Africa: Why the World Can’t Agree How to Tackle Drought

Delegates from 196 nations plus EU officials have met in Mongolia to discuss how best to tackle drought and desertification.

Often overlooked by the larger and busier climate summits, this small UN desertification summit, known as Cop17, felt more important than ever. Yet countries still could not agree on what needs to be done.

Negotiations that were often inconclusive and frustrating continued until 4am on some nights. The closing plenary was gavelled to a conclusion on August 29 at 2.36am.

Follow us on WhatsApp | LinkedIn for the latest headlines

The issue of drought split the negotiation room from the start. On behalf of the African Group and Togo, South Africa pushed a legally binding global drought protocol. The UK, Australia and Cook Islands rejected a binding instrument. India and Suriname wanted flexibility and country‑driven design, not a one‑size‑fits‑all approach.

After days of bilateral consultations with the summit presidency, some form of agreement was announced — a deferral, not a resolution. This debate will continue at the next UN desertification summit, due to take place in Egypt in 2027.

Much of the UK has been struggling with severe droughts, empty reservoirs and hosepipe bans following its hottest summer since records began in 1884. Indeed, 71.3% of England is still in drought now.

Across the world, every continent — even Antarctica — is dealing with drought or flooding in some form due to climate change. In August, a devastating wall of mud, rock and water swept through the Nepal‑Tibet border region following a glacial collapse. The death toll continues to rise after flash floods resulting from this rock‑ice avalanche in the Himalayas.

During Cop17 in Mongolia, everyone agreed drought was a serious problem. But countries got stuck arguing about what kind of promise to make about it.

They disagreed on three key issues. First, how strict the commitment should be: a firm rule everyone must follow, a gentler agreement, or merely voluntary goals each nation sets for itself. And second, how to frame the problem: does drought affect the whole world equally, or hit certain regions far harder than others?

The final question — tied closely to the second — asks whose responsibility lies. Should there be a single global agreement binding all parties, or should each country primarily address drought concerns within its own borders?

Solutions

The United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) is widely regarded as the world’s legal cornerstone for land stewardship. It remains the sole international treaty bound specifically on desertification, land degradation and drought.

Its origins trace back to the 1970s, when escalating desertification crises gripped sub‑Saharan Africa after massive food‑security failures. In 1994 the convention was formally established after three major agreements emerged from the Brazil Earth Summit known as the Rio conventions. Alongside land, the subsequent Cops also target biodiversity and climate change.

Read more: The climate and biodiversity crises are woven together, but we risk pitting one against the other

Yet climate, biodiversity and land operate as a single intersecting crisis. Degraded soils release carbon and worsen warming; hotter climates dry moisture‑rich soils, driving drought and desertization; and habitat loss strips ecosystems of the resilience needed to retain water and anchor soil.

Nevertheless, the treaties governing them frequently exist on separate tracks, each overseen by distinct secretariats, reporting bodies and legal regimes. This fragmentation annoyed negotiators in Mongolia. Crucially, the term “synergies” — shorthand for making the three conventions work together — was blocked early on by the US.

To break this deadlock, I argue a dual strategy is required. First, empower advocacy groups to amplify transformative political actions. Second, achieve clear legal coherence across the Cop fora.

Drought is a climate obligation

Drought connects all three Rio conventions on climate, biodiversity and land. Nonetheless, at Cop17 participants quarreled over whether even mentioning such links was worthwhile.

Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters

Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox

Success!