Algeria's Green Dam: timeline, figures, and the role of the prickly pear
The Algerian Green Dam is often portrayed as a wall of trees planted all at once. It is neither a wall nor a single event. It is a program launched in 1970, extensively revised in 1982, then put on hold, and finally relaunched in stages between 2020 and 2026 under a different model. This page compiles the dated chronology, official figures with their scope, and what sources do not allow us to affirm.
What the word "dam" does not mean
The expression is metaphorical. It is neither a hydraulic structure nor a continuous barrier. The program covers forest areas, belts, windbreaks, pastoral plantations, and, since its relaunch, agro-silvo-pastoral developments spread across discontinuous zones.
Chronology
| Date | Decision or Operation |
|---|---|
| 1970 | Project announced under President Houari Boumédiène; first plantations in the early 1970s, notably in Moudjbara, Djelfa region |
| 1971-1980 | First assessments: over 300,000 hectares of forest plantations, 42,000 hectares of pastoral plantations, 21,000 hectares of fruit tree plantations |
| 1982 | Design revision: species diversification deemed imperative for ecological and socio-economic reasons |
| August 30, 2020 | Cabinet instruction: relaunch the project with local stakeholder participation |
| June 17, 2021 | National initiative launched in M'Sila, with a project involving FAO |
| October 29, 2023 | Operational relaunch announced in Djelfa: first phase, 400,000 hectares mentioned by 2026 |
| 2024-2025 | Annual programs: plantations, water, tracks, soil, pastures |
| March 2026 | FAO finalizes the financial proposal "Algerian Green Dam" to the Green Climate Fund |
The scale of the current scheme
The relaunch aims to increase the area concerned from 3.7 to 4.7 million hectares across 13 wilayas: Naâma, El Bayadh, Laghouat, Djelfa, Médéa, Bouira, M'Sila, Batna, Khenchela, Tébessa, Sétif, Bordj Bou Arreridj, and Biskra. The perimeter covers 183 communes and approximately 1,200 localities.
Governance is shared among several institutions: the General Directorate of Forests for forest restoration and monitoring, the agricultural services directorates for fruit tree plantations, the High Commission for Steppe Development for pastures and water, BNEDER for studies and mapping, with support from FAO and the Green Climate Fund for financial engineering.
Why the first model showed its limits
Three causes are consistently cited in evaluations.
Monoculture. The predominance of Aleppo pine created ecological vulnerability. A remote sensing study conducted in Moudjbara between 1972 and 2019 concludes an initial success followed by degradation.
Conflict of use. Some plantations were established on steppes already used for grazing. Without pasture governance or local benefits, coexistence became difficult.
Maintenance. Planting is the most visible step, not the most decisive. Survival rates depend on soil preparation, establishment watering, weeding, and protection against livestock.
The new model: restore and produce
The relaunch combines forest reforestation, pastoral plantations, arboriculture, exclosure, soil and water conservation, and the creation of tracks and water points. Economically valuable species are introduced so that restoration also generates rural income: fruit, oil, fodder, wood, and jobs.
However, water scarcity does not disappear. Even species considered hardy require suitable establishment and sometimes initial watering.
The real place of prickly pear
This is the point that directly concerns us, and it requires precision.
The prickly pear (Opuntia ficus-indica) is included in certain operations of the program. Rehabilitation work carried out in Tébessa documents 34 hectares of prickly pear plants. Its functions there are multiple: erosion protection, living fences, fodder in dry periods, fruit production, and valorization of cladodes and seeds.
A taxonomic clarification is necessary: public discourse sometimes classifies prickly pear among "fruit trees." It is a cactus, not a tree. The distinction is not trivial when comparing planted areas.
Other species are better documented nationally: olive and almond trees are the most confirmed, apricots appear in 2023 operations in Tébessa, and the argan tree is the subject of a strategy for 184,000 plants over 1,000 hectares in 2024-2025.
Which species are actually documented, and at what level
Public discourse lumps together "fruit trees" with plants of very different statuses, and mixes sources of unequal value. Here, for each species, is what documents allow us to establish and with what degree of certainty.
| Species | Status | Functions in the program | Level of certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
| Prickly pear | fruit-bearing cactus | hedge, anti-erosion, fruit, fodder, seed oil | high locally, medium nationally |
| Olive tree | fruit tree | fruit, oil, income, agricultural landscape | high |
| Almond tree | fruit tree | dried fruit, rural diversification | high |
| Argan tree | oilseed tree | arid restoration, oil, value chain | high for argan program, geography to be distinguished |
| Atlas pistachio | steppe tree or shrub | resilience, restoration, rootstock, seeds | high locally |
| Apricot tree | fruit tree | fruit and agricultural income | high locally |
| Carob tree | Mediterranean tree | fruit, fodder, restoration | medium |
Two figures circulate concerning prickly pear, and they do not have the same status. Rehabilitation operations in Tébessa document 34 hectares; a press article citing the program mentions 444.16 hectares of cactus and 4,331.5 hectares of fruit tree plantations in March 2023. The first figure is local and well-established, the second comes from the press reporting on a program and has not been corroborated by an official source. We publish both with their level, rather than choosing the more flattering one.
How to read the figures without being mistaken
Two numbers appear everywhere and are regularly confused. 400,000 hectares is a public program objective, announced in October 2023. 26,000 hectares is a reforestation balance sheet communicated in October 2025.
Bringing the two together to conclude that the project is "behind schedule" implies a documented timeline, which is not public. Conversely, presenting the objective as close to being achieved would be equally unfounded. Both interpretations are found in the press; neither is based on a source.
Progress figures, and their limitations
The General Directorate of Forests reported more than 21,000 hectares planted in March 2025, 24,000 in May, then 26,000 hectares in October 2025 since the operational resumption.
These figures are not directly comparable. Planted, restored, protected, or developed areas fall into different categories, and the perimeters used vary from one communication to another.
What sources do not allow us to affirm
This section is the most important on this page.
- Public timelines are not harmonized. The 2023 announcement mentioned 400,000 hectares by 2026; subsequent documents place rehabilitation within a 2023-2030 program.
- The national argan tree program extends beyond the 13 wilayas. Tindouf, for example, is not in the official corridor. Strategic contribution and effective implementation are two distinct things.
- A local experiment does not constitute generalization. Trials conducted in Djelfa on the Atlas pistachio provide an interesting signal, at a given site and period.
- No public source consulted allows us to establish that a given oil comes from a plot financed by the Green Dam. This applies to any brand, including ours.
Our position, unambiguous
NOPAL LIFE claims no funding or public supervision link with the Green Dam.
Our fruits come from family farms in the arid high plateaus and Kabylia, historically predating the relaunch programs, from which Bio Nopal Cactus sources its supply. Prickly pear grows there without irrigation — this is a property of the species, not an effect of the program.
What we can say with accuracy is this: the species we process is among those selected for certain restoration operations in Algerian arid zones, and our supply is independent of these operations.
Establishing a stronger link would require plot documents, an operation number, and a traceability chain from fruit to oil batch. As long as these pieces do not exist, the assertion would be unverifiable — and we prefer a page that is verifiable to one that tells a story. Our quality criteria and analytical specification follow the same logic.
Sources and levels of evidence
This page is based on twenty sources, classified by level. The classification is as important as the source: it indicates what can be drawn from it.
| Level | Nature | Examples used here |
|---|---|---|
| A | official, ministerial, or institutional | General Directorate of Forests and APS (October 2023, February, May and October 2025); Ministry of Agriculture (December 2024, August 2025); BNEDER (June 2021, January 2024); FAO and Green Climate Fund (November 2021, March 2026) |
| B | scientific, peer-reviewed | remote sensing study on Moudjbara 1972-2019; Annales algériennes d'agronomie on the 1982 revision; Annales de la recherche forestière on the Chbika trial; Djelfa phytoecology work |
| C | press, including quoting a program | local press on Tébessa (March 2024); article quoting cactus areas (March 2023); report on the prickly pear sector (February 2019) |
The assertions on this page regarding official figures are based on Level A sources. Those based on Level C are indicated as such in the body of the text.
This page will be corrected and dated with each new element. Any documented correction is welcome, including contradictory ones.
Sources and method
This page is based on a documentary verification report dated August 8, 2026, compiled from communications from the General Directorate of Forests, official announcements, university work on Moudjbara and Djelfa, and FAO documents related to the Green Climate Fund.
The photographs of the program remain protected by their respective rights and are not reproduced here. Any documented correction is welcome: this page will be updated and dated accordingly.
Frequently asked questions
Is the Algerian Green Dam a continuous wall of trees?
No. The expression is metaphorical. The program covers massifs, belts, windbreaks, and pastoral plantations spread over discontinuous areas across 13 wilayas.
How many hectares have been replanted since the relaunch?
The General Directorate of Forests reported 26,000 hectares in October 2025 since the operational resumption. This figure is not directly comparable to restored, protected, or developed areas, which fall into other categories.
Is prickly pear part of the program?
It is included in some operations: rehabilitation work in Tébessa documents 34 hectares of prickly pear. It is a cactus and not a tree, which matters when comparing areas.
Does NOPAL LIFE oil come from the Green Dam?
No, and we do not claim it. Our fruits come from family farms independent of the public program. No available source would allow us to claim the opposite for any brand.
Why did the first model partially fail?
Three causes are consistently cited: the monoculture of Aleppo pine and its vulnerability, the conflict of use with steppe grazing, and the lack of maintenance after planting, which has a greater impact on survival than the planting itself.
Our anti-aging treatments
