Conclusion
What does the study of green development initiatives in Kenya and Tanzania tell us in regard to the overarching question of how futures are envisioned and shaped in rural Africa? Green futures appear highly desirable, because they seem to be in almost everyone’s interest. In the face of climate change, there can be no doubt that the environment plays a crucial role in shaping the future. Yet, as our case studies have shown, the appropriation of green concepts of development often remains superficial; it changes the colour, but not the content, of development. The rhetoric of green futures is widely used in public discourse, not only in Africa, but globally. It promises economic growth in harmony with human well-being and the environment.
The case studies describe the development arena at the national level in Kenya and Tanzania as being like a battlefield of competing developmental ideas. They show that ‘green’ concepts are often used and misused to tap into international finance, and to legitimise projects that serve other interests besides their declared environmental purposes. Understanding ‘green’ ideas should therefore not stop at the juxtaposition of rhetoric and reality, but acknowledge the hidden agenda of specific interests, political purposes, and strategic alliances.
Taking the example of green concepts, the chapter shows that African futures are often not shaped by Africans alone, but in conjunction with foreign actors and global entanglements. However, it would be too simplistic to view green transformations in Africa as just another example of foreign domination and neo-colonial dependency. It is not that African governments are forced to follow the new directions of the green agenda. Rather, they respond to the incentives and opportunities offered by global support structures to select and implement those elements of environmentally friendly development that fit into national development plans. Kenya’s Vision 2030 and the African Union’s Agenda 2063 have not simply been designed as copies of global policy papers. The influence is more subtle and differentiated, as can be seen from the differences between the two East African countries. The green paradigm is partially adopted, modified, or rejected, so that it fits into national plans, power structures and interests. The process of its translation into national contexts reflects foreign influences and incentive structures just as well as the interest of policymakers at the national level.
To explain the external influence, this chapter refers to the conceptual framework of travelling models. It focuses on approaches of ‘Green Economy’ and ‘Green Growth’, which were originally designed outside of the African continent, before they were transferred and locally adopted in various settings all across that continent. Such a transfer of blueprints is not unusual in international development cooperation. Conceiving of it as a travelling model helps to explain the gap between rhetoric and reality. The rhetoric of green futures does not mean that it is built on empty promises or lies. Instead, the rhetoric should rather be understood as a tool to convince the wider society of a common goal, or in other words, as an instrument to ‘sell’ the future (Colonomos 2016).
With respect to the future of green ideas, this question remains open. Notably, there are many ongoing activities relating to these concepts, including efforts to create the Africa Green Growth Forum as well as the launching of Africa’s Green and Climate Resilient Development (AGREED) programme with the support of the World Bank and African Development Bank. How this will fare across nations in the Global South is certainly difficult to foretell. However, what we learn from the case studies is that these concepts are gaining importance in politics; they inform visions; and they can be used, modified, adopted or rejected either in part or entirely.