How Climate Change Fuels Conflict in the Sahel: New Research Revealed

The Sahel, the semi-arid African region stretching from the Atlantic Ocean in the west to the Red Sea in the east, has become the epicentre of global terrorism, given the high number of attacks by armed groups and the resulting fatalities, including those suffered by civilians. This development is rooted in a complex interplay of factors. They include state fragility, illicit economies, limited presence of government in rural areas, and conflicts driven by resource scarcity due to climate shocks. I am a political scientist with regional expertise in conflict, security and development in west Africa. In a recent policy brief for a research programme, I set out how climate change mitigation efforts in Sahelian communities have intensified pre-existing tensions. The research involved extensive fieldwork and interviews in July and August 2025 with community members in Burkina Faso, Mali, Niger and Nigeria. The aim was to understand the interaction between various pressure points and crises playing out in their lives. Livelihoods are under pressure as a result of climate change. Resources are scarce and unevenly allocated. Governance structures are weak and armed groups compete for control. The findings were clear: climate action can either exacerbate or alleviate crises. Many climate mitigation efforts are large-scale projects, like building solar farms, extensive reforestation initiatives, or bio-fuel plantations. The Great Green Wall initiative and the Agriculture Climate Resilient Value Chain Development Project in Niger are examples. These projects are deemed vital for reducing carbon footprints. But carrying them out in fragile states poses a risk. In the Sahel, misconceived environmental security policymaking can have adverse impacts and even fuel the very insecurity it aims to prevent. Top-down approach objectives can be at odds with local social and ecological realities. I conclude from my findings that the United Nations’ approach to climate change mitigation in the Sahel requires a re-evaluation. What’s needed are adaptation interventions that are: conflict-sensitive community-led and context-specific designed using a transboundary process. This is because interventions are capable of shaping political economies, security arrangements and community relations across borders, not just within them. A fragile environment My research confirms that climate change in Sahelian communities has intensified pre-existing tensions. These include: Insecurity: Local populations are exposed to conflicts that are made worse by climate-induced pressures. This includes farmer-herder disputes over diminishing grazing land, intercommunal clashes for access to scarce water resources, and ethno-religious tensions aggravated by competition over livelihood opportunities. Interviews conducted with farmers, pastoralists and community heads, among others, highlighted how shifts in rainfall patterns, long droughts and unpredictable harvests are directly undermining livelihoods. People are being forced into daily coping strategies that sometimes heighten local conflicts. State fragility: Interviews with key informants, including local vigilantes, paint a picture of governments’ inability to provide security, deliver basic services or mediate rising disputes. As a result communities have been forced to find alternative forms of governance and protection. These include local vigilante groups, traditional community elders and informal resource management committees. Criminal networks: Climate vulnerability and state fragility have created an environment that allows violent extremist organisations to operate and expand their influence. These groups range from armed bandits to violent extremist organisations such as Boko Haram and Jama'at Nusrat al-Islam wal-Muslimin (JNIM). They are not merely a result of ideology. They are consequences of a system in distress. They strategically exploit the insecurities and grievances that climate change and state fragility have created. A Malian community leader put it perfectly. He warned that if a community becomes a dry land … the armed group can use this opportunity to install themselves. Towards a conflict-sensitive approach Statements from people interviewed reflect simple, yet profound, solutions. The central message is the need for local ownership and community involvement. A traditional ruler from Burkina Faso, for instance, insisted that: if projects come, they must include the community from the beginning, to ensure people feel respected, build trust, and ensure that solutions respond to real needs. A respondent in Nigeria, too, said that “when the locals engage with government many solutions come aboard”. In Niger, a local actor stressed the need to “involve the population more in the decision-making process concerning them”. These comments point to policy directives. They argue for a departure from the top-down, expert-driven model of development. For climate change mitigation to be a force for peace, it must be integrated with peacebuilding and state-building efforts. Involving local authorities and community-level institutions in making decisions can lead to interventions that are context-sensitive, legitimate and responsive to local realities. This translates to linking climate finance to projects that provide not only renewable energy infrastructure but also schools, health centres and sustainable livelihoods. It means transparent, community-led dialogue to resolve conflicts before they escalate across the Sahel region. Next steps The Sahel’s plight is a powerful lesson for the global community. The interconnectedness of climate change, state fragility and conflict is a complex adaptive system. It cannot be solved with single-sector interventions. The challenges are too intertwined, and the stakes are too high. International development and climate policy must shift. Climate change mitigation is not a technical exercise, but an opportunity to rebuild broken social contracts, foster community resilience and promote equitable development. Addressing root causes instead of symptoms can turn a vicious cycle of fragility into one of peace and development.