Foreign investment raises concerns about land access in Africa

A new trend is emerging as climate change accelerates, raising concerns about a modern form of colonialism. Driven by carbon markets, renewable energy investments, and conservation efforts, Africa is increasingly viewed as a key resource for global climate action. However, critics argue this approach, termed “green colonialism,” transfers land control and environmental burdens to the continent.

Africa, which contributes less than four percent of global greenhouse gas emissions, is being positioned as a carbon sink and a supplier of minerals vital for the green energy transition. This situation raises questions about equity and responsibility in addressing the climate crisis.

Climate action meets historical inequality

Green colonialism reflects existing global power imbalances. Industrialized nations have historically benefited from fossil fuel use and environmental degradation. While Africa accounts for a small percentage of global greenhouse gas emissions, it is disproportionately affected by climate impacts. Current climate solutions, such as tree planting and carbon sequestration, are increasingly implemented in the Global South, with a growing concentration of carbon offset and nature-based solution projects on African land.

Large areas are being designated for carbon offset projects, conservation zones, biofuel plantations, and renewable energy installations. These projects often restrict traditional land use, displace communities, or convert communal land into assets controlled by foreign investors. This creates a situation where Africa is asked to bear a significant portion of the land and social costs of climate mitigation, despite contributing minimally to the problem.

Green grabbing and carbon markets

Green grabbing, the acquisition of land for environmental purposes without adequate consultation or compensation, is a key driver of this trend. Voluntary carbon markets, valued at billions of dollars annually, rely heavily on land-based projects in Africa, Latin America, and Southeast Asia. These markets allow high-emitting countries to offset pollution by financing projects elsewhere, often in African forests, savannahs, and rangelands. Despite being promoted as cost-effective climate tools, their impact on long-term emission reductions has been questioned.

Many offset schemes allow polluters to delay real emission cuts while shifting responsibility to communities reliant on the land. Carbon credits become financial instruments traded internationally, while local populations face restrictions on land they have used for generations. Concerns persist regarding transparency and accountability, with reports highlighting shortcomings in community consultation, benefit sharing, and monitoring of social impacts.

Renewable energy and the new resource rush

Africa’s role in the global energy transition extends beyond carbon offsets. The continent possesses substantial reserves of minerals like lithium, cobalt, nickel, copper, and rare earth elements, essential for electric vehicles, batteries, and renewable energy technologies. Demand for these minerals is projected to increase significantly by 2040. Countries such as the Democratic Republic of Congo, Namibia, Zimbabwe, and Mali have become strategic suppliers. While this presents economic opportunities, it also risks replicating historical patterns of resource extraction. Raw materials are often exported with limited local processing, environmental safeguards are inconsistently enforced, and communities bear the ecological costs. Critics argue the green economy risks becoming a rebranded version of resource extraction unless African nations gain greater control over value chains and industrial policy.

Land Rights, livelihoods, and consent

The impact of green colonialism on land rights is a major point of contention. In Africa, land is integral to identity, culture, and survival. Large-scale climate projects that disregard Free, Prior, and Informed Consent undermine local governance and international human rights standards. Pastoralists, smallholder farmers, and indigenous communities are particularly vulnerable to restrictions on land use, which can destabilize livelihoods and increase poverty.

A global credibility test

Green colonialism poses a risk to global climate action. Environmental solutions that exacerbate inequality generate resistance and erode trust. Climate policies perceived as unjust are unlikely to succeed, particularly in regions facing poverty, conflict, and underdevelopment. Africa faces the challenge of balancing environmental protection with development priorities, including energy access, food security, and industrialization. The global community must pursue climate goals without replicating colonial-era patterns of domination.

Towards a just transition

A viable path forward requires prioritizing real emission reductions at the source, alongside fair climate finance, technology transfer, and inclusive decision-making. African countries must be partners in global climate solutions, not merely sites for them. Without justice, the green transition risks becoming an unequal exchange: land and resources from Africa, environmental benefits and profits elsewhere. The fight against climate change will only succeed if it addresses both carbon emissions and the power structures that determine who bears the costs of addressing them.