MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK
The African Development Bank and the Tree Plantations Industry
Published
6 years agoon

“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:

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
Open letter to African Development Bank and Nordic Development Fund: Address reprisals against Paten Clan
You may like
MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK
From grassroots action to policy transformation: How local environmental solutions spark enduring change.
Published
14 hours agoon
October 26, 2026
By the Witness Radio team.
Experts agree that when communities lead environmental initiatives, they can safeguard land, biodiversity, and local livelihoods. Yet for these efforts to truly shape decisions and create lasting change, communities need a real seat at the table when crafting the policies that govern their territories.
Across regions, communities are crafting unique approaches to agriculture, conservation, and resource management that mirror their own priorities and landscapes. But finding solutions is just the beginning. For these grassroots efforts to ripple out and shape broader environmental policy, the people driving them must have a voice in decision-making, gain recognition for their methods, and see that policy promises become reality.
Stories shared by environmental policy advocates during a recent webinar brought to life both the power of collective action and the hurdles communities encounter when trying to shape decisions beyond their own backyards.
A project in central Italy demonstrates how collaboration among communities, farmers, and local officials can win formal policy recognition. At the same time, Guillerme Eidt’s advocacy work underscores why local communities must move from passive recipients of environmental policies to active shapers.
In Italy’s Lazio region, the Bio-district of Via Amerina e delle Forre shows that collective action can lay the groundwork for environmental stewardship and shape the future of territorial development.
According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the bio-district brings together 13 municipalities and more than 300 organic farms in a territory with approximately 70,000 inhabitants. The initiative connects agriculture, local communities, environmental protection and economic development through a shared approach to managing the territory.
Instead of leaving environmental challenges for individual farmers to tackle alone, the bio-district champions teamwork among producers, residents, civil society groups, and local authorities.
Andrea Ferrante, an agronomist and agroecologist with experience in food and agriculture policy and rural development, says this territorial perspective is central to understanding how environmental protection can work in practice.
“So, we need communities; we need organizations and movements that are the ones stewarding also the soil, the biodiversity,” Ferrante said during the webinar.
He argued that tackling issues like land degradation requires more than focusing on single farms, since landscape health depends on the web of relationships among those who live and work there.
“It’s not the single farm, it’s a territory,” he added.
The bio-district supports organic farming, boosts direct sales from farmers to consumers, promotes environmental education, and champions sustainable local growth. Reports also highlight how the community has come together to address concerns about intensive hazelnut farming, including pesticide use, water pollution, and threats to biodiversity.
Ferrante pushed back against the idea that innovation always means new gadgets or technology. He argued that true innovation often lies in collaboration, especially when communities tap into their shared wisdom and work hand in hand with nature.
“Innovation is all about how we work together, how we build on our local community, how the capacity to manage and live in collaboration, in great collaboration with nature,” he said.
Ferrante described how civil society and local government joined forces to create a framework that would bring their shared vision for agriculture and territorial development to life.
“So, both civil society and the municipality, we built together a structure because if we are recognized, we have the capacity to protect our territory, to build our socioeconomic models. And from the regional law, we arrived at the national legislation,” he further added.
In October 2019, the Lazio regional government officially recognized the initiative, marking a key step in building a legal framework for bio-districts.
While the Italian bio-district shows how collective action can earn official recognition, Guillerme Eidt’s presentation spotlighted a different challenge: ensuring communities have a real voice in shaping the policies that govern their lands.
Eidt believes that true participation means honoring the identities and governance systems that communities use to organize themselves.
“We understand that local communities have the right to self-identify themselves and not be labeled for the state,” he said.
He explained that local communities comprise a rich tapestry of groups, from pastoralists and Afro-descendant peoples to community foresters, nomads, and farmers. Despite their varied histories and cultures, many rely on collective systems to steward land and resources.
Eidt pointed out that local communities often have little say in international environmental negotiations, even though decisions on climate, biodiversity, and land use can reshape how resources are managed at every level.
“It’s not fully open. It’s not fully inclusive. If you invite parties to do something, it means something different. We need to pay attention to these documents and understand how they are written. We need to participate in these processes to ensure local communities have a more visible voice. Indigenous people are so well organized.” He added
Eidt emphasized that for local communities to have real influence in international environmental governance, they need ongoing coordination and strong, organized advocacy.
In his presentation, he described how the Global Forum of Local Communities brings organizations together, helping them align their priorities and take part in international environmental discussions.
He outlined several ways communities and their allies can influence policy, including contributing proposed wording to negotiation texts, preparing policy briefs and technical submissions, participating in mandated workshops, holding bilateral meetings with decision-makers, and organizing events that bring communities together. The stories Ferrante and Eidt share reveal how vital it is to bridge the gap between local environmental action and the institutions that craft, enforce, and implement policy.
Ferrante’s story of the Italian bio-district shows how communities, farmers, and local authorities can work together to manage land and win official recognition.
Eidt’s presentation, on the other hand, highlights the challenge of ensuring communities can shape decisions that reach far beyond their borders, even in international environmental negotiations.
Hania Morani, a legal expert and former vice-chair of the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, reinforced this relationship in her closing reflections during the webinar.
“International ideas inspire local action, and communities give those ideas meaning, and their experiences return to reshape policy,” she said.
Related posts:

Uganda moves toward a Bamboo Policy to boost environmental conservation and green growth.
Witness Radio, private companies, CSOs and local government officials are meeting to discuss alternative remedies to salvage the appalling land and environmental rights situation in Kiryandongo district.
Joint CSO Statement Calls on IFC and MIGA to Strengthen its New Approach to Remedial Action Policy
Experts push for a National Bamboo Policy to strengthen climate mitigation efforts.
MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK
A coalition of 625 African faith leaders will gather, united in their call for reparations in response to what they describe as the failure of a Gates-backed agricultural model.
Published
14 hours agoon
October 26, 2026
By the Witness Radio Team
On Thursday, 29th October 2026, faith leaders representing more than 20 African nations will release an open letter to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. In it, they urge the Foundation to acknowledge and address the harm they say two decades of industrial agricultural funding in Africa has caused—their call for reparations centers on redirecting resources toward agroecology and food systems led by Africans themselves.
Signed by 625 faith leaders, the letter directly challenges the Foundation’s backing of the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA), an organization established in 2006 by the Gates and Rockefeller Foundations. Their demands gain urgency from research published in August 2026 by Tufts University’s Timothy Wise and the Alliance for Food Sovereignty in Africa (AFSA), which found a 58% surge in undernourished people across AGRA’s 13 focus countries between 2004–2006 and 2022–2024.
AGRA says its mission is to transform African agriculture by helping smallholder farmers increase production, improve their livelihoods and access growing agricultural markets.
On its website, the organization states: “AGRA, headquartered in Nairobi, is a proudly African-led institution focused on scaling agricultural innovations that help smallholder farmers towards increased incomes, better livelihoods, and improved food security. We understand that African farmers need uniquely African solutions to the environmental and agricultural challenges they face, enabling them to sustainably boost production and gain access to rapidly growing agricultural markets.”
Marking its 20th anniversary, AGRA frames this milestone as a moment for reflection and a renewed pledge to transform Africa’s food systems.
“In 2026, AGRA celebrates 20 years since Kofi Annan ignited a bold vision: a continent where agriculture fuels prosperity, opportunity, and resilience for millions of smallholder farmers. Over two decades, we have partnered with governments, farmers, research institutions, the private sector, and development partners to strengthen the foundations of Africa’s food systems. AGRA@20 is a milestone of reflection and renewal. It honors two decades of advancing Africa’s food systems, while charting a bolder path for the future of food systems transformation across the continent.”
Yet, civil society groups, agricultural experts, and independent researchers have sharply criticized AGRA’s approach, questioning whether its focus on commercial seeds, synthetic fertilizers, and industrial inputs has truly delivered on its promises of improved food security.
The August 2026 research by Wise and AFSA found that the number of undernourished people across AGRA’s 13 focus countries rose from 94.6 million in 2004–2006 to 149.6 million in 2022–2024. It also found that annual staple-crop yield growth averaged 1.2% after AGRA’s introduction, slightly below the 1.3% recorded annually during the preceding 12 years.
According to the report, fertilizer use more than doubled, while the share of cultivated land planted with millet and sorghum, both drought-tolerant crops, declined from 26% to 16%.
The researchers also cited Senegal, not one of AGRA’s 13 focus countries, as a contrast. The country halved its number of undernourished people while using approximately half as much fertilizer per hectare as the AGRA countries.
These findings have only deepened the worries of faith leaders and food-sovereignty advocates, who insist that agricultural development funding must put ecological sustainability, farmers’ rights, and locally driven solutions at the forefront.
The delegation delivering the letter will feature voices from South Africa, Liberia, Kenya, and Botswana. These leaders plan to urge the Gates Foundation to meet with them before its 2026 funding decisions and to respond directly to independent research scrutinizing the impact of its agricultural investments.
The faith leaders have raised similar concerns with the Foundation in previous years. In 2020, they called on it to stop funding Green Revolution programs. In November 2025, they sent another letter through the Southern African Faith Communities’ Environment Institute (SAFCEI), urging the Foundation to acknowledge what they described as the failure of its interventions in African food and farming systems.
In the 2025 letter, the leaders questioned the Foundation’s continued support for AGRA, arguing that its agricultural development approach raised concerns about environmental sustainability, community rights and the well-being of vulnerable populations.
“As faith leaders, we have a responsibility as custodians of the Earth and of our faith communities to call out injustice and ensure the equitable sharing of resources for all, particularly the most vulnerable. While we note that the Gates Foundation has committed itself to ending food insecurity and poverty in Africa, we are gravely concerned about the approach it continues to take, through its support of AGRA (until recently known as the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa).”
The leaders urge the Foundation to halt funding for AGRA and similar initiatives and redirect investment toward agroecology and food systems shaped by Africans. Their demands encompass support for farmer-led research, community seed banks, and local knowledge, along with policies that safeguard African communities’ rights and empower them to control their own food production.
The virtual press conference on 29 October will bring together Francesca de Gasparis, Executive Director of SAFCEI; Rev. Dr Tolbert Thomas Jallah Jr., Board Chair of AFSA; Ulfat Hussein Masibo from the Africa Muslims Women’s Action Network; Gorata Ramokgothwane of the Botswana Council of Churches; Dr Hassan Omari Kinyua from the Africa Faith Actors Network for Climate Justice and the Muslim Council in Kenya; and Gabriel Manyangadze, Food and Climate Justice Manager at SAFCEI, who will deliver the letter and issue the call to action.
At the heart of their appeal is a call for international funders to pivot their support toward agroecology and food production strategies defined by local communities.
“It’s time for international funders to transition towards agroecology through respecting and supporting locally defined holistic approaches in Africa, by Africa. As faith leaders, we must advocate for the restoration of our relationship with the Earth and the community of life on which we all depend,” the faith leaders stated.
AGRA, however, rejects claims that its agricultural model has failed, arguing that any progress over the past twenty years should be weighed against the broader challenges facing African food systems.
In its August 2026 Impact, Learning and Foresight Report, the organization says agricultural output across Africa has roughly doubled in real terms since 2005, while cereal yields have increased by about 40%. It also points to the growth of local seed companies, agricultural input distribution networks, and community extension services as evidence of progress.
Related posts:

Failed Green Revolution: African Leaders Demand Reparations from Gates Foundation.
African Food Systems Summit 2024: Do not use it to promote failed agricultural models – African Faith Leaders.
African Faith Communities Tell Gates Foundation, “Big Farming is No Solution for Africa
East African lawmakers and CSO leaders are meeting in Uganda to draw up plans to promote Agroecology as an alternative to climate change mitigation.
MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK
High land title costs, bureaucracy, and distance leave women struggling to secure land rights in Africa.
Published
1 day agoon
October 26, 2026
By the Witness Radio Team.
For many women, securing land rights is not just about having a law that recognizes their ownership. Even after participating in land registration programs, some lack the documents to prove their claims because they cannot afford the fees, travel long distances to government offices, or navigate complicated procedures.
Experiences from Tanzania, Uganda, and Zambia show how these barriers keep women from completing the final stages of land documentation, leaving their claims vulnerable even after the registration process has begun.
Land rights practitioners discussed these challenges during an online webinar organized by TenureSecurity.org with LandBridge International on the recent International Day of Rural Women. The event commemorated the day and examined why women with recognized land claims can remain without legal documentation and what must change to help them secure and exercise their rights.
Ms. Rania Ahmed, a co-founder of LandBridge International, said the organization began focusing on these barriers after noticing a gap between men’s and women’s access to land titles in Zambia. She says data from land-titling work showed that women-headed households participated in the process but did not receive their titles.
“We started to wonder how many other women have a recognized claim to land and have even begun the documentation process but couldn’t complete the final steps needed to secure legal ownership,” Ms. Ahmed said.
The organization initially suspected that the upfront payment to complete registration prevented women from obtaining their documents. This concern led to the creation of LandBridge, which works through local partners to help women overcome practical obstacles to obtaining documentation in their own names.
According to Ahmed, the problem extends beyond the absence of legal rights. In many places, she said, women have recognized claims to land and government documentation programs are already in place, yet they remain unable to complete the process.
“Without documentation in their names, their homes and land remain vulnerable, especially after divorce or the death of a spouse,” she added.
Ms. Ailey Kaiser-Hughes, a land tenure and women’s land rights specialist and co-founder of LandBridge, said the barriers often go beyond the cost of obtaining a title.
“We see common barriers across countries, and a fee is rarely the whole story. Women may lack clear information, money for transportation, or the documents needed to enter the registration process. Some also lack the confidence or support to navigate government bureaucracy and unfamiliar offices,” she added.
“I saw this firsthand during land titling work in Monrovia “I saw this firsthand during land titling work in Monrovia, Liberia. To participate, landholders needed an official ID costing about US$5, plus travel expenses to a government office. As a result, few community members had the required ID, and even fewer were women. This prevented many women from participating from the start. We negotiated with the government to bring identification services directly to the community, significantly increasing participation,” she added.
Identification remains a significant obstacle, particularly for widows and older women who may have limited financial resources.
Mr. Mustafa Issa, CEO of Tanzania Land Tenure Assistance, said the organization has worked for about 20 years to help women obtain Certificates of Customary Right of Occupancy (CCROs). He added that about 60 percent of women in the villages they worked with could not afford the payment.
He explained that awareness of land rights had improved through government initiatives and the work of implementing partners. However, paying for documentation remained a serious challenge.
“Most of the women we’ve been working with face challenges in getting financial support to contribute to their land registration and receive certification,” Mustafa said. explained that the cost of obtaining a certificate had risen from about US$10 per parcel to about US$20, making it unaffordable for many rural women.
“Those with husbands can manage, but widows and older women struggle to pay for their CCROs,” he added. He called for targeted financial support to help disadvantaged women complete land registration and suggested incorporating such assistance into local government financing systems.
In Uganda’s Oyam District, some women have land titles already produced under a government project but remain uncollected because of the costs and administrative procedures required to release them.
Ms. Christine Kajumba, research manager at Associates Research Trust, explained that the government had completed the technical work and delivered the titles to the district. However, applicants still needed to pay outstanding government fees and have caveats removed before receiving their documents. She added that the required payments amounted to approximately US$28 to US$30 per title.
Kajumba described how the process can stall even after people pay and submit titles to the relevant offices.
“When we paid for those 100 titles, we spent six months without getting the land titles,” she said, attributing the delays to administrative procedures involving the national land information system, which requires titles to pass through a digital process before they can be released.
Ms. Kajumba adds that distance is another obstacle, as offices are located far away.
“Even when a woman can afford the US$30, she must navigate a lengthy process involving separate government offices. She first goes to the district land office to collect the title, then travels about 70 kilometers to the regional Ministry of Lands, Housing and Urban Development office in Lira. For women from sub-counties or villages 80 to 100 kilometers away, the journey is even more challenging. This creates an opportunity cost. A woman may ask why she should spend time and money traveling to collect a document when she can continue using her land without it. Even when the title is ready, she may decide the cost and effort are not worth it,” she added.
In Zambia, the financial burden becomes particularly evident at the final stage of land registration, when applicants receive an offer letter specifying the payment required to obtain a certificate of title.
Ms. Kamiji Malasha, a gender specialist with LandBridge International in Zambia, explained that the government’s land formalization program takes households through sensitization, enumeration, verification, and the offer-letter stage, adding that, although women may complete the earlier steps, the required payment can prevent them from receiving their certificates.
“Many women want to secure their title deeds, but the upfront cost is simply out of reach for them,” Kamiji said.
“The initial payment required by the Ministry of Lands was about 1,000 Zambian Kwachas, roughly US$50 at the time. The total cost to obtain a title was about US$150. For a woman-headed household in an informal settlement, that’s less than $2 a day. That’s nearly a month’s household income. As a result, women may have to choose between paying for land documents and meeting immediate family needs like food, rent, and other basic expenses,” she said.
Kamiji said targeted support could help women overcome this final barrier, while community outreach and sensitization could ensure they understand the registration process and the importance of obtaining their documents.
She also called for services to be brought closer to women, rather than requiring them to travel repeatedly to government offices.
“Services must come to the women, rather than requiring the women to come to the system,” she said.
Related posts:

Land Grabbing Crisis Escalates in Uganda: Mayiga Urges Citizens to Secure Land Documents
Women’s Climate Assembly, 2024: African women vow to protect human and environmental rights amidst an influx of destructive land-based investments on the continent.
“No Land, No Life” – Women at the East Africa Convergence Refuse to Move out Quietly
Kibaale Residents Raise Corruption Concerns Over Delayed Land Title Processing
From grassroots action to policy transformation: How local environmental solutions spark enduring change.
A coalition of 625 African faith leaders will gather, united in their call for reparations in response to what they describe as the failure of a Gates-backed agricultural model.
High land title costs, bureaucracy, and distance leave women struggling to secure land rights in Africa.
Environmental and human rights advocates are urging the world to hold global investors accountable for their actions.
Tanzanian Government Abducts Maasai Villagers in an Unconscionable Attack on Indigenous Land Defenders
World Food Day 2026: Building healthy diets means reimagining how we grow, share, and enjoy our food.
The global race for clean energy minerals is leaving communities grappling with conflicts and human rights abuses, a new report reveals.
Sweeping investments are fueling widespread land grabbing and deepening rights violations across Uganda – Report.
Innovative Finance from Canada projects positive impact on local communities.
Over 5000 Indigenous Communities evicted in Kiryandongo District
Petition To Land Inquiry Commission Over Human Rights In Kiryandongo District
Invisible victims of Uganda Land Grabs
Resource Center
- CAN AFRICAN FOOD SYSTEMS THRIVE WITHOUT CHEMICAL FERTILISERS
- Land And Environment Rights In Uganda Experiences From Karamoja And Mid Western Sub Regions
- REPARATORY AND CLIMATE JUSTICE MUST BE AT THE CORE OF COP30, SAY GLOBAL LEADERS AND MOVEMENTS
- LAND GRABS AT GUNPOINT REPORT IN KIRYANDONGO DISTRICT
- THOSE OIL LIARS! THEY DESTROYED MY BUSINESS!
- RESEARCH BRIEF -TOURISM POTENTIAL OF GREATER MASAKA -MARCH 2025
- The Mouila Declaration of the Informal Alliance against the Expansion of Industrial Monocultures
- FORCED LAND EVICTIONS IN UGANDA TRENDS RIGHTS OF DEFENDERS IMPACT AND CALL FOR ACTION
Legal Framework
READ BY CATEGORY
Newsletter
Trending
-
NGO WORK2 weeks agoTanzanian Government Abducts Maasai Villagers in an Unconscionable Attack on Indigenous Land Defenders
-
MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK2 weeks agoWorld Food Day 2026: Building healthy diets means reimagining how we grow, share, and enjoy our food.
-
MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK2 weeks agoCourt remands 10 anti-oil activists as suspect collapses in dock
-
MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK5 days agoEnvironmental and human rights advocates are urging the world to hold global investors accountable for their actions.
-
MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK2 weeks agoInternational Day of Rural Women : Rural women farmers deserve not only equal rights and access to resources, but also the strength and voice to safeguard Mother Nature.
-
MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK2 weeks agoDefending ancestral land comes at a steep price as Maasai communities in Tanzania face relentless, mounting pressure.
-
MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK2 weeks agoAs waves of investment sweep across Uganda, countless women rise to defend their land, safeguard their traditions, and claim their right to be heard.
-
NGO WORK2 weeks agoAs World Bank Holds Annual Meetings, 84,000 Tanzanians Call for Justice
