EACOP — Human Displacement and Environmental Costs of Uganda’s Oil Pipeline
By The Urban Gazette Investigative Desk | Uganda / Tanzania Border
The East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP) promises billions in economic returns for Uganda and Tanzania, transporting crude oil from Uganda’s Tilenga and Kingfisher fields to Tanzania’s Tanga port. But our investigation uncovers a human and environmental cost that threatens livelihoods, ecosystems, and community trust. Tens of thousands of people have been displaced, while environmental safeguards remain inadequate.
Project Overview
Length & Scope: 1,443 km pipeline crossing Uganda and Tanzania, connecting oil fields to the coast. (The Guardian)
Estimated cost: $4–5 billion.
Timeline: Originally slated for completion 2027–2028, now threatened by community disputes and environmental scrutiny.
Human Displacement and Compensation Issues
Affected populations: ~13,000 Ugandan and Tanzanian residents displaced. Many report under-compensation for land and homes.
Legal conflicts: Government sued 80 landowners in Uganda who rejected compensation, forcing controversial compulsory acquisition. (The Standard Uganda)
Community grievances: Relocation sites lack adequate water, healthcare, markets, and schools. Several families interviewed described stress, financial loss, and uncertainty, despite promises of fair compensation.
Accountability: Human Rights Watch reports indicate inconsistencies in payments, lack of transparency, and minimal legal recourse for affected households.
Environmental Concerns
Sensitive ecosystems: The pipeline traverses wetlands, forests, and wildlife corridors. Leaks or spills could disrupt water sources and biodiversity.
Mitigation gaps: Environmental and Social Impact Assessments (ESIAs) exist, but enforcement is patchy and under-resourced.
Community voices: Farmers report declining soil fertility and restricted access to traditional fishing grounds. “We were promised livelihoods support, but we still struggle to farm our own land,” said a displaced farmer in Rakai District.
Accountability and Oversight
Project proponents, including TotalEnergies, insist on compliance with IFC and national standards. Yet, gaps remain between policy and implementation.
Monitoring bodies are constrained by budget and political pressure. Independent observers warn that without rigorous enforcement, human and ecological impacts may worsen.
Courts continue to process compensation disputes, but delays leave residents in prolonged limbo.
Economic vs Human Costs
Economic narrative: EACOP is framed as a regional economic driver, generating foreign revenue, jobs, and energy infrastructure.
Hidden costs: Loss of land, disruption of agriculture, displacement trauma, and environmental degradation may erode the social license needed for sustainable operations.
Donor scrutiny: International financiers now demand improved safeguards, highlighting the tension between profit and accountability.
EACOP reflects the complexity of megaprojects in Africa: a pipeline with immense economic promise, yet simultaneously exposing residents and ecosystems to significant risk. Our investigation underscores the need for transparent compensation, independent monitoring, and proactive environmental protection — without which the pipeline’s long-term legitimacy remains uncertain.
