Africa-Press – Liberia. The Forestry Development Authority (FDA) decision to suspend all activities leading to the gazettement of the Foya Proposed Protected Area (FPPA) has ignited a fresh national debate over forest governance, community rights, and the country’s climate-finance ambitions.
In a strongly worded statement, the Society for the Conservation of Nature of Liberia (SCNL) condemned the January 31, 2026 action as abrupt, legally questionable, and potentially damaging to both rural livelihoods and Liberia’s international credibility.
“This action violates national law, breaches international commitments, and jeopardizes the livelihoods of forest-dependent communities,” SCNL said. “It risks eroding donor confidence, undermining carbon-finance opportunities, and reversing hard-won conservation gains since the end of Liberia’s civil conflict.”
At stake is not only a forest landscape in Lofa County, but a broader struggle over the country’s development model—conservation-driven sustainability versus renewed emphasis on commercial extraction.
The FDA’s move to halt the process has raised immediate legal questions.
Under the 2006 National Forestry Reform Law and the 2016 Wildlife Conservation and Protected Area Management Law, Liberia committed to protecting at least 30 percent of its forest estate. Section 5.8 of the 2016 law stipulates that only the Legislature may modify or abolish a protected area—and only with scientific and social justification.
SCNL argues that an administrative suspension of a protected-area process exceeds the FDA’s statutory authority.
Equally contentious is the consultation requirement. Sections 5.4.4 and 5.4.1(i) of the 2006 law mandate transparent, participatory consultations and free, prior, and informed consent before decisions affecting protected areas are made.
According to conservation partners, no such consultations preceded the suspension.
The FDA has not publicly detailed its rationale beyond administrative review concerns, but observers suggest that the decision may reflect competing pressures from commercial logging interests and local political actors who argue that protected status could restrict economic activity.
Community Stakes: 158 Villages in Limbo
Beyond legal interpretation lies the human impact.
The FPPA process has reportedly delivered tangible benefits to 158 communities, affecting more than 50,000 people. Conservation investments—supported by the European Union, the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB), Rainforest Trust, and SCNL—have funded climate-smart agriculture for over 1,500 farmers, formalization of customary land rights, rice milling enterprises, and more than 100 local jobs with significant participation by women and youth.
For many households, these initiatives represent more than environmental stewardship—they are alternative income streams in regions historically underserved by government services.
A halt in conservation programming, SCNL warns, could destabilize those gains and create a vacuum vulnerable to illegal logging, wildlife trafficking, and unsustainable exploitation.
Forest-dependent communities have experienced this cycle before: promises of logging-driven development followed by disputes over unpaid land rentals and minimal social benefits.
SCNL’s criticism is rooted partly in Liberia’s forest governance history.
By 2019, logging companies reportedly owed communities US$37.6 million in unpaid land rentals. Of the US$27.7 million collected by government, only US$2.6 million—approximately 10 percent—was transferred to communities instead of the legally mandated 30 percent.
The result: communities received seven times less than their statutory entitlement.
The recent termination of a logging contract by the Tonglay Community due to non-payment underscores a recurring pattern—short-term extraction, weak compliance, and limited local benefit.
If the suspension signals a pivot toward expanded commercial logging in Foya, critics argue it may revive precisely the governance failures the 2006 forestry reform sought to correct.
The timing of the suspension is particularly sensitive.
The government is currently developing frameworks under the Carbon Markets Authority, the National Carbon Policy, and the National REDD+ Strategy to attract carbon-based revenue. Protecting intact forest landscapes is essential to securing long-term payments for emissions reductions.
SCNL estimates that Liberia could access US$20.68 million annually through the Tropical Forest Forever Facility and potentially US$908 million under a future REDD+ arrangement—if forest permanence is guaranteed.
Suspending protection efforts in high-carbon landscapes like Foya may weaken investor confidence.
“Liberia cannot afford to trade its natural heritage for short-term gains,” SCNL cautioned. “Conservation is not the enemy of development; it is the foundation.”
Foya forms part of the Upper Guinean Forest ecosystem—one of the world’s biodiversity hotspots—harboring species such as the African Forest Elephant, White-bellied Pangolin, and Chimpanzee.
Ecologically, the stakes are high. Politically, they are equally significant.
The move appears at odds with President Joseph Boakai’s ARREST Agenda for Inclusive Development, whose Pillar Seven prioritizes environmental sustainability and climate finance as drivers of long-term economic transformation.
If conservation is sidelined, critics argue, Liberia risks sending mixed signals to donors and development partners who have invested more than US$11.7 million in the Gola–Foya landscape since 2009.
The controversy ultimately reflects a deeper national dilemma: how to balance immediate economic pressures with long-term sustainability.
Supporters of a pause may argue that land-use decisions must consider local economic aspirations and national revenue needs. Critics counter that conservation and development are not mutually exclusive—that forest protection, if properly structured, can deliver stable income, climate resilience, and international financing without repeating the mistakes of extractive models.
For local communities, the uncertainty is immediate. Jobs may stall. Agricultural support could wane. Land formalization efforts may freeze. And trust—carefully built through years of engagement—may erode.
SCNL is urging the FDA to reverse the suspension, the Executive to ensure compliance with national law, and the Legislature to exercise oversight.
Whether the FDA reconsiders its position or proceeds with a revised land-use strategy will shape not only the future of Foya but Liberia’s broader environmental trajectory.
At a moment when climate finance is reshaping global development priorities, Liberia faces a defining choice—consolidate its conservation gains or risk reopening a chapter of forest governance marked by contested benefits and fragile trust.
For the communities of Foya, the forest is not an abstraction. It is livelihood, identity, and future.
And for Liberia, it may well be a test of whether sustainable development remains policy—or becomes principle.
For More News And Analysis About Liberia Follow Africa-Press
