---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: IRIN <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 3:50 PM
Subject: AFRICA: Opposition building to Great Green Wall
To: Jean-Francois Darcq <[email protected]>


AFRICA: Opposition building to Great Green Wall

NAIROBI, 8 April 2011 (IRIN) - What's green, controversial, 15km wide,
7,775km long, cuts across 11 African countries and is designed to
reduce livestock deaths and boost food security for millions of
people? Nothing yet, but the Great Green Wall project, a pipe-dream
for decades, was recently endorsed by a swathe of African states
stretching from Senegal to Djibouti.
 [ http://www.thegef.org/gef/press_release/great_green_wall_2011 ]

 An estimated 10 million people faced severe food shortages due to
recurrent drought and climate change in the Sahel region last year. [
http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=34840&Cr=Africa&Cr1=hunger
] In Niger alone, the famine in 2010 left half the country's
population needing food aid and one in six children suffering from
acute malnutrition. Some villagers in Niger described 2010 as worse
than the 1973 drought that killed thousands of people, according to
Malek Triki, West African spokesperson for the World Food Programme
(WFP). [ http://www.wfp.org/content/aid-workers-warn-famine-disaster-niger
]

 The Great Green Wall (GGW) project, originally proposed by Burkina
Faso's Marxist leader Thomas Sankara in the 1980s, was later
resurrected by former Nigerian President Olesegun Obasanjo in 2005
before receiving approval by the African Union in December 2006. In
June 2010, 11 countries involved signed a convention in Chad to
further the development of the project, but the plan remained on
standby until February when it was officially approved at an
international summit in Bonn, Germany.

 During the summit, the Global Environment Facility (GEF) [
http://www.thegef.org/gef/whatisgef ] set aside US$115 million to fund
the wall. Mohamed I Bakarr, a senior environment specialist with GEF,
told IRIN the wall "is in reality a metaphor to reflect the vision of
African leaders for an integrated land-use system that addresses
environment and development needs across all affected countries". The
GEF foresees the wall adopting a "mosaic" of "sustainable
land-management systems with stakeholders, including grassroots
communities, in all 11 countries implementing options that are
appropriate to the local context".

 The plan entails each country implementing its own land, water and
vegetation-management projects on up to two million hectares of land,
under the framework of the UN Convention to Combat Desertification. [
http://www.thegef.org/gef/press_release/great_green_wall_2011 ]
Monique Barbut, CEO of the GEF, said in a statement it would not fund
"an all-out tree-funding drive from Dakar to Djibouti", but rather,
would allocate the funding according to national priorities, which
have yet to be finalized. In a paper adopted by the Sahara and Sahel
Observatory (OSS) in 2008, alleviating poverty is said to be one of
the wall's principal objectives.

 The paper outlines national and regional objectives, including
consolidating and expanding existing greenbelts of trees, conserving
biodiversity, restoring and conserving soil and promoting
income-generating activities, as well as carbon capture and storage of
0.5-3.1 million tons of carbon per year. [
http://www.grandemurailleverte.org/gmven/donnees/Concept_Note.pdf ]

 Indigenous communities "threatened"

 The project has faced opposition, despite its stated commitment to
combating drought and desertification, which have exacted a heavy toll
on the region as a whole. Wally Menne, a member of Timberwatch, the
African NGO focal point for the Global Forest Coalition, told IRIN the
organization was sceptical. "In our view it seems poorly conceived in
terms of both ecological and socio-economic considerations. Its
chances of being a success could be limited, and it may even cause
more harm to the environment," he said. The Global Forest Coalition
campaigns for the rights of indigenous and forest people and for
socially just policies.

 Menne added that the inclusion of carbon sequestration activities and
the potential future development of REDD projects (Reducing Emissions
from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) as components of the GGW
would require converting suitable land within the belt to fast-growing
foreign species of monoculture tree plantations and carbon sinks
opposed by many indigenous groups in the Sahel. Growing plantations
would also require displacing people living on land earmarked for the
GGW and would lead to further depletion of scarce water sources.

 A concept paper on the kinds of vegetal species to be included in the
GGW states that the wall will run through both inhabited and
uninhabited areas, but will be located in areas where the average
annual rainfall is higher than 200mm. It also stated that the only
species to be adapted to the wall would be "primarily those that are
found, live and develop there". [
http://www.grandemurailleverte.org/donnees/especes_vegetal.pdf ]

 However, in a statement to the Indigenous People's of Africa
Coordinating Committee, IPACC, Sada Albachir, director of Association
Tunfa, a Tuareg human rights group in Niger, said that "international
agreements in the past introduced alien invasive species into the
Sahara, without tackling the root problems of poor governance,
dangerous uranium mining, and a failure to conserve biodiversity and
water security in the arid region. I think the idea of planting a
Green Wall across Africa is not to be entertained by indigenous people
living in the proposed sites, unless the project has been studied in
collaboration with them and they are also involved in the
implementation." [
http://www.ipacc.org.za/eng/news_details.asp?NID=276 ]

 The programme coordinator for the OSS, Jihed Ghannem, told IRIN such
concerns were baseless. "The full participation of communities is
essential," he said.

 Timberwatch's Menne told IRIN: "In my experience, 'consulting' local
communities usually means misinforming them about the potential
impacts of a project by exaggerating how they will benefit, whilst
neglecting to inform them of the negative impacts. When they say that
local communities will be an integral part of the project, it normally
means that they will be used to provide cheap labour."

 Part of the GGW concept plan includes a section on "Food for Work"
designed to recruit unemployed workers in each country to help with
the planting of the greenbelt in the Sahel. According to OSS, under
the scheme, "members of the communities assuming responsibilities are
paid in part at the time of planting. The remainder is paid two years
later on the basis of the plant growth scale." The plan also indicates
that private businesses, including "initiators of safari parks, modern
farming, ecotourist sites" will find "some economic opportunities" in
the wall. [ http://www.grandemurailleverte.org/gmven/objectifs.php ]

 Menne said the wall could be a useful tool to combat desertification
only if "viewed as an exercise in adaptation, rather than as an
opportunity for climate change mitigation and making money from
CDM/REDD carbon offsets as presently envisioned".

 According to Khadija Hassan*, representative of an indigenous
people's organization, the GGW might also interfere with migration
patterns of pastoral communities and instead should incorporate
ancestral systems of land management. "It would be best to protect
what already exists in the region, stop the felling of trees in
valleys and oases, repair damage caused by climate change, educate
communities about REDD and restore livestock that has been lost," she
said. "I find the project is good, but too ambitious."

 *Not her real name

 zm/am/mw[END]

This report online: http://www.irinnews.org/report.aspx?reportID=92422



Côte d'Ivoire crisis: http://www.irinnews.org/Country.aspx?Country=CI

© IRIN. All rights reserved. More humanitarian news and analysis:
http://www.irinnews.org

[This item comes to you via IRIN, the humanitarian news and analysis
service of the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs.
The opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect those of the United
Nations or its Member States. Reposting or reproduction, with
attribution, for non-commercial purposes is permitted. Terms and
conditions: http://www.irinnews.org/copyright.aspx

IRIN partners: UAE, Canada, Germany, Ireland, Netherlands, Norway,
Sweden, Switzerland, UK, UNEP and the IHC. More information:
http://www.irinnews.org/donors.aspx

This mail is from a automatic address. Contact IRIN at:
[email protected]. Revise/stop your subscription:
http://bit.ly/9nCoUP ]

Subscribed Email: [email protected]

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "JFD 
info" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/jfdinfo?hl=en.

Reply via email to