Imagining the Great Green Wall of Africa
In order to avert future famines and desertification, Sahel countries have for many years now attempted to construct the Great Green Wall of Africa. To make this a success a combination of planting and regeneration techniques is required that suits the particular context but also ensures that the project is not driven by commercially oriented motives.
Timothy Walker, Consultant, Conflict Management and Peace Building
Despite the
United Nation’s recent declaration that the deadly Horn of Africa famine of
2011 has finally ended, it remains an obvious and inescapable certainty that
the continent will soon confront another convergence of climatic, political and
economic problems that produces a similar tragedy. Unless immediate and
effective measures are taken forthwith, the lives of possibly an even greater
number of people will continue to be imperilled. Moreover, it seems imprudent
to imagine that such a crisis can truly be thought to have abated, as the
latent effects will be felt for the foreseeable future amongst both people and
the environment.
An integral
characteristic of regions at risk, particularly the famine-prone Sahel region,
is the continued human insecurity of many of its inhabitants, not simply in
terms of food, but also water, land and livelihood. The Sahel region of Africa
is an environmental zone stretching from Djibouti in the Horn of Africa to the
Atlantic coastlines of Senegal and Mauritania. It separates the Sahara Desert
to the north from the temperate regions and rainforests to the south. Combined
with long-standing concerns over shrinking land and water resources available
for the production of food, the search is on for long-term viable and
sustainable solutions on a pan-African basis that can raise human security
levels and ensure future famines can be averted.
One such project
that is successfully attracting and exciting the imaginations of local
stakeholders, international donors and global environmentalists is the proposed
Great Green Wall (GGW). This ambitious project is immense in both its scope and
the possible consequences it could have on the geographical and
political-economic fortunes of the peoples and states in the Sahel and beyond.
In effect an approximately 8000 km long, 15km wide belt of trees and bushes
would be planted, cultivated or regenerated across the entire length of the
Sahel, in order to safeguard against any southward encroachment of the Sahara,
thereby preventing further desertification. Behind this green safety barrier
Sahel countries would theoretically be able to increase the yield of the land
to feed growing populations. Increasing vegetation cover ensures that water is
retained as it causes rain water to seep into the ground rather than disappear
as run-off, which would otherwise carry away vital top soil.
The origins for
idea of the GGW are commonly credited to former Burkina Faso president Thomas
Sankara, although contemporary interest and impetus largely occurred once
former Nigerian president Olusegun Obasanjo backed the plan in 2005. The GGW was
subsequently taken up and has since been adopted by the African Union as a
major future initiative. The project has also received widespread backing from
a number of international and non-governmental organisations such as the UN
Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) and the Global Environment
Facility (GEF), which has pledged support in the region of $115 million in
grants and investments.
Such a grand and
long-sighted environmentally-orientated project is welcome given the fact that
Sahelian lands are amongst the most vulnerable in the world to the process of
desertification. This is as a result of
the environmental damage endured as a result of climate change, as well as the
increased pressure upon them as means for livelihoods and survival.
However, despite
the repetition of good intentions and statements of praise for the project,
some observers are noting that its promise remains unfulfilled, as large-scale
projects are not yet being undertaken. This loses sight of some of the
inspiring and encouraging farming and conservation practices that have emerged
in Africa in response to droughts and desertification.
The techniques
and ideas deserve greater attention and funding, as the potential benefits are
huge. Upon critical reflection, a number of crucial points emerge concerning
the GGW that need to be addressed whilst the project proceeds. Foremost amongst
these considerations is the fact that projects that plant trees with the aim of
preventing desertification have proven largely unsuccessful as a result of poor
planning, policies and because inadequate resources were devoted to sustaining
the projects. Little encouragement was also given to local farmers to partake
in such projects. Indeed, legislation often penalised farmers for encroaching
on wooded areas, as they were accustomed to do.
The GGW needs to
mirror the success of projects elsewhere. Two important examples stand out,
firstly the work of the late Wangari Maathai and the Green Belt Movement in
Kenya in planting seedlings and trees and successfully replacing lost wooded
areas. Planting alone, though, is not deemed a feasible continental-wide
solution, and to combat this problem the Green Belt Movement successfully
encouraged local participation on a wide scale, particularly amongst women.
The second project
which provides useful insights stem from the examples of Yacouba Sawadogo in
Burkina Faso and other proponents of Farmer
Managed Natural Regeneration (FMNR).
FMNR has encouraged farming techniques suited to vulnerable areas of Sahel,
such as agro-forestry, which entails the practice of allowing trees to grow
inside crop fields, thus anchoring soils and shielding surrounding crops. It
also reflects a key lesson from past projects that trees must be grown and
nurtured, rather than simply planted and left to grow. Moreover indigenous
trees must be chosen, ones well suited to the environment and that have
additional economic benefits derived from their seeds, fruits, oils, bark or
leaves.
A major
challenge for GGW proponents is to ensure that the region does not become
viewed as a veritable cornucopia for revenue. One of the major difficulties of
the greening process is that the area could ultimately succumb to
desertification if the process is abused and the green belt is not allowed to
flourish before it is exploited. Economic gain should not become the main
driving force for the project, as the past has illustrated that too often the
environment is destroyed for short-term profit. The GGW will only prove to be a
success over a long period of time, and rewards from the endeavour will not be
immediately apparent. A combination of planting and regeneration techniques is
required that suits the particular context but also ensures that the project is
not driven by commercially oriented desires to use GGW project money to create new
industries in these countries.
Local opposition
to the plans for the GGW are not widely known at present and a worry is that
the rights of farmers and communities will not be considered in the
decision-making processes for the location and construction of the GGW. This
would ultimately derail the project, as it is vital that any artificial change
to the landscape is made with the consent and support of the populace. In
addition, local populations risk being marginalised by authorities. The failure
of past projects also points to the inadequacies of a top-down state directed
process. Instead, as far as possible, responsible bottom-up leadership and
initiatives are required to ensure that it remains human security orientated.
The successes of the Green Belt Movement also affirms the importance of local
participation, and a sense of being a permanent stakeholder in this holistic
process.
