Interests, Positions, and Africa’s Fight Against Land Degradation

Mbabane, Eswatini – 1 July 2025 – Inside a modest training room, a group of African journalists leaned in as their facilitator posed a deceptively simple question: “What’s the difference between an interest and a position?”

A participant ventured an answer: “Interest is the intention—where states show they share expectations—whereas position is an agreed course of action.”

The facilitator smiled. “Exactly—but think about it. Can you, alone, really have a position? Or just an interest?”

Laughter rippled through the room as someone quipped about having an “interest” in someone because “she’s beautiful.” It was lighthearted, but also perfectly illustrated the core lesson:

Interest is personal and internal. The position is collective and formal.

The facilitator paused before offering the key takeaway:

“Position is what you say. Interest is what informs what you say.”

He explained that in negotiations—whether at the UN or in a local council—countries and stakeholders share formal positions. These are the demands, proposals, or red lines put on the table. But beneath them lie interests—the real motivations, needs, fears, and aspirations that shape those positions.

“Negotiations break down when everyone just trades positions back and forth,” Dr. Oduetse Oldman Koboto, the MEA Coordinator of the Sustainable Environment and Blue Economy Directorate of the African Union Commission (AUC) Department of Agriculture, Rural Development, Blue Economy, and Sustainable Environment warned.

“If you don’t uncover the interests, you’ll never find real compromise.”

This distinction is vital in international forums, where African countries negotiate on issues like trade, climate change, and land degradation.

“Think about your opponent’s text,” the facilitator urged. “What’s the interest that informs it? Because that’s what you need to understand.”

Without understanding interests, negotiations can stall—even when the wording of a treaty or declaration seems uncontroversial.

This lesson was particularly timely given one of Africa’s most pressing negotiation challenges: land degradation, drought, and desertification.

Across the continent, vast drylands are under threat. An estimated 65% of Africa’s arable land is already degraded. This crisis undermines food security, destroys livelihoods, and traps communities in poverty.

Yet it often receives far less attention than carbon emissions or rising seas.

 “When people hear ‘climate change,’ they think of greenhouse gases,” Norah Kendeli Mugita Project Officer at the Regional Office for Africa at the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) said

“But for Africa, land degradation is an equally devastating crisis.”

That’s where the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) comes in.

The UNCCD is one of the three so-called Rio Conventions, alongside the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). It entered into force in 1994, following the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio.

It requires countries to develop National Action Plans to identify drivers of land degradation and propose local solutions. These are reviewed at biannual Conferences of the Parties (COPs).

A key innovation is Land Degradation Neutrality (LDN) targets. These voluntary goals aim for net-zero loss of productive land:

“If you degrade land in one place, you must restore an equivalent area elsewhere.”

Africa has embraced ambitious projects like the Great Green Wall Initiative, which aims to restore degraded lands across the Sahel. Countries such as Ethiopia have launched their own efforts, like the Green Legacy Initiative, which focuses on mass tree planting with strong political backing.

These initiatives show how national interests—like food security and rural development—inform positions in international negotiations.

Despite widespread recognition of its importance, the UNCCD is chronically underfunded.

“It’s one of the conventions with almost universal membership, yet one of the least funded,” the trainer observed.

African negotiators consistently call for adequate, predictable, and additional financing to implement their action plans. Without it, many countries struggle to monitor land degradation, report progress, or scale up restoration.

One of Africa’s key negotiating positions is the call for a binding Drought Protocol under the UNCCD.

Drought devastates agriculture and water supplies, particularly in regions like the Sahel and southern Africa. Yet, no binding global framework currently commits countries to help others mitigate or respond to drought.

A protocol would oblige wealthier nations to support drought mitigation with funding, technology transfer, and capacity-building. But developed countries, notably the United States, have resisted a legally binding approach.

 “A voluntary framework is a toothless dog,” the trainer warned. “It carries no real obligation to act.”

Understanding Policy Drivers: Interests Beneath the Positions

The training session also delved into how countries arrive at the positions they defend in negotiations.

“When governments make policy, where do they get the mandate?” the facilitator asked.

Participants suggested the cabinet and the president. But the answer was broader:

“The people. Constitutions give governments the authority to develop policies. That’s where the mandate lies.”

He explained the concept of Directive Principles of State Policy found in many constitutions—broad mandates that allow governments to pursue the public good.

The Four Foundations of Policy Direction:

The trainer introduced four foundational drivers that shape a country’s interests:

Policies are shaped by how citizens are directly affected.

“That’s why many African countries prioritize adaptation in climate talks. They’re responding to immediate threats.”

Policies are designed to appeal to what voters will broadly accept.

“Australia’s environmental policies present them as modern, peaceful leaders because that’s how their public wants to see them.”

Policies are crafted to seize economic advantage.

“China offers roads and infrastructure in Africa, but through loans that secure its long-term influence.”

Similarly, U.S. campaigns emphasize economic growth, tax cuts, and private-sector opportunities.

Policies are rooted in principles of equity.

“New Zealand often supports positions it views as fair—even if that means backing African negotiators.”

The facilitator challenged the journalists:

 “If you say poverty reduction is a national priority, can you show me the document that proves it?”

He urged them to see policies as concrete, documented commitments—not vague promises.

For environmental issues, countries should map their Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs) to their national priorities, focusing implementation on the conventions that matter most to them.

“If climate finance is a priority, it must be reflected in the vision, policy, or strategy—not just in talk.”

Finally, the session turned to the journalists’ own responsibilities.

“When you report on negotiations, don’t just parrot positions,” the trainer said. “Ask what interests lie beneath. That’s how you hold power to account.”

Too often, stories about the UNCCD or environmental crises are buried under generic “climate” reporting.

“We confuse UNCCD matters with climate or biodiversity. But land degradation deserves its own focus.”

Moreover, reporting tends to highlight disasters—failing rains, livestock dying—without showcasing solutions.

Good reporting should explain technical terms, show the human impact, and celebrate local innovations and policies designed to restore land.

“We’re giving you this information,” the trainer concluded, “so when you report, you don’t just spread fear or confusion. You show the way forward.”

And so, from a simple question about the difference between interest and position emerged a profound lesson in policy-making, negotiation strategy, and the civic responsibility of clear, honest journalism—one that matters deeply for Africa’s land, its people, and its future.