisations from 47 countries and 730 members from
different rural communities in Mozambique that are facing industrial tree plantations,
disseminated an open letter to demand the immediate abandonment of any and every
afforestation programme based on large-scale monoculture plantations. (2)
The report, nonetheless, brags about having used a “sector-wide consultation exercise.”
For the authors, the sector includes “industry participants ranging from investors, industrial
players, and Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) through to forestry fund managers
(…) To further enrich and triangulate inputs to the study, the team also participated in three
forestry industry events and consulted with a broad range of personal contacts in the sector.”
The report also mentions consultations made to Development Finance Institutions and
agencies as well as oil and other industrial companies. It is clear however how communities
living in or around the almost 500,000 hectares of land identified to be transformed into
industrial monocultures, are not considered part of the sector. Nor were considered the many
communities and groups that have been resisting for decades the plantations in the countries
the report use as examples: Tanzania, Mozambique, Ghana and Brazil. (3)
The report further sustains that the NGO Conservation International confirmed “that it sees
potential in associating large global businesses with the forestry sector.” It further mentions
WWF and The Nature Conservancy – namely, the same category of NGOs mainly concerned
on promoting programs and policies that are aligned with corporate interests as an easy way
to keep their funding, projects and investments.
The purely financial focus of this report, with an eye on how to make most profits, should not
come as a surprise though. It was prepared by a company called Acacia Sustainable
Business Advisors (4), which was set up by Martin Poulsen, a development banker active in
rising private Equity Funds particularly in Africa. Equity Funds try to offer big returns by
spreading investments across companies from different sectors. (5) One co-author of the
report was Mads Asprem, the ex-director of Green Resources, a Norwegian industrial tree
plantation and carbon offsets company. Green Resources’ tree plantations in Mozambique,
Tanzania, and Uganda have resulted in land grabs, evictions, loss of livelihoods and
increased hunger for local communities. (6)

The report also shows the possible responses that investors could have to potential
“barriers”. One “structural barrier” identified is called “stakeholder relations,” a very vague
concept that seems to be related to possible conflicts with communities living in or around
the plantation projects. The term “conflicts” however is not mentioned once in the whole
report. The recommended response to this “barrier” is to “Use AfDB or other MDB
[Multilateral Development Bank] “honest broker” profile to convene stakeholders.” So it
seems that the strategy is to use development banks to make communities believe that the
project has the intention of improving (developing) people’s lives. Another “structural barrier”
identified in the report is “land tenure challenges,” to which the recommended response is to
“Follow FSC and other best practices.” This, of course, is recommended despite the vast
amount of information that shows how, in practice, FSC certifies as “sustainable” industrial
tree plantations that destroy peoples’ livelihoods.
When the climate and development agendas blend for profit
It is relevant to underline how the report makes use of the Sustainable Development Goals
(SDG) and the need for climate change mitigation and adaptation in the African region to
promote the further expansion of industrial plantations. It goes as far as to conclude that
“Channelling financial resources to such efforts [afforestation in the framework of the SDGs]
is within the mandate of international development organizations and special climate funds.”
The report also states that “preliminary interviews yielded information that some oil
companies are already forming alliances with sustainable forestry investment companies.”
This despite the fact that oil and gas companies are a fundamental driver of climate change,
which would undermine any possible positive outcome for the climate. Besides, these
‘alliances’ also give these companies an easy way out of any responsibility for their business
operations. This is clearly exemplified with the announcement of oil giant companies, such as
Italian ENI and Anglo-Dutch Shell, to invest in mega tree plantation projects to supposedly
“compensate” their mega levels of pollution they provoke. These two companies are
responsible for environmental disasters and crimes as a result of their fossil fuel activities in
many places across the globe. (7)
The African Development Bank is complicit in this strategy. While the Bank finances this
report encouraging the expansion of industrial plantations in Africa as a climate solution, it
finances in Mozambique a new gas extraction mega-project in the Cabo Delgado province,
undertaken by a consortium of companies including ENI.
This report is one more proof of how investments from profit-seeking corporations are put in
front of the social well being of people in the name of development and now also of
addressing climate change. There is no “unused” or “degraded” land available at the scale
proposed, which means countless people in Africa will be directly and indirectly affected if
this expansion plan materialise.
Another relevant omission of the report is how it bluntly assumes that the current scarcity of
investment in large-scale tree plantations in this African region is due to the few investment
opportunities available. However, the communities and groups on the ground organizing
almost on a daily basis to oppose the seizing of their lands and lives by these plantations
companies, have clear that their resistance has been successful to halt the expansion of
these plantations in many places. And as the open letter launched on September 21st said,

communities around the world “will certainly resist this new and insane expansion plan
proposed in the AfDB and WWF-Kenya.”

(1) AfDB, CIF, WWF, Acacia Sustainable, Towards large-scale investment in African forestry, 2019,
http://redd-monitor.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/towards_largescale_
commercial_investment_in_african_forestry.pdf
(2) 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, 2020,
https://wrm.org.uy/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/carta-con-firmas-en-inglés_upd201008.pdf
(3) See more information on resistance struggles against plantations here: https://wrm.org.uy/browseby-
subject/international-movement-building/local-struggles-against-plantations/
(4) Acacia Sustainable Business Advisors, https://www.acaciasba.com/about
(5) Groww, Equity Mutual Funds, https://groww.in/p/equity-funds/
(6) REDD-Monitor, How WWF and the African Development Bank are promoting lang grabs in Africa,
2020, https://redd-monitor.org/2020/09/22/international-day-of-struggle-against-monoculture-treeplantations-
how-wwf-and-the-african-development-bank-are-promoting-land-grabs-in-africa/ ; The
Expansion of Tree Plantations on Peasant Territories in the Nacala Territories: Green Resources in
Mozambique, 2018, https://wrm.org.uy/articles-from-the-wrm-bulletin/recommended/the-expansion-oftree-
plantations-on-peasant-territories-in-the-nacala-corridor-green-resources-in-mozambique/ ; WRM
bulletin, Green Resources Mozambique: More False Promises! 2018, https://wrm.org.uy/articles-fromthe-
wrm-bulletin/section1/green-resources-mozambique-more-false-promises/ ; WRM bulletin, Carbon
Colonialism: Failure of Green Resources’ Carbon Offset Project in Uganda, 2018,
https://wrm.org.uy/articles-from-the-wrm-bulletin/section1/carbon-colonialism-failure-of-greenresources-
carbon-offset-project-in-uganda/ ; WRM bulletin, Tanzania: Community resistance against
monoculture tree plantations, 2018,
https://wrm.org.uy/articles-from-the-wrm-bulletin/section1/tanzania-community-resistance-againstmonoculture-
tree-plantations/ ; and WRM bulletin, The farce of “Smart forestry”: The cases of Green
Resources in Mozambique and Suzano in Brazil, 2015, https://wrm.org.uy/articles-from-the-wrmbulletin/
section1/the-farce-of-smart-forestry-the-cases-of-green-resources-in-mozambique-andsuzano-
in-brazil/
(7) REDD-Monitor, NGOs oppose the oil industry’s Natural Climate Solutions and demand that ENI
and Shell keep fossil fuels in the ground, 2019, https://wrm.org.uy/other-relevant-information/ngosoppose-
the-oil-industrys-natural-climate-solutions-and-demand-that-eni-and-shell-keep-fossil-fuels-in the-
ground /
WRM Bulletin

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

Witness Radio and Seed Savers Network are partnering to produce radio content to save indigenous seeds in Africa.

Published

on

By Witness Radio team.

Across Africa, indigenous seeds are vital, climate-resilient, and culturally significant resources that smallholder farmers deeply value for biodiversity and food sovereignty.

Today, however, these traditional seed systems face threats from commercial seed interests, restrictive laws, and policies that may impact farmers’ rights. Addressing these concerns directly can help farmers understand how the program supports their legal and cultural rights.

In response to this growing challenge, Witness Radio Uganda, in partnership with the Seed Savers Network (SSN) in Kenya, is launching a radio broadcast titled “The Struggle to Save Cultural Seeds in Africa.”

Witness Radio and Seed Savers in Africa aim to use the radio as a tool to organize, mobilize, and empower smallholder farmers across Africa and beyond.

Food production and consumption patterns in Africa have changed significantly since the pre-colonial era. The gradual introduction of exotic crops, the establishment of settler farms on land seized from local communities, and the shift from agroecological practices to agrochemical-dependent and mechanized agriculture have disrupted indigenous food systems.

While agribusinesses continue to generate profits, research by civil society organizations shows that these models have contributed to soil degradation, biodiversity loss, widening inequalities through land grabbing, and increased vulnerability among smallholder farmers. These historical disruptions have laid the groundwork for modern policies that further marginalize farmer-managed seed systems.

The struggle to save indigenous seeds affirms farmers’ rights to control their seeds and farming knowledge, empowering smallholder farmers to protect their food security and cultural heritage.

In 2025, the East African Community (EAC) Seed and Plant Varieties Draft Bill threatened farmers’ rights by criminalizing traditional seed practices and favoring multinational companies. This situation should motivate policymakers and community leaders to stand for farmers’ rights and food sovereignty.

In response to this emergency, it is critical to close this gap by placing smallholder farmers, Africa’s largest food producers, at the center of seed and food systems. This radio program draws inspiration from the 2025 Seed Savers Boot Camp organized by the Seed Savers Network Kenya. Held in Gilgil, Nakuru County, from the last week of October to the first week of November last year, the boot camp brought together farmers and civil society leaders from across Africa for hands-on training and learning exchanges.

Participants explored seed conservation methods and shared knowledge, fostering a movement that builds community resilience and revives traditional farming systems.

Witness Radio participated in this gathering alongside farmers, reinforcing a shared commitment to strengthening community resilience and farmer-led food systems across Africa.

This broadcast launches a new series from Witness Radio and the Seed Savers Network to raise awareness of seed saving and food sovereignty, offering practical tips and resources for farmers to actively participate in safeguarding farmer-managed seeds.

The live program will feature voices from across the continent, including Atim Robert Anaab from Trax Ghana and The Beela Project, who works to strengthen indigenous seed systems in Ghana’s Upper East and North East Regions. Other guests include June Bartuin, Executive Director of Indigenous Peoples for Peace and Climate Justice in Kenya, and Priscilla Nakato, Chairperson of the Informal Alliance for Communities Affected by Irresponsible Land-Based Investments in Uganda.

Together, the speakers will reflect on what motivated them to join the Seed Savers Boot Camp, what they learned, the current state of seed sovereignty in their countries, and how they are applying this knowledge within their communities.

The goal is to show how insights from the Seed Savers Boot Camp translate into tangible actions, inspiring farmers and policymakers to protect indigenous seeds for food sovereignty and climate resilience.

The program will air live on Witness Radio tomorrow, Thursday at 3:00 pm EAT, accessible via the Witness Radio App or online via www.witnessradio.org or https://radio.witnessradio.org/. to maximize reach and participation.

Continue Reading

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

Evicted from their land to host Refugees: A case of Uganda’s Kyangwali refugee settlement expansion, which left host communities landless.

Published

on

By Witness Radio team.

As Uganda continues to host more refugees than almost any other country in Africa, displaced residents in Kikuube are still waiting for accountability, restitution, and the chance to live with dignity once again. This ongoing struggle should stir feelings of compassion and urgency in the audience.

More than 60,000 people occupying 9323.96 hectares (36 square miles) were displaced from villages, including Bukinda A and B, Bukinda II, Kavule, Bwizibwera A and B, Kyeya A and B, Nyaruhanga, Kabirizi, Nyamigisa A and B, Katoma, and others in Kasonga parish, Kyangwali sub-county.

The violent forced land evictions in Kyangwali date back more than a decade. Beginning in September 2013, masterminded by officials from the Office of the Prime Minister (OPM), led by the Principal Resettlement Officer Charles Bafaki, backed by the Uganda Police Force and the Uganda People’s Defence Forces (UPDF). The OPM office claimed that the contested land had been gazetted for refugee settlement, a claim former refugee host communities refute, saying they are bona fide landowners.

According to evidence seen by the Witness Radio team, most of the evictees were born on the land from the 1950s to the date they were illegally evicted.

According to Uganda’s Land Act, a bona fide occupant is a person who, before the 1995 Constitution, had occupied land unchallenged for 12 years or more, or was settled by the government. Clarifying these legal standards can help the public and policymakers understand the legal basis of land claims and potential violations.

According to the UN Refugee Agency, by the end of 2024, Uganda was hosting approximately 1.8 million refugees and asylum-seekers – the largest refugee population in Africa – reflecting a 10% increase from the previous year. The majority were from South Sudan (57%) and DRC (31%), with smaller populations from Somalia, Burundi, Eritrea, Rwanda, Sudan, and Ethiopia. Women and children made up 80% of the refugee population.

In Butyamba village, along the Hoima-Kagadi Road in Kikuube District in Western Uganda, is an informal settlement of fragile, makeshift houses that stretches across a single acre of land. It hosts over 500 people, including evictees. It’s packed tightly together, their shelters built from tarpaulins, scrap wood, and other grass thatched.

The residents, who have camped in the area since 2023, were once landowners in Bukinda and Katikala. Now, they are landless and struggling after an illegal land eviction for the expansion of the Kyangwali refugee settlement, one of Uganda’s largest refugee-hosting areas.

For many here, life changed abruptly in 2013, followed by another series of forced land evictions in 2020, at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic.

“I became a refugee in my own country,” an elderly Kabulala Oliver struggles to hold back tears as she recalls the forced land eviction that shattered her life and the lives of other members of her family.

Kabulala is among the over 60,000 people evicted from 30 villages in Bukinda, Kyangwali Sub-county. We found her together with others at the informal camp.

“When we were evicted from our land, we camped at the Kikuube Resident District Commissioner (RDC)’s premises, but this was short-lived, and we were chased away. Later, we were given this small piece of land by an area member of parliament, Hon. Natumanya,” she says.

What pains her most, she says, is that she was displaced to make room for refugees, only to become displaced herself. 

“I am a Munyoro. I had lived on my land for decades. “Why should I be evicted because the government wants land for refugees? This is total impunity where the poor are not counted as humans.” Kabulala asks?

She now lives in a small makeshift shelter with a family of 13. With no land to cultivate, survival has become a daily struggle.

“My land was taken. We have nowhere to farm. We are starving every day. Children ask for food, and I don’t know where to get it. We drink dirty water,” she says. 

Kabulala belongs to the Bunyoro tribe, which is constitutionally recognised as one of Uganda’s 56 indigenous communities.

The affected communities say they were never notified about the eviction or given meaningful consultation. According to Ahumuza and other witnesses, armed security personnel arrived in trucks, firing bullets, beating residents, and demolishing homes.

“In August 2013, OPM officials came and told us we had three hours to leave the land, which people had lived on for decades. They treated us like rebels. They beat people and destroyed all properties worth billions of Shillings, which forced people to scatter in all directions. After three days, refugees were ferried in and settled in our gardens where food was still growing.”

Ahumuza Businge, chairperson of the Internally Displaced Youth in Bukinda and Katikala. recalls 

After the eviction, many families fled to Kyangwali sub-county headquarters, seeking refuge. Others later settled in an Internally Displaced Persons (IDP) camp in Butyamba, near Kiziranfumbi town, an area with no permanent services, such as water, toilets, and other essentials.

“You can also see how people are suffering. When our loved ones die, we have nowhere to bury them. Children don’t go to school. People die every day because there is no food, there is no water, and our temporary toilets are almost full,” Mbambali Fred, a former resident of Bukinda, whose land was also taken despite having a lease title, told Witness Radio. 

Mbambali says his land was grabbed at gunpoint and misused. “I had a land title, but my land was forcefully taken and used to settle people who are not even refugees. Part of it is hired out for maize farming while I, the land owner, suffer.” He added.

In 2020, during the COVID-19 lockdown, the same government security forces forcefully evicted another group of more than 20,000 people from 1812.99 hectares (7 square miles) of land. Victims revealed that security forces sealed off their area under the pretext of a disease outbreak. Journalists and political leaders were barred, and evictions resumed quietly.

According to the ministry responsible for lands, housing, and urban development’s then guidelines, during COVID-19, no land evictions were to take place. On April 16th, 2020, the government of Uganda, through the Ministry of Lands, ordered a halt to all land evictions during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. The same ministry directed all local governments and security agencies to enforce the order, but the OPM disregarded it. 

Today, many of the evictees live in IDPs who are framed as encroachers on their land, landless, impoverished, and dependent on casual labor. Unable to farm, families struggle to feed themselves, educate their children, or rebuild their lives.

Thirteen years after the first eviction, the affected communities say they have reached out to all concerned offices, including the president’s office, for justice, but in vain.

“The land was our life. Without it, we are nothing.” Mbambali reacts

Continue Reading

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

Women environmental rights defenders in Africa are at the most significant risk of threats and attacks – ALLIED New report

Published

on

By Witness Radio Team

As land and environmental rights defenders face ongoing threats for protecting community land and territories affected by development projects, a new trend shows attacks increasingly targeting women defenders.

According to the latest research report by Natural Justice, based on data from the ALLIED Coalition, women land and environmental defenders accounted for 6% of all documented cases between 2022 and 2025.

In its recent report titled ‘The Situation of Women Environmental & Human Rights Defenders Across Africa,’ released in December 2025, a total of 261 attacks targeting land and environmental rights defenders across all countries since 2022 were recorded, highlighting the urgent need for policy change to protect women defenders better better better and sustain their vital roles.

“Across Africa, women environmental and human rights defenders (WEHRDs) are standing at the frontlines of the fight for land, water, and climate justice, and they are paying a steep price for their courage. From Kenya to the DRC, Uganda to South Africa, women activists confront not only repression but also deeply rooted patriarchal norms,” the report reads, aiming to inspire resilience and collective action.

Mary Mwangi, a land and environmental rights defender in Kenya, has been arrested more than eight times since 2020 for defending her community along Kenya’s coast against pollution, caused mainly by industries operating along the Mombasa highway in Nairobi.

“I’ve been facing numerous trumped-up charges since 2020 by the state on behalf of a private oil recycling company. The company is located right in the middle of a residential area where around 2,000 people live,” the woman defender reveals.

According to her testimony, the company began operations in 2019 without following due process and in violation of Kenya’s Environmental Management and Coordination Act. The company’s activities, including the delivery of used oil, its pre-treatment, and its refining into specific products, have had severe negative environmental impacts on residents.

“I was one of the residents who raised environmental concerns with company management, but no action was taken. The plant was operating against the will of the people, as there was no public participation in its development. Toxic gases were produced, endangering both human and livestock health and lives. The plant releases sulphuric acid, which is highly corrosive and has caused severe skin burns within the community,” she adds.

According to Mwangi, instead of addressing the concerns raised, the company’s response has been brutal, extending to her family and several community members through harassment, intimidation, arrests, and trumped-up charges.

“The company management conspired with local police in a series of harassment and intimidation campaigns that resulted in arrests and fabricated charges targeting residents, particularly families championing community rights. I was among the first to be targeted because I mobilised the community. There are currently four cases in court involving me, my family, my husband and children, and a few community members supporting this struggle.”

Beyond the legal harassment, Mwangi says her movements have been restricted, and she continues to face threats to her life.

“I cannot move freely because my movements are being monitored by company management. The biggest threat I face now is fear for my life and that of my family. There are compelling individuals within government who have openly shown they will stop at nothing,” she says.

Such conditions, once more commonly faced by male defenders, are increasingly affecting women as well. Mary is not alone; many other female defenders are falling prey to powerful multinational corporations and governments intent on grabbing community land for harmful projects.

Women defenders face disproportionate risks, including gender-based violence, criminalisation, intimidation, and exclusion from decision-making processes. Despite their critical contributions, their experiences of WEHRDs are often overlooked, their voices sidelined, and their struggles underreported.

“They endure smear campaigns, sexual violence, online abuse, and many other abuses for daring to challenge power. Many are targeted precisely because they are women, with their gender weaponized to silence their voices and discredit their leadership,” the report adds, emphasizing the threats women defenders face and the need for protective measures.

According to ALLIED Coalition data, of the 261 attacks reported, 18 targeted women, compared to 88 against men, with 70 cases categorized as unknown or unspecified, emphasizing the urgent need for protective measures for women defenders and a clearer understanding of the scale of the crisis.

Uganda—often referred to as the Pearl of Africa—has emerged as a hazardous zone. The report shows that 94 cases were reported from Uganda, followed by the Democratic Republic of Congo and Tanzania, each accounting for around 15% of attacks, with 35 and 34 cases, respectively.

“Environmental activists have been particularly targeted by the Ugandan government, with the most high-profile cases involving protests against the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP).

Physical attacks and threats against environmental human rights defenders have escalated, with no indication they will subside. These acts are perpetrated by both government officials and representatives of oil companies,” the report notes.

The most frequent category of attacks recorded was “threats or other harassment” (33 cases or 18%), indicating sustained intimidation short of overt violence. Arbitrary arrest or detention accounted for 16 cases (9%), physical attacks for 15 cases (8%), and death threats for 13 cases (7%), underscoring the persistence of criminalisation and direct violence. A smaller number of entries (9 cases or 5%) involved non-violation-related support such as solidarity or medical aid, suggesting limited preventive or recovery-oriented interventions.

A third of the cases were linked to the fossil fuel industry (oil and gas), with mining and energy accounting for 25 and 23 attacks, respectively.

Across Africa, land continues to be targeted by corporate interests from the West, often branding themselves as developers or job creators. African governments, in turn, allocate vast tracts of land to these companies, much of it traditionally used by Indigenous or local communities.

For years, the continent has been shaped by the misleading narrative that Africa possesses vast, vacant, or underutilised land awaiting transformation into industrial farms or profitable carbon markets.

However, a 2025 report by the Alliance for Food Sovereignty in Africa (AFSA), Land Availability and Land-Use Changes in Africa, dismissed this narrative. Drawing on satellite data, field research, and interviews with farmers across the continent, the study revealed that Africa’s landscapes are far from empty.

“Much of the land labelled as ‘underutilised’ is, in fact, used for grazing, shifting cultivation, gathering wild foods, spiritual practices, or forms part of ecologically significant systems such as forests, wetlands, or savannahs,” the report stated.

In conclusion, the Natural Justice report calls on African states to recognise and protect WEHRDs by adopting national laws and policies that explicitly acknowledge their role and the state’s duty to protect them. This includes meaningful consultation with civil society and alignment with the UN Declaration on Human Rights Defenders and the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights.

It further calls on African governments to tackle the drivers of harm against WEHRDs by protecting land and environmental rights, ending criminalisation and harassment, and preventing and addressing gender-based threats and violence. Ensuring the recognition and protection of women defenders and their communities remains critical.

Despite the stress and fatigue caused by her work, Mary Mwangi remains committed to the struggle.

“I will continue the work and try new strategies. We are considering organising and implementing projects around environmental rights as a tool for environmental justice. If communities are well sensitised and understand their rights, they may support the struggle. That would also help reduce the risks faced by my family,” she concludes.

Continue Reading

Resource Center

Legal Framework

READ BY CATEGORY

Facebook

Newsletter

Subscribe to Witness Radio's newsletter



Trending

Subscribe to Witness Radio's newsletter