Nigeria’s Disappearing Forests

Nigeria is losing its forests at a pace that is becoming increasingly difficult to ignore.

Across the country, trees are being felled for charcoal and firewood, forests are being cleared for farming, and once-protected landscapes are coming under increasing pressure from settlement, logging and other human activities.

The consequences go far beyond the disappearance of trees. Forest loss affects soil fertility, water systems, biodiversity, local livelihoods and the climatic conditions on which millions of Nigerians, particularly farmers, depend.

Recent Global Forest Watch data estimates that Nigeria lost about 1.6 million hectares of tree cover between 2001 and 2025, representing roughly 15 per cent of the country's tree-cover area in 2000. The data indicates that permanent agriculture accounted for about 1.3 million hectares of the recorded tree-cover loss.

Behind these figures are communities where the forest is no longer what it used to be.

For millions of Nigerians, farming is a means of survival. As the population grows and pressure on land increases, farmers need more space to cultivate food. In many rural areas, clearing vegetation remains one of the easiest ways to open new farmland.

But when natural vegetation is continuously removed for agriculture without adequate land management, the immediate benefit of gaining farmland can create a much bigger problem in the future.

Research on Nigeria's forest landscape shows that agricultural expansion is one of the major drivers of forest loss. Crops such as cassava, rice, millet and vegetables are cultivated across areas where natural vegetation once existed.

 Forest reserves have also faced encroachment from farmers, loggers, herders and other users.

The problem is therefore not simply that people are cutting trees. It is that the country's growing demand for food, land and income is placing unprecedented pressure on its remaining forests.

Another major part of the story is charcoal.

In cities and rural communities, charcoal remains an important source of cooking energy. For many poor households, it is affordable, accessible and easier to transport and store than firewood.

For the people producing it, charcoal is also a source of income.

But producing charcoal requires wood.

In many communities, trees are cut and converted into charcoal using traditional earth-mound kilns. Research in Borgu Local Government Area of Niger State, for example, found that most surveyed charcoal producers relied on traditional earth-mound kilns, while biodiversity loss was identified as the leading environmental impact by respondents.

The charcoal economy therefore creates a difficult contradiction. What is an affordable cooking fuel for one household can represent the destruction of trees somewhere else.

A review of Nigeria's wood-fuel sector found that harvesting wood for energy contributes to forest degradation, biodiversity loss, soil erosion and greenhouse-gas emissions.

Yet simply criminalising charcoal producers would not solve the problem. Many people involved in the trade are responding to poverty and the absence of reliable and affordable alternatives.

The bigger question is why millions of households still depend heavily on wood-based fuels in a country with enormous energy potential.

The environmental consequences of deforestation are becoming increasingly visible.

One of the most important concerns is rainfall.

It would be scientifically misleading to blame every delayed rainfall, dry spell or flood in Nigeria directly on deforestation.

 Weather patterns are influenced by several factors, including atmospheric circulation, ocean temperatures, climate change and regional land-use changes.

However, forests play an important role in the water cycle.

Trees absorb water from the soil and release moisture into the atmosphere through a process known as evapotranspiration. This moisture can contribute to cloud formation and rainfall. When large areas of vegetation are removed, the movement and recycling of water between the land and atmosphere can change.

Research examining deforestation and rainfall across Africa has found evidence that tree-cover loss can reduce rainfall in parts of West Africa. Scientists have also found that the effects of land-use change can extend beyond the immediate location where trees are removed.

A modelling study of tropical West Africa found that converting forest to cropland resulted in approximately five per cent less precipitation in the study basin, while an afforestation scenario produced approximately six per cent more precipitation.

This does not mean that cutting down trees in one community will automatically stop rainfall in that community. Rather, it demonstrates that large-scale changes in vegetation can influence regional water and energy cycles.

For Nigeria, where a large proportion of agriculture depends on rainfall, the implications are serious.

The disappearance of forests also means the disappearance of habitats.

A forest is much more than a collection of trees. It is an ecosystem supporting birds, insects, mammals, reptiles, plants and microorganisms. It provides food, shelter and breeding grounds for countless species.

When forests are cleared, wildlife loses habitat. Some species are forced to migrate, while others may decline or disappear from affected areas.

The destruction of natural habitats can also increase human-wildlife conflicts as animals are pushed closer to farms and settlements in search of food and shelter.

Nigeria's biodiversity is already facing pressure from agricultural expansion, illegal logging, development, extractive activities and other human activities.

For communities living around forests, the consequences can be even more direct.

Rural households depend on forests for firewood, food, medicinal plants, construction materials, fruits and other products. When those resources disappear, families must travel farther or spend more money to obtain them.

Forest degradation can also affect agricultural productivity.

Tree roots help hold soil together. Vegetation slows the movement of rainwater across the ground and allows more water to infiltrate the soil. Once trees and vegetation are removed, exposed soil becomes more vulnerable to erosion.

Heavy rainfall can wash away fertile topsoil, create gullies and increase surface runoff.

This can create a dangerous cycle in which deforestation contributes to soil degradation, declining agricultural productivity forces farmers to seek new land, and the search for new farmland leads to further forest clearance.

The communities that depend on forests can therefore become victims of the same environmental degradation that their economic circumstances have helped to drive.

Nigeria has policies and institutions responsible for protecting its forests. The Federal Ministry of Environment's forestry programme has stated a goal of having 25 per cent of Nigeria's land area under sustainably managed forest cover.

Nigeria has also developed forest-monitoring mechanisms and participates in international programmes designed to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation.

But having policies is not the same thing as enforcing them.

A 2026 policy analysis by Nigeria's National Institute for Legislative and Democratic Studies identified weak enforcement, fragmented implementation, inadequate funding, overlapping institutional responsibilities, limited monitoring capacity and inadequate community participation among the challenges facing forest protection.

This raises an uncomfortable question: who is actually responsible when a protected forest disappears?

Satellite technology can show where trees are being lost. It can identify hotspots and provide authorities with information about changes in forest cover.

But the harder questions remain: Who cleared the land? Was permission obtained? Who issued the permit? Was the land inside a protected area? Were the trees harvested legally? What happened after government agencies received information about the destruction?

These are the questions that an effective forest-protection system must answer.

There are, however, signs of renewed attention to the problem.

In 2026, the Food and Agriculture Organisation and Nigerian federal and state authorities announced efforts to strengthen integrated landscape management, restore degraded landscapes and promote sustainable livelihoods.

Such programmes are important, but their success will ultimately depend on what happens on the ground.

Nigeria cannot afford a situation where trees are planted ceremonially in one location while forests are being destroyed elsewhere.

The country needs to protect its remaining natural forests while making agriculture more productive on existing farmland. Farmers need access to improved seeds, irrigation, extension services, finance and technologies that can increase yields without requiring continuous expansion into forest areas.

The charcoal problem also requires a broader response.

Affordable and reliable alternatives to charcoal and firewood must become accessible to ordinary Nigerians.

 Improved cooking technologies, cleaner fuels and sustainable energy systems can reduce pressure on forests, but only if they are affordable to the people who currently depend on wood fuel.

Communities living around forests must also become part of the solution.

For decades, conservation policies have sometimes treated local people primarily as threats to forests. But communities can also become the strongest defenders of forests when they have clear rights, economic incentives and a meaningful role in managing natural resources.

Nigeria's forest crisis is ultimately not just an environmental story.

It is a story about food, energy, poverty, water, climate, wildlife and survival.

The farmer clearing land is trying to feed a family. The charcoal producer is trying to earn an income. The urban household buying charcoal is trying to cook a meal.

Each decision may appear reasonable when viewed individually.

But when millions of such decisions occur across a country with limited enforcement and inadequate alternatives, the cumulative effect can be devastating.

Nigeria's forests are disappearing not because of one culprit, but because poverty, population growth, energy insecurity, agricultural expansion, weak enforcement and inadequate land-use planning are converging on the same resource.

The question is no longer whether Nigeria is losing its forests.

The more urgent question is whether the country can continue losing them and still maintain the rainfall, fertile soils, biodiversity, food production and livelihoods that depend on them.

The evidence suggests that the longer Nigeria waits, the more expensive the consequences will become.

Aviashima Toom, Environmental Journalist 

aviashimatoom@gmail.com

09029550629/07076693238