On December 19, 2022, the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework was adopted at the 15e Conference of the Parties (COP15) to the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity. Among its 23 goals centered around environmental conservation and the preservation of biodiversity is the 30×30 initiative.
This flagship measure aims to designate 30% of terrestrial environments and 30% of maritime environments as protected natural areas by 2030. It also plans to support the environmental protection efforts of so-called developing countries by paying them 50 billion dollars by 2050, or to promote indigenous knowledge, the sustainable use of territories, respect for the rights of local communities and the use of compensation mechanisms for pollution emitted by supporting biodiversity conservation projects.
The 30×30 initiative, however, disregards the major conflicts generated by environmental conservation in the countries of the South, where protected natural areas tend to constitute areas of total exclusion of local communities and are often perceived as a colonial heritage.
Increasing the surface area of these protected areas would inevitably aggravate tensions: indeed, many countries in the South are faced with significant land pressure, on the one hand because of their strong population growth and, on the other hand, because of their economies oriented towards the extraction of natural resources (timber, energy and minerals) and large-scale agriculture intended to supply the markets of so-called developed countries.
Côte d’Ivoire, the leading exporter of cocoa and a major producer of coffee, palm oil and gold, is a good example. According to the World Bank, in 2020, 66.7% of its territory was devoted to agriculture. This situation is similar in Kenya, the largest tea exporter in the world and where 48.5% of the territory is used for cultivation. These countries already include a significant proportion of protected natural areas, i.e., in 2016, according to the International Union for Conservation of Nature, 22.9% of Ivorian territory and 12.4% of Kenyan territory.
Militarized environmental protection
In East Africa, as in West Africa, the protection of protected areas is generally assumed by forest rangers forming part of the national security forces. This militarization of environmental protection is also used, in many countries, as a means of controlling remote areas. It is accompanied not only by serious human rights violations, but also by the misuse of environmental protection rules by forest guards to exercise economic predation on neighboring communities.
These constraints and violence exerted by virtue of the protection of the environment are then added to the social and environmental impacts generated by the exploitation of natural resources. In Africa, these industries are sometimes set up near or even within protected areas, with international financial institutions encouraging governments to use resource extraction as a lever for development.
Exacerbating local tensions and feelings against national authorities, these situations generate numerous local conflicts that can subsequently be exploited by armed groups seeking to extend their areas of influence.
This is how in Burkina Faso, a country in the throes of a major security crisis since 2015, the country’s two main protected areas have become the first two centers of violence. In 2018, the attack on the Boungou mining site, then operated by the Quebec company SEMAFO, occurred about ten kilometers from the protected areas of Arly National Park.
Environmental conflicts and international armed groups
National parks in northern Côte d’Ivoire and Benin also harbor areas where armed groups seek to spread the Sahelian conflict to the rest of West Africa. These groups then chase away the forest rangers and allow local populations to take advantage of protected areas, whether for hunting (since the price of permits within natural territories is only accessible to international tourists), agriculture, animal husbandry or artisanal mining.
If local populations take advantage of this access, it is not for lack of environmental awareness, quite the contrary. They are often very sensitive to biodiversity protection issues. But the frustrations, injustices and usage restrictions generated by these environmental conservation practices affect them considerably.
Communities bordering protected areas in Southern countries experience both the main environmental impacts associated with the economies of the North, the main impacts of climate change and the main restrictions imposed to preserve the environment.
In the end, supporting environmental conservation policies that are inadequate and disconnected from the reality of neighboring communities is more likely to cause the destruction of biodiversity than its preservation. It is therefore essential to adapt them, in consultation with these populations.