Keypoints:
- Degraded land threatens Africa’s economies
- Restoration requires finance and policy reform
- COP17 must deliver practical African solutions
AFRICA’S leaders should pay close attention when governments gather in Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia, for UNCCD COP17. The summit is not merely about soil, drought or desertification; it concerns food security, economic resilience and political stability.
For a continent where millions depend on agriculture, livestock and natural resources, restoring degraded land must become a development priority. Decisions taken in Mongolia could influence how restoration is financed, how drought risks are managed and how African governments protect the landscapes sustaining their people.
More than an environmental summit
The 17th session of the Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification will take place in Ulaanbaatar from August 17–28, 2026, under the theme ‘Restoring Land, Restoring Hope’.
The gathering is expected to bring together representatives of the UNCCD’s 197 parties, alongside ministers, scientists, investors, Indigenous Peoples and pastoralists. Its purpose will be to accelerate action on land restoration, drought resilience, water security, rangelands and sustainable food systems.
Its importance extends beyond trees and soils. Up to 40 percent of the world’s land is degraded, undermining agricultural production, water availability, biodiversity, livelihoods and economic stability.
These consequences are especially serious in Africa, where two-thirds of the continent consists of deserts or drylands and large areas are degraded. Addressing desertification is not optional. It is a prerequisite for economic progress and social stability.
COP17 must therefore move beyond declarations. The real test is whether international commitments can become funded projects, functioning institutions and improvements for communities.
Land is economic infrastructure
Healthy land must be recognised as infrastructure.
It produces food, stores and filters water, supports biodiversity and anchors rural economies. It provides employment and income for farmers, pastoralists, forest communities and businesses across agricultural value chains.
When land deteriorates, governments pay through declining harvests, food imports, emergency relief, lost tax revenue, rural unemployment and pressure on public services.
Meeting global restoration and drought-resilience targets requires hundreds of billions of dollars annually. Investment remains far below what is needed, while losses caused by desertification, land degradation and drought continue to rise.
For African governments confronting debt pressures and limited fiscal space, prevention makes economic sense. Investments that improve soil fertility, restore watersheds or strengthen drought preparedness can reduce later spending on humanitarian assistance, disaster recovery and food imports. Restoration is preventive economics, not an environmental luxury.
Mongolia offers Africa a warning
Mongolia may appear distant from Africa’s development challenges. Yet its experience warns of the interaction between climate shocks, fragile ecosystems and rural livelihoods.
Much of its territory is affected by land degradation, while its pastoral economy is under pressure from droughts and severe winters known as dzuds.
The extreme 2023–2024 winter killed millions of livestock and affected thousands of herder households. In Mongolia, animals are not simply commodities. They represent wealth, food, income and economic security.
The parallels with Africa are unmistakable. Pastoral communities in Botswana, Namibia, Kenya, Ethiopia, the Horn of Africa and the Sahel face shrinking water sources, deteriorating pasture and unpredictable weather. A failed rainy season can destroy livestock, reduce incomes and force families from rural areas.
Climate shocks spread through food markets, employment, migration, public finances and national security. Mongolia’s experience illustrates why African countries must build resilience before drought and land degradation reach catastrophic levels.
Healthy land protects water
COP17 should help governments abandon the artificial separation between land and water policy.
Many countries respond to scarcity by drilling boreholes, constructing dams or expanding irrigation. Such infrastructure remains important, but it cannot provide a complete solution when the surrounding land is degraded.
Healthy soils function as natural reservoirs. They absorb rainfall, recharge groundwater and regulate water flows into rivers and lakes. Degraded soils lose this capacity. Water runs across hardened surfaces, causing erosion and flooding instead of replenishing underground reserves.
Restoring vegetation, wetlands, grasslands and watersheds can improve water security while reducing drought risk.
This is especially important for Southern Africa, where land degradation and water scarcity occur together. Governments cannot secure water supplies while allowing the landscapes that capture and store water to collapse.
Prevention must replace crisis response
African governments have relied on emergency responses after droughts and other climate-related disasters.
Food aid is distributed. Livestock feed is purchased. Emergency funds are released. These measures may save lives, but they often arrive after households have lost assets and livelihoods.
A more resilient approach would invest before disaster strikes. That means protecting soils, improving pasture management, diversifying rural incomes, developing early-warning systems, harvesting water and supporting drought-resistant crops. Local authorities and communities must also have the resources to act.
Satellite monitoring, artificial intelligence and digital mapping can help governments track soil conditions, anticipate drought and identify restoration priorities.
But technology cannot substitute for functioning institutions. Forecasts are useful only when governments have plans, funding and structures capable of responding.
Financing restoration at scale
Finance will ultimately determine whether COP17 succeeds.
African governments cannot restore millions of hectares through public budgets alone. They will need support from development banks, climate funds, private investors and international partners.
Attracting investment requires credible national strategies. Projects must have outcomes, transparent governance and reliable systems for measuring environmental and economic benefits.
Public and concessional finance can reduce risk and attract private capital. Governments can also create incentives for sustainable agriculture, responsible grazing, soil conservation and land rehabilitation.
Restoration must be integrated into agriculture, mining, infrastructure, water and climate policies. Too many governments treat these sectors separately. One ministry supports agricultural expansion, another approves mining operations and a third manages water resources, often without coordination.
The result can be policies in which one public investment repairs damage created by another. COP17 should encourage integrated strategies that treat land as natural capital supporting the entire economy.
Restoration is more than planting trees
Large-scale tree-planting campaigns have become popular across Africa and elsewhere. Mongolia’s Billion Trees Campaign aims to plant one billion trees by 2030.
Such programmes can contribute, but seedling numbers are not an adequate measure of restoration.
Trees must suit local soils, water availability and ecosystems. Inappropriate species in drylands can add pressure to limited water resources, while poorly maintained seedlings may die soon after ceremonial planting events.
In many dryland regions, healthy grasslands and rangelands are as important as forests. Success should be measured through improved soil health, biodiversity, water retention, agricultural productivity and more secure livelihoods.
This lesson is particularly relevant to Africa’s Great Green Wall and national tree-planting campaigns. Governments should prioritise ecological outcomes rather than planting targets.
Mining cannot ignore natural capital
Mongolia and many African countries share another dilemma: dependence on mineral extraction.
Mining generates jobs, export earnings and public revenue. Yet poorly regulated mining can contaminate water, damage soils and leave communities with degraded landscapes long after companies have departed.
The choice should not be framed as mining or environmental protection.
Responsible mining requires governments to enforce rehabilitation obligations, protect water sources and ensure restoration costs are built into projects. Companies must not be permitted to privatise profits while transferring environmental damage to communities and taxpayers.
Mineral-rich African countries should regard natural capital as an economic asset essential to sustaining development after mineral deposits are exhausted.
Rangelands deserve political attention
COP17 coincides with the UN International Year of Rangelands and Pastoralists 2026, championed by Mongolia.
Rangelands cover more than half of the Earth’s land surface and support hundreds of millions of people, yet remain among the world’s most overlooked ecosystems.
Pastoralism supports millions across Africa and contributes to livestock production, food markets and cross-border trade. Yet pastoral communities are frequently marginalised and deprived of infrastructure, veterinary services, education and water access.
Restoring rangelands should protect mobility, recognise traditional knowledge and give pastoralists a meaningful role in land governance.
What Africa should demand
African delegations should arrive in Ulaanbaatar with practical demands rather than general statements.
They should seek affordable restoration finance, stronger technology partnerships and fairer support for countries facing severe drought and land degradation. They should also push for investment models that benefit local communities instead of merely satisfying international reporting requirements.
Restoration will not succeed without secure land rights, local participation and economic incentives. Farmers and pastoralists are unlikely to invest in land they may lose or from which they receive little benefit.
African governments must also accept responsibility. International finance cannot compensate for weak regulation, fragmented planning or misuse of public resources.
The most valuable outcome would be a shift from isolated environmental projects towards national development models built around healthy land.
Restoring land means restoring hope
Land restoration can reduce poverty, create jobs, protect water, strengthen food systems and reduce competition over scarce resources.
The discussions in Ulaanbaatar will influence financing, scientific collaboration and international partnerships. But the conference’s value will depend on what happens after delegates return home.
Africa does not need another global summit whose promises remain trapped in carefully negotiated declarations. It needs investable programmes, stronger institutions and policies recognising healthy land as the basis of economic security.
Ulaanbaatar may be thousands of kilometres from Africa, but the questions being addressed there could hardly be closer to the continent’s future.
Dr Baboloki Semele is a youth and gender advocate and expert validator with the African Union’s High-Level Panel on Emerging Technologies (APET)
