Connect with us

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

The African Development Bank and the Tree Plantations Industry

Published

5 years ago

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

Related posts:

Monoculture tree plantations are a false climate solution The enduring legacy of a little-known World Bank project to secure African plantations for European billionaires Witness Radio – Uganda, Community members from Mozambique and other organizations around the world say NO to more industrial tree plantations CSOs to African Development Bank: Don’t fund EACOP Open letter to African Development Bank and Nordic Development Fund: Address reprisals against Paten Clan
Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

Despite harsh repression, opposition to the EACOP pipeline in Uganda remains strong

Published

1 week ago

on

June 12, 2025

By

On March 19, 2025, student members of the Justice Movement Uganda, including Ibrahim Mpiima (left), protest in the streets of Kampala against the EACOP oil project and its consequences for the climate and local populations. (Bruce Nahabwe)

“We will keep protesting until our demands are met. This project isn’t sustainable. The world is moving towards renewable energy, and Uganda should follow suit,” says Ibrahim Mpiima, team leader of Justice Movement Uganda, a student-led protest group of around a hundred members opposing the East African Crude Oil Pipeline Project (EACOP)—the world’s longest heated oil pipeline.

“We protest whenever we can. The only thing holding us back is money. But as soon as we raise enough, we make banners, buy disposable mobile phones, secure safe houses in case things go wrong—and then we go.” This local group is part of a broader movement, StopEACOP, a coalition of international NGOs that joined forces “for greater solidarity, visibility and funding,” explains the student from Kyambogo University in Kampala.

Despite all the precautions taken by Ibrahim Mpiima and around 30 of his fellow students, he was arrested at the demonstration on 19 March. Taken by force with three other activists to the capital’s high-security prison, he was beaten and tortured before ultimately being released on 3 April. In a story published on social media, Mpiima also accuses security agents of raping him during his detention.

Martha Amviko, an activist with Extinction Rebellion, was also at the protest. “We wanted to march to Parliament to hand in our petition demanding an end to the project. But no sooner had we unfurled our banners than the police appeared. I managed to escape, but not everyone was so lucky. Once they take you away in the police vans, you know you’re going to be badly beaten. The violence is systematic.”

Although protests began several years ago, over the past year around 100 people have been arrested and threatened with prosecution in Uganda for taking part in peaceful demonstrations against oil projects backed by the government.

The EACOP pipeline is expected to stretch approximately 1,400 kilometres, running from Murchison Falls National Park in Uganda to the port of Tanga in Tanzania. It will transport oil from 400 wells in the Tilenga and Kingfisher fields to the coast, where it can be exported to international markets. An estimated 246,000 barrels of oil are expected to flow through the pipeline each day over its projected 25-year operational lifespan.

Presented to the public as opportunities for development, these projects are backed by the governments of Uganda and Tanzania, along with oil giants TotalEnergies and China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC). Initially estimated at US$3.5 billion in 2020, costs have continued to climb. Both countries hope the pipeline will generate substantial revenue and create jobs, both during construction and for ongoing maintenance of the infrastructure.

In a country like Uganda, where per capita income is around US$1,000 per year, the government is banking on oil wealth to lift the nation out of poverty. “We believe this will serve as a catalyst for economic growth,” said Robert Kasande, an official at Uganda’s Ministry of Energy, during the signing ceremony in 2021.

The human cost of pipeline construction

On the ground, however, some residents are facing serious disruptions to their lives and livelihoods. One of them is Geoffrey Byakagaba, a 45-year-old farmer and father of eight, who was stripped of part of his land to make way for the project. “In 2017, Total took ownership of our land in the village. There were several types of compensation on offer. I chose the ‘land for land’ option. They took my land, but to this day, I haven’t been compensated,” he says.

Byakagaba still lives in Kasenyi, in Uganda’s Buliisa district, where the town is currently preparing to host a processing plant for the Tilenga project. He says his standard of living has dropped significantly. “Before the project, I used to grow cassava and sweet potatoes. We ate what we needed and sold the rest. I had 20 to 25 animals—cows and goats. Today, I’m down to just about ten, and my harvest barely feeds the family.”

Due to this loss of income, Byakagaba had to move his children to different schools. “They’re still in school, but in neighbourhoods we’re not happy with.” Since then, he has been surviving by doing odd jobs and selling what he catches fishing. Still, compared to other residents of Kasenyi, he considers himself fortunate. “Luckily, I didn’t live on the land I farmed, so I still have somewhere to stay. That’s not the case for everyone.” He adds: “And I didn’t accept their money. Total’s compensation would never have allowed me to buy land. They offered just 3.5 million shillings per hectare [around €850], but today, buying a hectare around here costs between 10 and 15 million [€2,500 to €3,500]. I would have been ruined. Some people were.”

Geoffrey Byakagaba is the fifth generation of his family to live on this land. For him, it holds far more than just market value.

“This is where I grew up. I inherited nine hectares from my parents, but now I have less than half of that left. If I were to die today, my children would be landless. I’m not just fighting for my rights, but also to leave something behind for my children.”

In April 2021, frustrated by the situation, he decided to file a land-grabbing lawsuit in the High Court of Masindi, seeking fair compensation from the developers of the EACOP project. As he told Equal Times, he was soon labelled a saboteur—not only by the project’s backers but also by the Ugandan authorities—for daring to protest and for speaking to Italian journalist Federica Marsi. Marsi was arrested shortly thereafter, along with Ugandan human rights defender Maxwell Atuhura.

As of 2025, according to Geoffroy Byakagaba, the situation remains unchanged and he is still waiting for compensation. He is not alone. Byakagaba is one of an estimated 118,000 people who have been fully or partially displaced due to the Tilenga and EACOP projects.

One of them is the grandmother of activist Ibrahim Mpiima. “She was evicted from her land in Hoima, so she came to live with us in Kampala. With the compensation she received, she couldn’t afford to buy any land. Because of that, she never felt at peace. And now she has passed away,” says the young man. It was this experience that prompted him to get involved in the campaign against the project while still a student. “At the time, I didn’t know much about EACOP, but seeing what happened to my grandmother made me want to understand it better. Then I realised that most people know nothing about the project or its consequences. Some even believe it’s a development scheme that will lift Uganda out of poverty—when in reality, huge numbers of people have lost their land. We have to fight this misinformation,” he says angrily.

Opponents of the project face harsh repression

Even before the project was officially approved, anti-EACOP mobilisation had already begun to take shape nationally. The movement went global in 2018, coinciding with the major student protests led by Fridays For Future. The world began to take notice of EACOP and its alarming scale—the fifteen protected areas that it will cut through, its proximity to the Great Lakes (Lake Albert and Lake Victoria), one of Africa’s most important sources of fresh water, and its massive projected carbon footprint: 34 million tonnes of CO² per year, compared to Uganda’s annual emissions of just 5 million tonnes. All these reasons have led scientists to describe the project as a ‘carbon bomb’.

In Uganda, authorities have responded in a press release issued by the Ugandan oil authority by describing the international protest movement #StopEacop as a misguided opposition movement bordering on racism and colonialism. According to an investigation by the British media outlet DeSmog, TotalEnergies reportedly hired a South African public relations agency to “squash all the negative PR” surrounding the oil projects. To achieve this, a full-scale campaign has been launched both on the streets and across social media.

For Dickens Kamugisha, CEO of the non-profit AFIEGO (Africa Institute for Energy Governance), which has been tracking the EACOP case for years, this comes as no surprise. “Unfortunately, we have both a weak judicial system and a government that uses the police to punish community members who speak out. Many people have been arrested, intimidated and imprisoned.”

“Here, if you oppose what the government and the company (TotalEnergies, editor’s note) are doing, you become the enemy. And once you’re in their sights, you have to face the consequences.”

Ibrahim Mpiima has always been aware of the risks, having already been arrested once in 2023. “It’s our responsibility. I’m afraid of ending up in prison, of being beaten. I’m really afraid. But if we, the people who are informed, don’t protest, then we will have betrayed all those who believe in us,” he told Equal Times a few days before the demonstrations in March. Reached again by phone after his release from detention, where he endured torture, he said the ordeal had taken its toll: “I feel depressed. I haven’t fully recovered physically or mentally. The feeling is still fresh in my mind, as if it happened yesterday.”

Martha Amviko was also arrested in August 2024 and spent two weeks in prison. “They took us to Luzira, the high-security prison. They put me in the same cell as criminals, people who had committed murder, even though I was being charged with disturbing the public order,” she recalls. “It was overcrowded. From time to time, the guards would call us into their offices where they beat us and did everything to break our spirit.” Despite this ordeal, she insists, “I’d rather die than leave things as they are today. The people building this pipeline will be dead in 20 to 30 years. We are the generation who will have to live with their decisions—us and our children. We cannot give up the fight.”

Indeed, on 23 April, despite the ongoing repression, another demonstration was held in Kampala. Eleven activists were arrested. At the time of writing, they remain behind bars in Luzira high-security prison.

This article has been translated from French by Brandon Johnson

Related posts:

EACOP activism under Siege: Activists are reportedly criminalized for opposing oil pipeline project in Uganda. EACOP Partners With Surveyors Body as Pipeline Land Acquisition Nears Completion. EACOP: Another community of 80 households has lost its land to the government and Total Energies to construct an oil pipeline. A reference filed by CSOs against the planned construction of the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP) is set for hearing. EACOP: Uganda sues to evict landowners standing in way of regional pipeline
Continue Reading

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

Uganda’s top Lands Ministry official has been arrested and charged with Corruption and Abuse of Office, a significant event that will have far-reaching implications for land governance in the country.

Published

2 weeks ago

on

June 6, 2025

By

By Witness Radio team.

Kampala, Uganda – The commissioner of Land Registration from Uganda’s Ministry of Lands Housing and Urban Development, Mr. Baker Mugaino, has been arrested and charged before the Anti-Corruption Court, Witness Radio has learned.

Mugaino was arrested by officers from the Office of the Inspectorate of Government (IG) on Wednesday, June 4th, and arraigned before the Anti-Corruption Court, where he was charged with corruption and abuse of office. He pleaded not guilty before Chief Magistrate Rachael Nakyaze.

This development confirms findings from numerous reports and investigations by Witness Radio, a leading watchdog for land and environmental rights in Uganda. Witness Radio, through its extensive research and investigative work, has been at the forefront of uncovering systemic corruption and the misuse of authority, particularly within Uganda’s land administration institutions, which continue to fuel land-related injustices, especially against vulnerable and impoverished communities.

The arrest comes at a critical time when the country is experiencing a surge in land grabs, many of which are tied to fraudulent land dealings, title cancellations, double titling, and land transfers facilitated by compromised officials. This is an urgent situation that demands immediate attention and action.

In one of its reports released in 2024, focusing on forced evictions and emerging trends in Uganda, Witness Radio called on the Government of Uganda to address rampant corruption and abuse of power by those in authority, particularly in land registries, the Uganda Police Force, and the army combined with favoritism towards the wealthy at the expense of the poor. This call for government accountability is crucial to ensure transparency and fairness in land administration.

According to the prosecution, Mugaino, in his role as the commissioner of land registration at the Ministry of Lands, unlawfully canceled land titles on April 8 and 20, 2024, which had previously been issued to Tropical Bank Ltd, Akugizibwe Gerald Mugera, and Namayiba Park Hotel. This action, if proven, could have severe financial and social implications for these entities, potentially leading to significant losses and disruptions.

In addition, Mugaino failed to perform his duties as provided for in Section 85 of the Land Act, Cap 236, and his duties as Commissioner of Land Registration.

The center of contention arises from the land located at Kibuga Block 12, Plots 658, 659, and 665 in Kisenyi; Kibuga Block 4, Plot 152 in Namirembe; and Kyadondo Block 244, Plot 2506, in Uganda’s capital Kampala. These are prime locations that have been subject to numerous land disputes, making Mugaino’s actions particularly significant.

Under Section 87 of the Penal Code Cap 120, Mugaino will face imprisonment for a term not exceeding seven years if convicted and dismissed from public service.

Witness Radio commends the government for taking action against one of its own, recognizing it as a necessary and hopeful step toward addressing the root causes of land evictions and fraudulent land dealings.

Speaking in response to the recent arrest of the Commissioner for Land Registration, Witness Radio’s Team leader, Jeff Wokulira Ssebaggala, emphasized that most land grabs, illegal evictions, and fraudulent land dealings are orchestrated from within government offices by individuals entrusted with public authority.

“It is time for the government to prosecute its own, those whose continued abuse and misuse of public office have directly fueled widespread land injustices.” Mr. Ssebaggala added.

Related posts:

A senior lands officer seated on a police patrol during her arrest.
Kiboga district senior lands officer is arrested and detained over land fraud. An early bird: oil-affected communities have launched a petition to the Lands Ministry, seeking protection of their rights in the face of forced acquisitions. Persecution: The prosecutor’s office is turned into a tool to harass locals for opposing land grabs to give way to the oil project in Mid Western Uganda. Mr. Mafumu Paul and his accomplices at police after their arrest.State House Anti-Corruption Unit nets a surveyor implicated in Mubende district land-grabs 394,000 Land Titles Affected By Closure Of Ministry Of Lands Offices In Wakiso
Continue Reading

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

Environmentalists raise red flags over plan to expand oil palm fields in Kalangala

Published

2 weeks ago

on

June 4, 2025

By

President Museveni inspects an oil palm plantation owned by Mr Deogratious Ssesanga, a model farmer in Kalangala District on May 26, 2023. PHOTO/PPU

Environmentalists have raised fresh concerns over the ongoing expansion of oil palm fields in other parts of Kalangala District, warning that it will degrade the ecosystem in the area.

The expansion follows a 2023 directive by President Museveni, allowing oil palm cultivation beyond Kalangala’s main island of Buggala. The initiative targets over 700 acres on Serinya Island, 600 acres on Lulamba, and 1,500 acres on Bukasa Island. Additional land on Bugaba, Bufumira, Buyovu, and Funve islands is also being earmarked for oil palm cultivation.

Environmentalists say this move contradicts earlier safeguards aimed at preserving the ecological integrity of other islands in Kalangala.
The district comprises 84 islands but only 64 are inhabited.
Mr Joseph Byaruhanga, the Kalangala District environmental officer, said the original Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) recommended limiting oil palm to Buggala to protect the natural forests and promote food crop diversity elsewhere.

“The intent was to preserve the natural forests on other islands and maintain food crop cultivation,” Byaruhanga explained in an interview on June 3.
Oil palm cultivation in Kalangala began in 2006, primarily on mailo land. Currently, over 12,000 hectares are under cultivation, including land managed by smallholder farmers and Oil Palm Uganda Limited (OPUL).

Records at the Kalangala District Environment Office indicate that forest cover has plummeted from 57 per cent in 1954 to just 22 per cent currently. The primary drivers of deforestation include rice farming (20 per cent), oil palm growing (18 per cent), and a combination of timber harvesting, settlement, and charcoal burning (16 per cent).
“The economic benefits are pushing residents to clear more land for oil palm, but this has long-term consequences—sedimentation, pollution, and even increased lake accidents and windstorms due to changing weather patterns,” Byaruhanga warned.

 “Kalangala is surrounded by shallow waters. Without vegetation to anchor the soil, siltation could gradually fill the lake. If oil palm must expand, then we need a parallel forest restoration programme.” he added.
Mr David Kureeba, a senior programme officer Forests , Biodiversity and Climate Change at National Association of Professional Environmentalists (Nape) cautioned that unregulated oil palm expansion is a looming environmental disaster in the island district . “Although oil palm is a tree-like crop, it does not replicate the ecological functions of natural forests,” he explained.
“Oil palm trees may live for 25 years, but they are no match for indigenous forests. Natural forests are biodiversity hubs with wide canopies, climbing plants, and complex ecosystems,” he added.

Mr Kureeba also noted that forest cover clearance releases greenhouse gases like methane and carbon dioxide, exacerbating global warming. “Methane alone contributes to nearly a quarter of global climate change impacts. Destroying forests releases these gases into the atmosphere,” he said.

“Forests also regulate climate through evapotranspiration, contributing to cloud formation and rainfall. The morning dew and fresh air we enjoy come from forests. Without them, even moisture exchange through leaf stomata disappears,” he further explained.

Mr Frank Muramuzi, NAPE Executive Director, emphasised Kalangala’s vulnerability due to its island geography.
“Clearing forests removes natural windbreaks, exposing the area to strong winds and dangerous weather patterns like tornadoes,” he said.
“Oil palm doesn’t absorb as much carbon dioxide or release as much oxygen as broadleaf trees. Replacing forests with oil palm only worsens the problem,” he added.

Mr Muramuzi also criticised Uganda’s EIA process. “Developers often conduct their own assessments, which tend to downplay environmental risks in favour of economic benefits,” he said.
Despite these concerns, project proponents insist the expansion is being handled responsibly.
Mr Boaz Zaake, an agronomist with Ssese Oil Palm Growers Cooperative Society Limited ( SOPAGCO), said farmers are using cover crops and maintaining buffer zones to prevent erosion and water pollution.

He also argued that most of the targeted land for new oil palm fields was previously abandoned due to tsetse fly infestations and not part of any protected forests.
“All national forests have been preserved. Oil palm trees do produce oxygen just like other trees,” he said.
Mr Muramuzi, however, dismissed this claim, arguing that oil palm trees contribute little to climate regulation.
“Oil palm isn’t a real tree in ecological terms. It has a small leaf surface and limited capacity for carbon capture. Unlike broadleaf indigenous trees, it offers minimal environmental benefits,” he said.

Kalangala Resident District Commissioner, Fred Badda, said an Environmental Impact Assessment will be conducted before any new expansion of oil palm fields is done.
“We are currently assessing the land’s availability and historical use—whether it was forested or not—before proceeding with the EIA,” he said.
At least 11,800 hectares of oil palm trees have so far been planted on Kalangala’s main Island of Buggala in the past two decades, and recently, the project started expanding to other islands of Bunyama, Bukasa and  Bubembe.

Source: Monitor

Related posts:

Kalangala loses 2,000 acres of forests in 2 years Palm oil plantation expansion: A disturbing alliance between a palm oil company, district officials, and a college school is actively seizing land from farming communities in Buvuma district for their own profit. New programme takes over palm oil growing in Uganda Palm Oil project investor in Landgrab: Witness Radio petitions Buganda Land Board to save its tenants from being forcefully displaced palm oil plantation. Resisting Oil Palm Plantations in Uganda
Continue Reading

Resource Center

Legal Framework

READ BY CATEGORY

Facebook

Newsletter

Subscribe to Witness Radio's newsletter



Trending

Subscribe to Witness Radio's newsletter