Introduction
Indigenous peoples in Africa only make up three percent of the continent’s population, yet they are disproportionately affected by environmental degradation and climate change. Indigenous people’s reliance on natural resources not only affects their livelihoods and cultural practices but also sometimes the survival of the group. This dependency is magnified by the impact of deforestation, land dispossession, and other biodiversity losses. As a response to the growing efforts to conserve global ecosystems, governments and international organisations continuously take on projects and policy changes that are meant to justify the displacement of Indigenous communities from their ancestral lands (Knox, 2024).
In past decades, the phenomenon of green colonialism has been widely discussed in international discourse. Due to global climate initiatives that include the monetisation of carbon markets, expansion of renewable energy, and the organisation of conservation schemes, states and corporate actors have been able to take over land control from Indigenous populations in the name of environmental protection. While Africa contributes to less than five percent of global greenhouse gas emissions, it is frequently framed by actors in the Global North as a carbon sink (Ongera, 2026). With large areas of lands repurposed for climate mitigation projects, it also frequently marginalises the very populations who have historically acted as stewards of these environments. Thus, initiatives promoted as solutions to climate crises without the consent of local communities should be refrained from.
Legal Framework
International law has progressively recognised the rights of Indigenous peoples, despite their disproportionate exposure to environmental degradation and climate change-induced human rights violations (OHCHR, n.d.). While Indigenous peoples are recognised as a distinctive sub-group of the mainstream population, the recognition of their special rights remains normative. Most legal frameworks either have limited ratification or do not create binding effects.
The first main framework dates back to the International Labour Organisation (ILO) publishing a study on the living and working conditions of Indigenous populations. The adoption of the ILO Convention No. 107, and later Convention No. 169, came after understanding and analysing the social and economic circumstances of Indigenous communities. While Convention No. 169 marked a significant shift towards recognising the Indigenous peoples as direct rights holders, its impact remained insubstantial due to limited ratification, especially in Africa.
Moreover, Article 17 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) recognises the preservation and promotion of cultural and collective identity of minority groups. More importantly, Common Article 1(2) of both international covenants affirms the right of all peoples to freely dispose of their natural resources. Nevertheless, these provisions remain broad frameworks and are rarely interpreted in a manner that holds governments and international organisations responsible.
As such, the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) has become the most comprehensive international legal instrument on the individual and collective rights of Indigenous peoples. The Declaration sets out minimum standards for the rights of Indigenous peoples, including the right to self-determination and autonomy, acknowledging their right to govern their own affairs and maintain control over their land and resources according to their customs (Spranger and Günther, 2025). Another important principle is the Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) principle, which requires states to consult Indigenous communities when initiating projects that affect their lands, livelihoods, and ways of life. Including Indigenous communities at the centre of the decision-making process, it directly safeguards their self-determination over land and resources. Despite these clear concepts, governments often lack a genuine intention of protecting Indigenous rights when economic incentives are presented.
In addition to international instruments, the African Commission’s Working Group on Indigenous Populations also focuses on preventing marginalisation and protecting the rights of the Indigenous population across Africa. The promotion and protection of their rights, their recognition as peoples, the safeguarding of their ways of life, and the right to access land and resources continue to be at the forefront of the Commission’s work.
The right to self-determination is also explicitly recognised by the African Charter under Article 20(1). This is complemented by Article 19, the prohibition against domination by another, and Articles 21 and 22 corresponding to the right to freely dispose natural resources, as well as social and cultural development (Bojosi and Wachira, 2006). In 2017, the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights (AfCHPR) delivered its judgment in a landmark case concerning the rights to land and resources of Indigenous peoples. The Ogiek, an Indigenous forest-dwelling community in Kenya, successfully held the government responsible for denying them access to their ancestral land, the Mau Forest (Claridge, 2025). The Ogieks were forcefully evicted when the government acquired control over the territory in exchange of carbon credits (Marshall, 2023). This judgment has been welcomed by many Indigenous communities across Africa, setting a clear precedent for their rights.
Despite international and regional standards guaranteeing their rights, Indigenous peoples continue to be systematically discriminated against and face limited access to political decision-making (Spranger and Günther, 2025). This suggests that existing legal frameworks are insufficient in addressing the underlying imbalance between Indigenous peoples, the state and external actors, enabling green colonialism.
Green Colonialism, Land Grabbing and Forced Evictions
Green colonialism refers to the process whereby increased investment in green energy and conservation initiatives exploits the land and livelihoods of marginalised communities (Earth.org, 2021). These projects are often initiated by Global North actors under the guise of environmental protection. Yet, the result is often harmful to Indigenous communities and leads to the displacement from their ancestral lands. In this sense, colonial patterns of land control and dispossession are recreated by these environmental policies, generating severe social, cultural, and economic consequences for Indigenous populations (Ongera, 2026).
Despite contributing minimally to climate change, Indigenous peoples often experience its most adverse effects (Human Rights Research Centre, 2025). Paradoxically, their traditional ecological knowledge has been shown to support biodiversity conservation and enhance resilience to environmental change, often proving more effective than externally imposed preservation methods (Minority Rights Group, 2025). This contradiction highlights the central tension with green colonialism.
In Africa, green colonialism is most visible through conservation initiatives and green energy transitions. These processes frequently involve the dispossession of land and natural resources that are intrinsically linked to Indigenous livelihoods, cultural identity, and survival. Framed within the urgency of the climate crisis, renewable energy technologies and conservation strategies are often presented as universal solutions, thereby legitimising large-scale land acquisitions (Misyk, 2025). Consequently, a contemporary scramble in Africa has emerged with the so-called “green grabbing” dynamic, where land is appropriated for environmental purposes that lead to forced evictions, marginalisation, and the loss of cultural heritage (Ongera, 2026).
In practice, carbon offset schemes and sustainability projects allow major polluters to compensate for their emissions while shifting the burden of climate mitigation onto vulnerable communities (GRAIN and Coulibaly, 2024). Rather than reducing emissions at its source, land and nature are now commodified, where profit overpowers the protection of human rights. This demonstrates the unfair distribution of the cost of climate actions. Despite producing the least pollution, Indigenous communities in Africa bear one of the highest burdens. Critically, such models do not necessarily produce better environmental outcomes and undermine long-standing Indigenous practices (Ndasi and Carrer, 2024).
In the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), the creation of Kahuzi-Beiga National Park (PNKB) was supported by other states and conservation non-governmental organisations (NGOs). While widely celebrated for its role in protecting biodiversity, it led to the eviction of the Batwa community. This hunter-gatherer group has been displaced since the 1970s and continues to face systemic discrimination and violence, preventing their return. The absence of formal legal recognition of Indigenous rights within the domestic framework further entrenches their marginalisation and unable to exercise control over land and resources. As a result, many Batwa communities experience extreme poverty, food insecurity, and declining health due to the loss of access to subsistence resources and medicinal plants. Similar patterns of displacement have been observed among Batwa populations in Burundi, Rwanda, and other parts of the Congo Basin.
Comparable dynamics can be observed in East Africa. The Maasai have historically been evicted from the Serengeti following its designation as a conservation area and now face further displacement in the Ngorongoro region. The prioritisation of wildlife conservation and tourism has effectively subordinated Maasai land rights, illustrating how economic and environmental interests can override Indigenous claims (Nnoko and Nyeko, 2024). Similarly, in Uganda, the establishment of Queen Elizabeth Park displaced the Basongora and Batooro Peoples, threatening their pastoralist livelihoods and contributing to the erosion of cultural traditions such as the Koogere oral tradition (Minority Rights Group, n.d.).
Similar cases include the eviction of Sengwer communities in Kenya from the Cherangany Hills (Amnesty International, 2018), the displacement of Pygmies (Baka) communities in the Odzala-KoKoua park in the Republic of Congo, the removal of Basarwa Peoples following the creation of the Moremi Game Reserve in Botswana (IPACC, 2025), and the bribes and threats given to Nairobi’s Borana herders to leave their home-lands of the Cherab reserve (ARTE, 2025). This pattern across Africa demonstrates that forced evictions under conservation frameworks are not isolated incidents, but indeed a design where the rights of Indigenous people are placed on the back burner.
Beyond conservation, African states have also been positioned as sites for offsetting emissions produced in the Global North. The increasing commodification of nature through carbon markets has facilitated the scale of land and ecosystem services to external actors (Kuna and Korbeogo, 2023). Hereby, reinforcing unequal global power dynamics. The Kyoto Protocol first institutionalised carbon as a tradable commodity, laying the foundation for contemporary carbon credit systems that enable this transfer of responsibility.
In Kenya, the Samburu tribes have lost control over the movement of their herds following the acquisition of land by the Northern Rangelands Trust (NRT). Through carbon credit schemes, the NRT has effectively monetised Samburu ancestral lands, selling credits to corporations such as Netflix and British Airways (Survival International, 2025). Their pastoralist traditions that rely on seasonal patterns and traditional knowledge can no longer be practiced. Similar challenges have been documented among Borana herders in northern Kenya.
Furthermore, so-called green energy projects also create a major obstacle for Indigenous peoples. For instance, the Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation (REDD+), a United Nations backed initiative to reduce emissions, has imposed restrictions on how the land is used by local actors across the Congo Basin (Global Forest Coalition, 2024). Other large-scale renewable energy projects such as the Lake Turkana Wind Power Project in Kenya, the Noor complex in Morocco, the Benban Solar Park in Egypt further demonstrate how green colonialism unevenly restricts Indigenous land use and access to resources while privileging external actors.
Local governments have also labelled activities such as logging and agricultural projects as sustainable. For instance, the Cameroonian government has continued to allow logging and the construction of roads in the forest, forcing the Ba’Aka and Bakola communities to leave and forced to engage in cultivation (Annagu, 2021). Similarly, Ethiopia has been pushing the selling of Indigenous lands to foreign investors, to produce large scale agriculture schemes (Cultural Survival, 2016). Land deals with promises to improve the livelihoods of Indigenous communities reconfigure the access to land and force Indigenous peoples to turn to other means of survival, risking the loss of their culture and knowledge (Wayessa, 2022). This reflects how sustainable development initiatives justify the dispossession of land for economic narratives.
In recent years, energy companies have increasingly considered hydrogen and hydropower as green solutions, requiring a large amount of land and water to achieve decarbonisation globally. In Namibia, the Nama people were dispossessed of their land in Great Namaqualand because of the Hyphen Hydrogen Energy project led by the British and Germans (ECCHR, n.d.). The Namas were also not included in the discussion of the project, they also did not give consent to the development on their land. Thus, this project not only failed to meet the FPIC principle prioritising Indigenous peoples but also risks endangering the biodiversity of their ancestral land. These cases illustrate how market-based climate solutions can restrict Indigenous land use while benefitting external actors, thereby reinforcing the dynamics of green colonialism.
Conclusion
The impact of green colonialism on Indigenous communities goes beyond land dispossession and forced displacements. Instead, profound consequences are incurred from patterns that reflect broader inequalities and discrimination embedded in both local and global governance.
The displacement of Indigenous communities not only restricts their access to traditional resources but also results in increased marginalisation and the erosion of the community. In many cases, Indigenous communities are relocated to areas habituated by a dominant ethnic group, where they are perceived as second class citizens or even as “dirty” (ARTE, 2025). The lack of adequate infrastructure and economic means also exacerbates their vulnerability and invisibility. Their reliance on traditional practices also means the eviction from ancestral land often forces them to take on new labour that they are unfamiliar with. The lack of government aid further marginalises them in new environments. The loss of access to their ancestral land also risks the disappearance of their spiritual and traditional knowledge systems. In essence, green colonialism not only violates the right of Indigenous peoples and natural resources but should also be considered a violation of the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment (UN Resolution 76/300).
BIBLIOGRAPHY
ACHPR. (2006). Indigenous Peoples in Africa: The Forgotten Peoples? https://achpr.au.int/en/special-mechanisms-reports/indigenous-peoples-africa-forgotten-peoples. Accessed March 17, 2026.
ARTE Reportage (2024) Africa’s Green Colonialism English. ARTE. https://www.arte.tv/en/videos/121460-000-A/arte-reportage/. Accessed March 19, 2026.
Claridge, L. (2025). The African Court’s Ogiek Compliance Decision: A Turning Point for Indigenous Land Rights in Africa? Humanrightsincontext. https://www.humanrightsincontext.be/post/the-african-court-s-ogiek-compliance-decision-a-turning-point-for-indigenous-land-rights-in-africa. Accessed March 21, 2026.
Cultural Survival. (2016, February). Ethiopia Cancels Concession for Karaturi Land Grab. Intercontinental Cry. https://icmagazine.org/ethiopia-cancels-concession-for-karaturi-land-grab/. Accessed March 22, 2026.
Earth.org.(2021). What Is Green Colonialism?. Earth.org. https://earth.org/green-colonialism/. Accessed March 21, 2026.
ECCHR (2022). ECCHR: From Empire to Energy imperialism: Germany’s Colonial Legacy and “Green” Projects in Namaqualand. https://www.ecchr.eu/en/case/vom-imperium-zum-energie-imperialismus-deutschlands-koloniales-erbe-und-gruene-projekte-in-namaqualand/. Accessed March 22, 2026.
Global Forest Coalition, & GFC Admin. (2024). Who Really Benefits? How REDD+ Fails Forests and Those Who Protect Them – A new Briefing from GFC. Global Forest Coalition. https://globalforestcoalition.org/who-really-benefits-how-redd-fails-forests/. Accessed March 21, 2026.
GRAIN and Coulibaly, M. (2024) The AfCFTA and land in Africa: towards a surge in land grabbing?. Grain.org. https://grain.org/en/article/7213-the-afcfta-and-land-in-africa-towards-a-surge-in-land-grabbing. Accessed March 18, 2026.
Human Rights Watch (2024). Conservation in Tanzania No Excuse to Violate Indigenous Rights. https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/08/09/conservation-tanzania-no-excuse-violate-indigenous-rights. Accessed March 24, 2026.
Kiran. (2020). Great concern in the Moremi game reserve in the Okavango Delta in Botswana – The Indigenous Peoples of Africa Co-ordinating Committee. The Indigenous Peoples of Africa Co-Ordinating Committee. https://www.ipacc.org.za/blog/2020/01/20/moremi-game-reserve-in-the-okavango-delta-in-botswana/. Accessed March 20, 2026.
Knox, J. H. (2024). New set of human rights principles aims to end displacement and abuse of Indigenous people through “fortress conservation.” The Conversation. https://theconversation.com/new-set-of-human-rights-principles-aims-to-end-displacement-and-abuse-of-indigenous-people-through-fortress-conservation-242891. Accessed March 20, 2026.
Marshall, C. (2023). Kenya’s Ogiek people being evicted for carbon credits. BBC News. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-67352067. Accessed March 23, 2026.
Minority Rights Group (2025). Guardians of the Land: Enhancing Protection for Indigenous Environmental Rights Defenders in Africa’s Changing Landscape. Minority Rights Group. https://minorityrights.org/events/guardians-of-the-land/. Accessed March 16, 2026.
Mukundi, G. (2026). Protecting indigenous peoples in Africa: An analysis of the approach of the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights. African Human Rights Law Journal (AHRLJ). Up.ac.za. https://www.ahrlj.up.ac.za/bojosi-k-n-wachira-g-m#_ftn91. Accessed March 15, 2026.
Olana Wayessa, G. (2022). Environmental (in)justices of land leases in Ethiopia: Premises, promises, and lived realities. World Development Perspectives, 28, 100464. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wdp.2022.100464. Accessed March 20, 2026.
Ongera, P. (2026). Green colonialism and the new scramble for African land. Meer; Meer.com. https://www.meer.com/en/103302-green-colonialism-and-the-new-scramble-for-african-land. Accessed March 18, 2026.
Rainforest Journalism Fund (n.d.). Cameroon: Large-Scale Logging Forces Indigenous Baka Out of the Forests. https://rainforestjournalismfund.org/stories/cameroon-large-scale-logging-forces-indigenous-baka-out-forests. Accessed March 25, 2026.
Spranger, T. M. and Günther, J. (2025). Indigenous people in international law: Developments and perspectives (Vol. 8, pp. 223–237). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.dnb.2024.12.003. Accessed March 21, 2026.
Survival International. (2026). Kenya: Landmark court ruling delivers devastating blow to flagship carbon offset project. Survivalinternational.org. https://survivalinternational.org/news/14121. Accessed March 22, 2026.
United Nations. (2024). About indigenous peoples and human rights. OHCHR. https://www.ohchr.org/en/indigenous-peoples/about-indigenous-peoples-and-human-rights. Accessed March 15, 2026.
UNPFI (2013). Indigenous Peoples in the African Region: Twelfth Session of the UN Permanent Foreum on Indigenous Issues. https://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unpfii/documents/2013/Media/Fact%20Sheet_Africa_%20UNPFII-12.pdf. Accessed March 18, 2026.
Yaryna Misyk. (2025). Green Colonialism and the true cost of clean energy. European Wilderness Society. https://wilderness-society.org/green-colonialism-and-the-true-cost-of-clean-energy/. Accessed March 18, 2026.