By Stewart Mior in Spotlight — Feb 26, 2025

Fact-Checking the Great Green Wall’s Progress

Great Green Wall's 15% progress claim lacks updated data; satellite monitoring shows gains, but transparency is needed.

Claim: The Great Green Wall (GGW) is 15% complete and is bringing life back to degraded African landscapes at an unprecedented scale.

Rating: Partly True

Summary:

The claim that the Great Green Wall is 15% complete has been repeated since at least 2019, with no clear updates on progress in 2025. While remote sensing data does indicate an increase in forest cover in GGW countries, tracking exact tree planting numbers remains a challenge due to a lack of consistent on-the-ground monitoring.

The initiative has demonstrated some positive environmental and socio-economic impacts, but governance challenges, climate conditions, and land tenure issues complicate long-term success.

A quick look from BBC News.

What Does the Evidence Say?

1. The 15% Completion Claim Remains Unchanged Since 2019

In 2019, reports stated the initiative was 15% complete.
The GGW website in 2025 still presents the same figure.
However, a 2020 article from The Guardian reported that only 4% of the target area had been covered.
That study included numbers from Ethiopia, which as we've covered elsewere, are questionable at best.
This discrepancy raises concerns about the accuracy and transparency of progress tracking.

2. Monitoring Relies on Remote Sensing, Not Direct Tree Counts

A recent study highlights the lack of consistent on-the-ground restoration data.
Instead of direct tree planting numbers, researchers use satellite imagery (Sentinel-2) to assess changes in forest cover.
While forest cover has increased in GGW regions, tree survival rates and long-term ecosystem restoration remain uncertain.
Authors of the study emphasize the need for better tracking methods beyond remote sensing.
There is an intractive map of project activities but nom polygon showing where the trees have been planted (in contrast, check out the projects on Restor.Eco).

3. Positive Correlation Between GGW and Food Security

The study found a link between increased forest cover and reduced food insecurity.
However, it acknowledges that governance issues, land tenure disputes, and environmental conditions affect long-term sustainability.
Without field data, it is difficult to determine whether these changes are directly attributable to GGW efforts or other factors.

Chart graphing food insecurity vs forest cover across Africa. — Tree-cover vs food insecurity, from Science Direct.

The study’s authors argue that more rigorous tracking of land restoration is necessary.
Open and shareable data could enhance policy effectiveness and accountability.
Financial and technical support remain critical, but improved monitoring is essential for assessing the initiative’s real impact.

Conclusion

The Great Green Wall initiative has made some progress, but claims about its completion percentage remain questionable due to inconsistent tracking methods. Remote sensing suggests positive trends in forest cover, yet long-term success depends on better monitoring, governance improvements, and data transparency. While the GGW is a promising solution to desertification and climate change, verifying its actual impact requires more reliable and shareable in situ data.