Cut-off and forgotten?: Livelihood disruption, social impacts and food insecurity arising from the East African Crude Oil Pipeline

We examined the Uganda section of the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP), especially the social and livelihood impacts from land acquisition. EACOP, which will cost over USD $3.5 billion in total, is intended to transport crude oil from Hoima in the Albertine Graben region of Uganda to Tanga in Tanzania, a distance of 1443 kms. A multi-methods approach was used, including 86 in-depth interviews, focus group discussions, participant observation, and document analysis. Although by late 2020 pipeline construction had not commenced, route planning and land acquisition for the pipeline had already created many environmental and social impacts, including: physical displacement; resettlement; economic displacement; disputed valuations; delayed compensation; livelihood disruption; food insecurity; and uncertainty, fear and anxiety. The likely benefits of the project include: employment opportunities (although these will mostly be short term); improved infrastructure and accessibility; and oil revenue to the nation. A major issue has been delays to the project, which have exacerbated anxiety and livelihood impacts. Confusion has occurred around the meaning and implementation of the 'cut-off date'. To gain a social licence to operate, we recommend that all stakeholders give greater consideration to addressing the negative environmental and social impacts, and to augmenting project benefits. We also recommend that the international standards and procedures used in project land acquisition pay more attention to how the cut-off date is explained to and understood by local communities, and how it is operationalised, especially in relation to subsistence farming activities.

Automated summary

The investigation of the Uganda section of the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP) focused on the social and livelihood impacts of land acquisition. Although the pipeline construction had not yet started by late 2020, the route planning and land acquisition had already caused various environmental and social impacts, including displacement, disputed valuations, delayed compensation, and livelihood disruption. The project potentially offers benefits such as employment opportunities, improved infrastructure, and oil revenue to the nation, but delays have worsened anxiety and livelihood impacts.