Addis Ababa, November 12, 2025 – On the sidelines of the 6th African Land Policy Conference, a side event titled “Debunking the Myth of Land Abundance: Unmasking the Neocolonial Land Grabbing Agenda” brought together experts, African organizations, and land justice activists to expose the real forces driving land reform across the continent.
Over two days of intense exchanges, participants highlighted that the concept of “land reform” holds radically different meanings depending on who defines it. For many African voices, the urgent priorities are restitution, reparations, and justice. Representatives from South Africa and Zimbabwe shared their national experiences in addressing historical land dispossession. Yet, injustice persists elsewhere: in the Democratic Republic of Congo, some communities still claim lands confiscated by King Leopold in 1911—114 years ago—now occupied by palm oil plantations run by a New York–based private equity fund. In Cameroon, local communities continue to challenge the occupation of their ancestral territories by plantations owned by French oligarch Vincent Bolloré.
By contrast, for some international actors, land reform serves a very different purpose: consolidating control over African lands for economic and financial gain. For decades, institutions such as the World Bank and the African Development Bank (AfDB) have promoted a reform agenda that favors land privatization and commodification. According to the World Bank’s 2024 policy paper “Land Policies for Resilient and Equitable Growth in Africa,” so-called “informal” land systems are portrayed as barriers to agricultural investment—despite the fact that many rural communities continue to resist attempts to transfer their lands to investors.
The World Bank now justifies this land formalization agenda in the name of the climate crisis. Yet the Climatewash Report, presented during the session, reveals that climate concerns are being used to mask deeper structural objectives: transforming African agriculture by opening so-called “unused” lands to investors and pushing small-scale farmers—deemed less productive—out of the sector. Public lands, the report notes, are being demarcated, titled, digitized, and turned into marketable assets—available for sale, lease, or mortgage.
Policy analyst Frédéric Mousseau, Policy Director at the Oakland Institute (California), explained during his presentation:
“The World Bank claims to promote land security, justice, and equity. In reality, its true goal is to attract foreign investment and consolidate large-scale agribusiness—at the expense of small farmers and local communities.”
The Climatewash Report and related analyses also focused on two key sectors where the World Bank argues that land formalization is essential for climate goals:
- Mining expansion: According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), under a net-zero scenario by 2050, only 10.7% of global demand for graphite, cobalt, and lithium would be linked to green energy. Meanwhile, 41.79% would go to electric vehicles, and 47.5% to industries unrelated to the energy transition. These figures show that climate urgency cannot justify large-scale exploitation of African lands.
- Carbon markets: While afforestation and reforestation programs can, in theory, benefit ecosystems, financing them through carbon credits remains highly problematic. A European Commission study revealed that 85% of Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) projects (2013–2020) failed to achieve real emissions reductions. Moreover, local populations receive only a tiny fraction of the generated revenues—most of which are siphoned off by financial intermediaries, certification firms, and corporate actors.
Since 2014, the Our Land, Our Business (OLOB) campaign has fought against these privatization agendas, particularly the Enabling the Business of Agriculture project. But global financial institutions have found a new justification: climate. Last year, the World Bank launched the Global Program on Land Tenure Security and Land Access for Climate Goals, pledging billions of dollars to “secure” lands and facilitate investor access.
In an interview with Kilalopress, Frédéric Mousseau stated:
“This is a historic moment. For the first time, the African Union is demanding justice and reparations from colonial powers that exploited Africa for centuries. But the current pressures have nothing to do with climate or development—they serve multinational corporations and financial institutions. African lands are being targeted for industrial agriculture, mining, and carbon markets, often at the expense of local communities. Agroecology remains the only truly sustainable path for Africa.”
He added that the Bukanga-Lonzo project in the DRC is a telling example of imposed models gone wrong: over 200 million dollars spent on massive agricultural infrastructure—with virtually no impact on production, save for a few sacks of maize. According to Mousseau, Africa’s agricultural future depends on local transformation, value addition, and empowering smallholders through agroecology and natural methods such as composting, crop diversification, and integrated livestock farming.
The side event also provided an open floor for journalists and participants to raise in-depth questions. Discussions focused on land rights protection, resource exploitation, carbon markets, and food sovereignty. The exchanges were deemed constructive and enlightening, reinforcing the urgent need to shield local communities from privatization policies disguised as reform. Speakers unanimously warned that Western-driven land formalization—backed by financial institutions like the World Bank—amounts to a modern form of dispossession and exploitation.
The consensus was clear: the sustainable path forward lies in defending community land rights, supporting agroecology, and ensuring that land and resources remain under local control.
By Franck Zongwe
