Connect with us

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

The African Development Bank and the Tree Plantations Industry

Published

6 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

South Africa’s top court blocks Shell oil exploration off country’s Wild Coast

Published

26 minutes ago

on

August 18, 2026

By

In a landmark judgment on Aug. 14, South Africa’s Constitutional Court set aside exploration rights held by oil giant Shell and Impact Africa, a South African oil and gas company. The ruling prevents the companies from exploring for fossil fuels off South Africa’s Wild Coast.

The case was brought by Wild Coast communities and environmental organizations after Shell announced plans in 2021 to conduct a 3D seismic survey off the country’s Eastern Cape province coastline. They argued that authorities had failed to meaningfully consult affected communities or consider harms to their spiritual and cultural rights and livelihoods. Authorities also failed to consider the potential harm to marine life and climate change, the plaintiffs argued.

In the judgement, Justice Jody Kollapen wrote the majority opinion and said consulting communities isn’t just a procedural requirement, but “a process which affirms human dignity by affording a seat at the table to those whose lives are impacted by decisions.”

Acknowledging the “cornerstone role that dispossession played in the apartheid regime,” the court noted that South Africa’s natural resources are highly contested and that the case is embedded in “well-documented struggles by coastal communities to protect their land, marine resources and ways of life in the face of extractive activities.”

The judges also considered last year’s International Court of Justice Advisory Opinion on countries’ obligations in the context of climate change: “Decisions must be taken within a framework of heightened diligence, informed by scientific knowledge, international commitments and the foreseeable impacts of emissions on present and future generations,” Kollapen wrote.

The question of oil exploration rights in the area began in 2014, when the Department of Mineral Resources and Energy granted Impact Africa Limited the right to undertake a seismic survey to look for oil and gas reserves on the Wild Coast. Impact Africa Limited is a subsidiary of Impact Oil & Gas Limited, which in 2021 transferred a 50% stake of its exploration rights in the area to Shell.

The case has appeared before several South African courts over the past decade before reaching the Constitutional Court, the highest in the country.

Carmen Mannarino from the South African nonprofit Masifundise Development Trust, which works with communities in the area, told Mongabay that the court’s decision is a victory for fishing communities. “The court recognized that exploring for resources in light of potential future financial benefits does not compare to the constitutionally recognized rights of fishing communities,” Mannarino said.

“This is the apex court and the first time that it has dealt with issues relating to the community and environmental rights in relation to oil and gas exploitation,” Melissa Groenink, an attorney with one of the applicants, civil society organization Natural Justice, told Mongabay, adding that the ruling might influence similar cases currently in process.

Shell did not respond to Mongabay’s request for comment by the time of publication.

Banner image: Fisherpeople in Port St. Johns, Eastern Cape. Image courtesy of Aletta Harrison CC BY 4.0.

Source: news.mongabay.com

Related posts:

The South African High Court concludes hearing a landmark case challenging TotalEnergies’ Deep-Water Drilling project and offers to deliver its ruling on notice. Small-scale fishers and coastal communities are pushing to testify before a human rights commission investigating the causes of food inequality in South Africa. The East Africa regional court dismisses a case challenging the construction of the EACOP project. Happening shortly! Kenya’s upcoming court ruling on the Seed Law could have a significant impact on farmers’ rights, food sovereignty, and the country’s food system. Total Energies’ oil exploration activities are displacing dozens of families due to flooding.
Continue Reading

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

Minister Nabakooba wants special land title issuance halted

Published

1 day ago

on

August 17, 2026

By

She said the continued issuance of the certificates without adequate verification was fuelling land disputes and creating opportunities for land grabbers to deprive legitimate owners of their property.

Lands minister Judith Nabakooba wants the issuance of certificates of occupancy, which act as land titles, halted for three months to allow the Government to review and streamline the process and curb double titling.

She said the continued issuance of the certificates without adequate verification was fuelling land disputes and creating opportunities for land grabbers to deprive legitimate owners of their property.

She made the remarks on August 14, 2026, during a lands staff meeting at the Office of the Prime Minister in Kampala.

The minister warned lands officers against issuing special certificates for land that already has registered ownership, saying those who disregard the procedures could face arrest.

“You have slept on your duty on the issue of special certificates. When you continue issuing them, I will send the police, and they will arrest you.”

Nabakooba cited cases in Kyengera and Kabula, in Wakiso and Lyantonde districts respectively, where the titles had reportedly been issued despite existing claims and titles on the same land.

“We need to sit and have a clear guideline on how to handle that issue,” she said, adding that many of the reported cases were coming from the Buganda region.

She said the creation of special titles on already registered land was also placing pressure on ministry leadership, as affected people frequently seek intervention.

“I receive distress calls from my bosses. You are putting special titles on existing titles, which makes my work very hard,” she said.

The minister’s concerns come amid persistent complaints about land grabbing, overlapping titles and double titling, which she said undermine public confidence in the country’s land administration system.

Nabakooba urged lands officials to take responsibility for the services they provide and follow proper procedures when handling land transactions.

She also directed lands officers to clear the backlog of land transactions by December, questioning how officials who frequently absent themselves from duty would meet the deadline.

She said the ministry continues to receive complaints about officers who report to work only once a week.

“You disappear a lot. Every time you give excuses. There are people who work for only one day a week. We get a lot of complaints from the public,” she said.

The minister also criticised poor customer care, saying some officers shout at clients and create an intimidating environment that discourages people from freely presenting their land-related concerns.

She further directed officials to remove brokers operating around Ministry Zonal Offices, accusing them of misleading clients and sometimes posing as ministry officials to solicit money.

“Let’s try to get brokers out of our offices. They even start blackmailing our names, posing as officials from the ministry and taking money from people,” she said.

Nabakooba also directed staff to wear name tags and ministry shirts to help members of the public distinguish genuine ministry employees from brokers.

The technical officers were also directed to enter titles completed under the Systematic Land Adjudication and Certification programme into the land information system and ensure they are distributed to the intended beneficiaries.

The minister appealed to officials to engage contractors to provide outstanding data needed to complete the programme.

“This is a World Bank loan, and we have to pay back the money, so let’s use it properly to finish the services they were asked for,” she said.

Nabakooba also urged technical officers to accompany ministers during field visits, saying their expertise is necessary to provide technical guidance and help the Government understand challenges faced by communities.

What others said

Acting permanent secretary in the lands ministry Dr Emmanuel Mugunga urged staff to embrace teamwork, accountability and respectful treatment of colleagues and clients.

He warned that the Human Capital Management System would track staff attendance and that absenteeism would have consequences.

Housing state minister Persis Namuganza urged staff to restore public confidence in the ministry, saying some members of the public now associate lands officials with land grabbing.

Lands state minister Harriet Ntabaazi called for greater collaboration among officers and warned technical staff against treating themselves as “small gods” at their duty stations.

Ntabaazi said land grabbing, overlapping titles, double titling and family conflicts remain among the major challenges facing the lands sector.

She also cautioned officers against soliciting money from clients, saying such practices damage the ministry’s reputation.

The ministers called for stronger accountability, adherence to proper procedures and improved teamwork to restore public confidence in land administration.

Related posts:

Lands minister warns against misuse of courts, calls for fairness in handling disputes
Nabakooba Urges Judicial Integrity in Land Cases Amid Rising Evictions Sembabule district suspends land title issuance over rampant disputes Minister Cancels Contested 12-Square-Mile Land Title in Mubende Kibaale Residents Raise Corruption Concerns Over Delayed Land Title Processing Breaking; Lands Minister directs police chief to arrest armed mobs involved in forced and illegal land evictions.
Continue Reading

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

Govt targets land grabbers with first national public-land register

Published

4 days ago

on

August 14, 2026

By

Officials say a nationwide inventory will finally let the state prove what it owns — from school compounds to road reserves — but the exercise is beginning on a shoestring.

Mukono, Uganda — Uganda has begun building its first comprehensive national register of government land, an undertaking officials say is aimed squarely at land grabbers who for years have carved up public property the state often cannot prove it owns.

The five-year exercise, the Comprehensive Government Land Inventory, will document every identifiable state plot — schools, hospitals, police stations, road reserves, wetlands and forests among them — and record who owns each, how it is used and whether it is under threat.

“If we don’t do that, then we may never have land to protect,” Lands Minister Judith Nabakooba told a regional workshop at Rider Hotel in Mukono, east of the capital Kampala, on Thursday.

The vulnerability is considerable. Government land makes up about 23 percent of Uganda’s territory, but only roughly a quarter of it has been formally titled, according to the Uganda Land Commission — leaving the majority undocumented and, officials concede, easy to grab.

Nabakooba said Uganda’s rapid transformation was making the problem worse. Towns are spreading, infrastructure and industry are expanding, and land that was rural only a few years ago is now valuable real estate. She warned that population growth — which she said could push Uganda towards 70 million people by 2050 — would only sharpen the competition for a fixed supply of land.

The minister urged local authorities to enforce physical development plans and to build upwards rather than outwards. “Can we now begin thinking of going vertical when you are building offices and spaces for accommodation… then the rest of the land is used for agricultural purposes?” she asked. She singled out Wakiso district, on Kampala’s fringes, where development pressure is most intense, and cautioned officials against surrendering government plots simply because they appeared vacant.

Local knowledge, national record

The Mukono meeting, billed as the “Buganda 1” engagement and the second after the programme’s national launch in July, gathered district chairpersons, resident district commissioners, land board members and civil society from central-region districts including Wakiso, Mukono, Buikwe, Kayunga, Luweero, Nakasongola and Buvuma.

Uganda Land Commission chairperson Prof Pen Mogi Nyeko told them their local knowledge was central to the exercise. “You all virtually know what land belongs to government,” he said, appealing to them to help identify and title state plots — and warning land boards not to hand public land to individuals.

He said the state was the country’s biggest developer, and that consolidated, protected land could anchor major projects. Nyeko pointed to the Amuru sugar scheme in northern Uganda, where the government compensated landowners across some 10,000 hectares for a plantation and factory, as an example of what public land could enable, describing the local opposition it once faced as “negative politics”. The project in fact has a long and contested history, resisted for years by Acholi communities and their leaders and fought through the courts over customary ownership before compensation was settled.

Nyeko also raised the grabbing of institutional land, including plots belonging to church-founded schools. “Many of you were students in these lands, in these schools. So it is you to help us get those lands protected,” he said. He stressed the commission was not after private property: “The constitution is very clear: land belongs to the people. For us, we are only interested in land which belongs to government.” A reliable inventory, he added, would let the state direct investors to suitable sites — “if we know that there is 2, 3 square miles of land belonging to government in Nakasongola… we recommend that area for industrialisation.”

A reform on a tight budget

For all its ambition, the programme is starting with little money. The commission has said it was costed at about 100 billion shillings (roughly $27m), but only 6 billion shillings was released this financial year, even after a parliamentary committee recommended more. Implementation will be phased, beginning with cities and municipalities where land values — and the incentive to grab — are highest.

Emmanuel Kaganzi, representing the ministry’s permanent secretary, said the register had to capture more than ownership. It should show whether each parcel was surveyed, titled and free of encroachment or competing claims, he said, giving government the chance “to intervene early” rather than react to disputes after the fact.

But a register was only as good as its upkeep, he cautioned. “A government land inventory completed today but not updated tomorrow will gradually lose its usefulness.” He said responsibility for keeping records current would fall across the commission, the ministry, local governments and the agencies that occupy state land, and pressed repeatedly for coordination between them. The inventory, he added, should build on systems already in place — the Uganda Land Information System, the National Land Information Centre and the ministry’s zonal offices, which have moved land services closer to citizens — rather than create new silos.

Kaganzi was blunt about the human element. “An accurate system will achieve little if public officers knowingly allow government land to be encroached, to be taken, to be grabbed, and irregularly allocated,” he said, adding that officials entrusted with public land must treat it as belonging to the people of Uganda.

Cross-checking a fragmented record

The commission’s secretary, Andrew Nyumba, said the state’s own records were part of the problem, scattered across the commission, ministries, local governments and district land boards and never fully reconciled. The existing records, he said, did not amount to a comprehensive picture of government land.

For each holding, he said, the inventory should answer a set of basic questions — what the parcel is, where it lies, its size and boundaries, the evidence of state ownership, which institution is responsible, how it is used, whether it is documented and whether it is occupied, encroached upon or disputed. The commission would draw on registry and cadastral data, ministry and local-government records, survey and planning information, asset registers, historical archives, community knowledge and, where needed, physical checks on the ground.

Those sources would be cross-checked against one another, and disagreements, Nyumba argued, were useful rather than a setback. “A discrepancy in information is not necessarily a failure of the exercise. It is also information,” he said, describing conflicting records as a signal of where further verification was required. The goal, he said, was to move “from fragmented information toward a more reliable, integrated and continuously maintained picture of government land in Uganda”.

The drive follows years of criticism over the commission’s record-keeping. The Auditor General has previously flagged the absence of a comprehensive government land database, and the body has been drawn into numerous court cases over contested public plots — the very gaps the inventory is meant to close.

Source: www.ugstandard.com/

Related posts:

Why govt is launching a comprehensive digital land registry Government urges Ugandans to register their land interests to reduce land evictions. Govt moves to register surveyors to curb land conflicts Land commission starts updating govt land countrywide. Kasese district land bosses ordered to cancel land titles of gov’t land grabbers
Continue Reading

Resource Center

Legal Framework

READ BY CATEGORY

Facebook

Newsletter

Subscribe to Witness Radio's news and report updates



Trending

Subscribe to Witness Radio's news and report updates