evidoria

← Back to browse

Good practice Imported

Ethiopia's Green Legacy Initiative — Mass National Tree-Planting Campaign

Ethiopia · Addis Ababa · See the Ethiopia profile · See the Addis Ababa profile

Evidence: Descriptive / self-reported Top 96% 20/100 · Ask Evidence Copilot about this practice

Ethiopia's Green Legacy claims 40bn+ seedlings planted since 2019, incl. a single-day record of 350 million trees. Independent analysts say survival is unverified — a 2025 district satellite study found only 40% survival vs official claims of 79–85%.

350 million
Seedlings planted in a single day (2019 record) (July 2019)
up to 600 million
Seedlings planted in a single day (2024 record) (2024)
>40 billion
Cumulative seedlings planted (official claim) (2019-2025)
50 billion trees
Programme target
79-85%
Officially reported survival rate
39.8%
Independent district survival rate (Gubalafto, 2025 study) (2019-2024)
≤50%
Estimated survival for 2022-23 planting round (Environmental Commission staff estimate)
35% (early 1900s) → ~4% (2000s) → ~11% (mid-2020s)
National forest cover
Ethiopia's Green Legacy Initiative — Mass National Tree-Planting Campaign

Details

Maturity
Scaling
Promoter
Ethiopian Ministry of Agriculture / Prime Minister's Office (Green Legacy Initiative Secretariat)
Period
2019–present
Keywords
reforestation, land restoration, carbon, national campaign

Context

In 2019 Ethiopia's government launched the Green Legacy Initiative, a nationwide mass tree-planting campaign coordinated by the Prime Minister's Office and the Ministry of Agriculture, aiming to reverse decades of deforestation that took national forest cover from roughly 35% in the early 1900s to about 4% by the 2000s.

Activities

The campaign is best known for single-day planting drives — officials reported 350 million seedlings planted in 12 hours in July 2019 and up to 600 million in a day by 2024 — and the government has set a target of 50 billion trees, claiming to have already exceeded 40 billion seedlings planted across six years, with officially reported survival rates of 79-85%.

Results

Independent scrutiny paints a more uncertain picture. A 2025 remote-sensing study of Gubalafto district (published in Discover Environment/Springer Nature), using Google Earth Engine land-cover analysis over 2019-2024, found an average survival rate of only 39.8% — far below official figures. Reporting by Dialogue Earth cites Ethiopian Environmental Commission staff who suggest survival for the 2022-23 planting round (7.5 billion claimed seedlings) may not exceed 50%. Global Forest Watch data cited by independent trackers shows national forest cover at around 11% in the mid-2020s — an improvement on the historic low, but far short of what the campaign's headline seedling counts would imply if fully credited.

Conclusions

Analysts note that at typical planting densities, a genuine 50-billion-tree programme would require afforesting roughly 35% of Ethiopia's total land area — a scale for which no comprehensive, publicly available survey or independent verification system exists. The initiative illustrates both the scale achievable through mass civic mobilisation and the evidence gap that opens when a state-run programme lacks independent, third-party monitoring of its outcomes.

Implementation

Indicative cost
Medium (€50k–€500k)
Time to results
Long (> 3 years)
Staffing & skills
Ethiopian Prime Minister's Office / Green Legacy Initiative Secretariat, Ministry of Agriculture, mass civic volunteer mobilisation

Conditions for success

  • National political mobilisation coordinated at Prime Minister's Office level, enabling single-day mass planting events

Common failure modes

  • Independent 2025 remote-sensing survey found only 39.8% survival versus official 79-85% claims
  • No independent, third-party verification system exists for planting or survival claims at national scale
  • Achieving the 50-billion-tree target implies afforesting roughly 35% of Ethiopia's land area, a scale with no public survey infrastructure to verify

Commonly funded by

National / regional programmes

Indicative funding routes for practices of this type — always check each programme's current calls and eligibility rules.

Do you run this practice? Claim it — verified implementers get a public contact pathway and can propose corrections.

Data sources

Where this practice's information was retrieved from, and when.

Attachments

Similar practices you may find useful