Random News

eriinfo

Africa: Rethinking Africa Foreign Policy in the Esg Era

eriinfo.com09 mins
Africa: Rethinking Africa Foreign Policy in the Esg Era


The debate between positivist and normative frameworks shifts focus from power and profit to planet and people

As foreign governments and corporations race to secure critical minerals across Africa, the language of environmental, social and governance (ESG) principles is becoming more prominent. Behind the policy papers and investment pledges lies a deeper philosophical struggle-how should the world engage with Africa? Understanding the clash between positivist and normative approaches within international relations (IR) theories can help clarify why this matters.

Realism, long dominant in international relations, is rooted in a positivist approach. It assumes that states act in self-interest within an anarchic world, driven by military power and economic leverage. Realists focus on what is rather than what ought to be using empirical data such as military spending and alliances to model state behavior. Moral ideals including global justice or sustainable development are often sidelined as irrelevant.

This mindset still shapes foreign policies toward Africa. China’s infrastructure-for-resources deals, Russia’s military contracts and Western security partnerships all follow realist logic: gain influence, secure resources and maintain power. Many of the BRICS nations, including China and Russia, have introduced financing strategies aimed at Africa’s critical minerals sector incorporating ESG principles. These initiatives are aimed at geopolitical competition, not necessarily addressing Africa’s social or environmental needs.

Neoliberalism shares much with realism, but introduces institutions and economic interdependence into the analysis. Similar to realism, it is also positivist; focused on explaining state behavior through observable data including trade agreements and international rules. Neoliberals argue that through cooperation and multilateral institutions, states can achieve mutual gains and reduce conflict.

This logic underpins many development initiatives from the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) to regional integration efforts. Neoliberalism assumes that cooperation fosters peace and prosperity. ESG fits into this framework as a governance tool helping to stabilise the business environment. The European Union’s 2024 Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) requires European companies to demonstrate compliance with ESG standards when operating in Africa, particularly concerning land rights and environmental impact.

Neoliberalism often overlooks realities on the ground. It fails to address power imbalances and the lived experiences of marginalised communities. Protests in Madagascar last year at Rio Tinto’s QIT Minerals Madagascar (QMM) ilmenite mine over environmental damage and land access tragically culminated in the deaths of three protesters. This highlights the risks of ESG frameworks that fail to effectively engage with local communities and prioritise corporate compliance over stakeholder engagement.

Green theory presents a direct challenge to both realism and neoliberalism. It is fundamentally normative: focused on what ought to be. Green theorists argue that international relations must confront ecological limits, climate justice and the ethical responsibilities of global actors. It critiques the positivist obsession with power and profit and calls for systemic change.

Green theory demands that ESG frameworks be more than a checklist. It insists that ESG must reckon with colonial legacies, intergenerational justice and the structural causes of poverty and environmental degradation. The rejection by several European banks to finance the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP) in response to environmental and human rights risks demonstrates the growing pressure for ESG to reflect community concerns, intergenerational justice and the broader structural impacts of extractive projects–not just profitability.

Green theory also questions the reductive use of data. While metrics are essential, they cannot capture the complexity of “sustainability” in regions facing both biodiversity loss and acute poverty. What does sustainability mean in a place where youth unemployment is soaring and ecosystems are in peril?

The debate between positivist and normative frameworks is not simply academic. It has real consequences for Africa’s future. Realism and neoliberalism often prioritise corporate interests over social justice while Green theory seeks to place people and ecosystems at the center of policy. The tragic unrest in Madagascar, sparked by Rio Tinto’s environmental practices, highlights the dangers of ignoring local communities in the ESG equation.