By George S Tengbeh
Liberia’s wealth of natural resources, its forests, minerals, fisheries, and fertile lands, has been both a blessing and a curse. While these resources should serve as a foundation for national prosperity, they have too often been managed in ways that exclude the very citizens who live on and depend upon them.
The gap between policy promises and community realities reveals a persistent struggle between non-participation and genuine citizen power in natural resource governance.
In many cases, Liberian citizens are consulted only in symbolic ways, while key decisions are taken behind closed doors by political elites, investors, and foreign companies. This imbalance has fueled mistrust, sparked community protests, and undermined the potential for inclusive development.
The roots of non-participation in Liberia’s resource management are tied to a history of centralized governance and concession-driven economics. For decades, deals for mining, logging, and agricultural concessions have been negotiated at the highest levels of government with minimal public scrutiny.
Communities often learn about these agreements after they are signed, when bulldozers arrive, forests are cleared, or mining pits are dug. The case of Sime Darby’s oil palm operations in Bomi and Grand Cape Mount Counties is a striking example.
Communities alleged that the company’s concession agreement was signed without their full knowledge or consent, leading to disputes over land rights, environmental degradation, and loss of livelihoods. While the government insisted that consultations had taken place, many residents reported they were not given the opportunity to influence the terms of the agreement or reject it outright.
Mining concessions have also highlighted the limitations of citizen participation in Liberia’s natural resource sector. The Bea Mountain Mining Company in Grand Cape Mount County has faced repeated protests over environmental pollution, unsafe working conditions, and insufficient community benefits.
While company representatives and government officials have held public meetings to address grievances, the format of these engagements often amounts to informing communities about decisions already made rather than co-creating solutions.
In such cases, the participation process mirrors a form of tokenism: citizens are present in the room but not at the table where power is exercised. This breeds frustration and a perception that “consultations” are mere formalities to satisfy legal or donor requirements.
In the forestry sector, the implementation of the Land Rights Act of 2018 was supposed to empower local communities to take ownership of their customary lands, including forest areas. On paper, the law grants communities significant rights to manage, protect, and benefit from their natural resources.
In practice, however, the process of securing formal deeds has been slow and cumbersome. Many communities lack the technical knowledge, legal support, and resources needed to navigate the system.
Moreover, some logging companies and local power brokers exploit these weaknesses, using their influence to sway decision-making in ways that sideline legitimate community voices. The result is that, despite a progressive law, the lived experience for many rural Liberians remains one of limited agency and vulnerability to exploitation.
There are, however, pockets of progress where communities have successfully pushed back against exclusionary practices and asserted greater control over their resources. In River Cess County, for instance, several forest communities have worked together to establish community forest management bodies.
By organizing at the grassroots level, engaging civil society organizations for technical support, and maintaining transparent decision-making processes, these communities have been able to negotiate directly with companies and secure better terms for resource use. This shows that when citizens are given both the space and the capacity to participate meaningfully, they can become powerful actors in shaping outcomes that serve the public interest.
The challenges in Liberia’s natural resource governance are not simply about the absence of laws or policies. They are about the quality of participation, whether citizens are treated as passive recipients of information or active co-decision-makers. Too often, participation stops at the level of public hearings where government officials and company representatives present already-finalized plans.
True citizen power requires shifting from this “inform and defend” approach to one where communities are involved from the earliest stages, before contracts are signed, before environmental assessments are finalized, and before resource allocation decisions are locked in.
This shift is essential not only for fairness but also for long-term stability. Communities that feel ownership over decisions are more likely to support and help sustain resource projects.
Practical steps to move Liberia from non-participation to citizen power include strengthening local governance structures, ensuring transparency in all concession negotiations, and building the technical capacity of communities to engage effectively.
Access to timely and accurate information is critical. Too often, key documents like concession agreements, environmental impact assessments, and benefit-sharing plans are either inaccessible to the public or written in technical language that most community members cannot understand.
Translating these documents into local languages, holding pre-decision workshops, and using community radio to share updates are all ways to bridge the information gap.
Another critical step is enforcing accountability for both government officials and private companies. When public servants or investors violate participation rights, there must be consequences. Without enforcement, the legal right to participate becomes hollow.
Civil society organizations have a vital role to play here by monitoring compliance, documenting violations, and mobilizing public pressure to demand corrective action. The media, too, can shine a light on practices that undermine genuine participation, making it harder for powerful actors to operate in secrecy.
Ultimately, the journey from non-participation to citizen power in Liberia’s natural resource management will require cultural as well as institutional change. It means breaking with a legacy of top-down decision-making and embracing a governance model that sees citizens not as obstacles to investment but as partners in development.
This is not an easy transformation, power is rarely surrendered willingly, but the benefits are clear. Resource projects designed and implemented with genuine community input are more likely to avoid costly disputes, protect the environment, and deliver lasting benefits to the people whose lives they affect most directly.
Liberia stands at a crossroads. With global demand for its resources growing and pressure mounting to attract foreign investment, the temptation to cut corners on participation will remain strong. But history has shown that excluding citizens from decision-making carries a heavy cost in conflict, mistrust, and lost opportunities for shared prosperity.
The choice, then, is stark: continue down the path of token participation and face recurring disputes, or invest in building a participatory culture where citizen power is not an afterthought but a guiding principle. The latter path is harder, but it is the only one that can truly turn Liberia’s natural wealth into a foundation for inclusive and sustainable development.
