Sudan reflects the grave dangers of mismanaging resources — climate change has only deepened its economic schisms: Harry Verhoeven

Harry Verhoeven is a Senior Research Scholar at Columbia University’s Center on Global Energy Policy. Speaking to Srijana Mitra Das, he discusses the current crisis in Sudan — and the role petrodollars played:

What is the core of your research?
I am fundamentally interested in how African societies are responding to major environmental changes taking place now. My research tracks economic a nd politic a l shi f t s occurring against the backdrop of global warming. This is particularly important in east and southern Africa which have some of the world’s poorest countries that are also the least prepared for climate change. My work studies the impacts of global warming on governments, civil society and businesses there.


Sudan was once an oil-rich nation — what caused its economic crisis?
It is important to note that the discovery of oil in Sudan from the 1970s onwards happened around a civil war — that conflict took place because of deep economic inequalities. A narrow group of elites based in Khartoum wielded huge political and economic power. It was hoped that with the discovery of more oil in the 1990s, sold to buyers from Japan, China and India, new resources would generate a more inclusive economic system. But many of these resources were squandered — the government took up large infrastructure projects which ended up benefitting the same elites and widened existing inequalities.

In 2011, South Sudan seceded — it took with it three-quarters of the oil reserves. Sudan went into a deep economic recession. Its infrastructure projects didn’t prepare it for the loss of oil wealth. There was no comparative source of income and the country has been dealing with the political fall-out of this situation since then. Much of the fighting now between different arms of Sudan’s security apparatus is over the remaining resources of the country.

This is a very sad tale which shows the grave dangers of mismanaging resources. Consider agriculture in Sudan — this was also dominated by the small elite and policies made around it, instead of seeking to feed the country’s own people and enhance their living standards, predominantly aimed to export commodities like sugar, sorghum and cotton. Oil was only the latest in a series of resources which have been disastrously mismanaged.

Global inflation, driven by Russia’s war in Ukraine, has sharpened Sudan’s long-standing economic crisis. The price of fertiliser more than tripled — the result was that in a country plagued by food shortages, farmers began planting less. This further shrank resources, bringing conflicts between groups competing over these to fever pitch

-Harry Verhoeven

How have global shocks like Covid-19 and post-2019 inflation impacted Sudan’s economy?
These have only added to a much longer crisis, with living standards declining even before Covid-19 occurred, people being able to afford less and less, families cutting back on what they could eat, etc. The pandemic hit Sudan in that context — then came this incredible rise in the prices of energy and food, caused by Russia’s war in Ukraine. This meant that in agriculture, for instance, the price of fertiliser more than tripled — the result was that in a country already plagued by food shortages, farmers began planting less. Many farmers also use diesel pumps for irrigation and the higher price of fuel made them cut back. This further shrank key resources and intensified conflicts among groups competing for these. The last couple of years accelerated the existing crisis, bringing shortages and pressures to fever pitch.

Sudan had both harsh floods and a long drought, pressuring people facing a deep economic crisis — with a narrow group of elites capturing national resources

-Harry Verhoeven

Does climate change play a role?
Absolutely. On top of Covid-19 and the price surges caused by the Russia-Ukraine conflict, parts of Sudan have also been affected in recent years by disastrous f looding. These f loods have caused a huge dislocation of people, with farmers also having to abandon their fields. This loss of economic activity has meant an extra cost to a government which was already very resource-strapped and heavily indebted.

There has also been a harsh and protracted drought in other parts of the country — this has wrought severe effects on livestock, which is crucial for pastoralist communities. The loss of livestock meant losing both income and stored wealth, further pressuring people already struggling with a decade of economic crisis, very high debt levels, a weak government and selfish elites capturing resources. Climate change impacts have aggravated all these social and economic schisms.

Does Sudan hold a lesson about the dependence on fossil fuels?
Yes. It holds a very cautionary tale for similarly placed economies. It also has immense meaning for the debate on whether poor countries should get into the production of hydrocarbons. Strikingly, Sudan’s oil wealth was not used to give ordinary people access to resources like electricity — most of the oil was sold to Asian buyers and the government spent the earnings as it saw fit instead of improving the lives of citizens, including those living in oil-producing areas.

This is extremely important in the global debate on whether organisations like the World Bank and IMF should help African countries export oil and gas, given both the contexts of climate change and poverty. Sudan’s story shows us that this demands taking much more deliberate actions not just to help these economies produce energy but reduce their own energy poverty. Ordinary citizens must benefit from energy — this needs brave and conscious political decisions which don’t just help narrow elites corner benefits.


Views expressed are personal