Are we gaining or losing on cross-border resources?
The dispute between Uganda and Kenya over the ownership of the Magingo Island on Lake Victoria unravels the post-colonial problems in Africa. It also raises the fundamental questions whether Uganda is actually gaining or losing its share of cross-border r
By Joseph Ogwal
The dispute between Uganda and Kenya over the ownership of the Magingo Island on Lake Victoria unravels the post-colonial problems in Africa. It also raises the fundamental questions whether Uganda is actually gaining or losing its share of cross-border resources to its neighbours.
Uganda’s border area is porous, unmarked, and yet it is endowed with a variety of natural resources — forests, lakes, rivers, minerals and wild fauna which transcend into neighbouring countries. Where these resources exist, there are also conflicts such as war, unclear borders, disputes over exploitation, user rights or over-exploitation.
Like other developing economies, Uganda is increasingly seeking to earn foreign exchange by exploiting and marketing its vast natural resources. This implies that the cross-border issues cannot be underscored because reduction in quality or quantity of natural resources translates directly onto the economy, social stability and national security.
In the recent times, both terrestrial and aquatic resources lying between borders of Uganda and its neighbours are being heavily threatened by exploitation.
For example, the fish storcks in Lake Victoria and Albert have greatly declined as a result of over fishing. Likewise, the forest cover on Mt Elgon, Sango Bay area and Rwenzori mountains has dwindled considerably due to heavy logging.
Shared water basins are also threatened by upstream pollution (River Kagera, River Semliki), excessive downstream exploitation (the Nile) or bio-invasion (L. Victoria).
In each case, economic forces are driving change and causing rapid loss of natural resources. Unfortunately, Uganda may be gaining less from this or doing little to protect its vital resources.
In the case of Semliki river basin, Ugandan fishermen have often lost out to their Congolese counterparts. There has also been concern that Uganda may have lost land to Congo due to the changing character of River Semliki, the natural boundary between the two countries. Under the international conventions and protocols, cross-border resources must be managed and used equitably.
Other multilateral conventions exist to harmonise and guide equitable use of resources.
However, in most regions of the world, including the Great Lakes region, cross-border disputes and disagreements over water and land resources are enormous. For example, the Ilemi Triangle between Sudan and Kenya, the Magingo Island between Uganda and Kenya, Mt Rwenzori between Uganda and DRC and Rukwanzi Island between Uganda and DRC. Natural resources like wildlife and forests may, therefore, be exploited without control. Yet the total value lost may be significant enough to offset foreign exchange balance.
In the case of Lake Victoria, both internal and external policy matters are at play. For example, it is not clear to the public which agency of the Government is responsible for the management of Lake Victoria. Is it defence, transport, agriculture and fisheries, water and environment or finance and trade? The same argument may be raised in Kenya or Tanzania.
In the absence of clear national guidelines, the common property rule supersedes. Efforts should be directed towards strengthening regional linkages and establishing forums for networking.
Scientists and politicians should work together to foster a holistic strategy. Synergies need to be developed by subjecting multiple interest and policies to both the compatibility and sustainability test.
The writer is a freelance journalist
The dispute between Uganda and Kenya over the ownership of the Magingo Island on Lake Victoria unravels the post-colonial problems in Africa. It also raises the fundamental questions whether Uganda is actually gaining or losing its share of cross-border resources to its neighbours.
Uganda’s border area is porous, unmarked, and yet it is endowed with a variety of natural resources — forests, lakes, rivers, minerals and wild fauna which transcend into neighbouring countries. Where these resources exist, there are also conflicts such as war, unclear borders, disputes over exploitation, user rights or over-exploitation.
Like other developing economies, Uganda is increasingly seeking to earn foreign exchange by exploiting and marketing its vast natural resources. This implies that the cross-border issues cannot be underscored because reduction in quality or quantity of natural resources translates directly onto the economy, social stability and national security.
In the recent times, both terrestrial and aquatic resources lying between borders of Uganda and its neighbours are being heavily threatened by exploitation.
For example, the fish storcks in Lake Victoria and Albert have greatly declined as a result of over fishing. Likewise, the forest cover on Mt Elgon, Sango Bay area and Rwenzori mountains has dwindled considerably due to heavy logging.
Shared water basins are also threatened by upstream pollution (River Kagera, River Semliki), excessive downstream exploitation (the Nile) or bio-invasion (L. Victoria).
In each case, economic forces are driving change and causing rapid loss of natural resources. Unfortunately, Uganda may be gaining less from this or doing little to protect its vital resources.
In the case of Semliki river basin, Ugandan fishermen have often lost out to their Congolese counterparts. There has also been concern that Uganda may have lost land to Congo due to the changing character of River Semliki, the natural boundary between the two countries. Under the international conventions and protocols, cross-border resources must be managed and used equitably.
Other multilateral conventions exist to harmonise and guide equitable use of resources.
However, in most regions of the world, including the Great Lakes region, cross-border disputes and disagreements over water and land resources are enormous. For example, the Ilemi Triangle between Sudan and Kenya, the Magingo Island between Uganda and Kenya, Mt Rwenzori between Uganda and DRC and Rukwanzi Island between Uganda and DRC. Natural resources like wildlife and forests may, therefore, be exploited without control. Yet the total value lost may be significant enough to offset foreign exchange balance.
In the case of Lake Victoria, both internal and external policy matters are at play. For example, it is not clear to the public which agency of the Government is responsible for the management of Lake Victoria. Is it defence, transport, agriculture and fisheries, water and environment or finance and trade? The same argument may be raised in Kenya or Tanzania.
In the absence of clear national guidelines, the common property rule supersedes. Efforts should be directed towards strengthening regional linkages and establishing forums for networking.
Scientists and politicians should work together to foster a holistic strategy. Synergies need to be developed by subjecting multiple interest and policies to both the compatibility and sustainability test.
The writer is a freelance journalist