Constructing ‘The Africa We Want’: A Linguistic Analysis of Identity, Agency and Participatory Communication in Agenda 2063
Authors
Department of Languages, Nigerian Army University Biu, Borno State (Nigeria)
Adamawa State College of Education, Hong, Adamawa State (Nigeria)
Information and Protocol Unit, Nigerian Army University Biu, Borno State (Nigeria)
Article Information
DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS.2026.1013COM0044
Subject Category: Communication
Volume/Issue: 10/13 | Page No: 609-626
Publication Timeline
Submitted: 2026-08-27
Accepted: 2026-09-01
Published: 2026-09-13
Abstract
This article examines how Agenda 2063: The Africa We Want, the African Union’s fifty-year strategic framework, linguistically constructs continental identity, distributes agency, and positions readers as participants in collective action. Although Agenda 2063 has attracted substantial scholarly attention as a development and policy framework, little research has examined the communicative mechanisms through which it performs persuasive and mobilizational work. Drawing on Systemic Functional Linguistics as the primary analytical framework, supplemented by Appraisal Theory and Conceptual Metaphor Theory, the study analyses a purposively stratified corpus of five rhetorically distinct sections of the document: the Foreword, the Executive Summary and Vision Statement, the Situational Analysis, the Goals and Strategies Framework, and the Communication Strategy. Analysis of pronoun reference, transitivity, modality, and evaluative language identifies three interconnected discursive movements: constructing a collective “we” through inclusive reference and relational processes; depicting a desirable future through densely positive evaluative and future-referring language; and distributing responsibility across differentiated human and institutional actors through graduated modality. The paper’s central contribution is identifying a communicative pattern, simultaneous symbolic collectivisation and distributed responsibility, through which “Africa” is constructed as a unified symbolic subject while practical agency is allocated to Member States, institutions, communities, and citizens. The analysis further shows that the document’s participatory rhetoric operates chiefly at the level of symbolic inclusion rather than substantive civic engagement. The study contributes to communication scholarship on supranational policy discourse, participatory development communication, and the linguistic construction of collective identity in institutional contexts. The analysis is text-internal and does not claim to establish actual audience effects.
Keywords
Agenda 2063; Systemic Functional Linguistics; continental communication; participatory development
Downloads
References
1. African Union. (2000). Constitutive Act of the African Union. African Union. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
2. African Union. (2015). Agenda 2063: The Africa We Want (Framework Document, first edition). African Union Commission. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
3. Akinola, A. O. (2021). Governance and development in Africa: The promise of Agenda 2063. Journal of African Development, 23(1), 78–102. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
4. Aniche, E. T. (2020). Agenda 2063 and the future of African regional integration. In S. O. Oloruntoba & T. Falola (Eds.), The Palgrave handbook of African political economy (pp. 203–221). Palgrave Macmillan. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
5. Chitonge, H. (2019). Gender, youth and Agenda 2063: A critical assessment. African Journal of Gender and Development, 8(2), 112–134. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
6. Escobar, A. (1995). Encountering development: The making and unmaking of the third world. Princeton University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
7. Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and social change. Polity Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
8. Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2014). Halliday’s introduction to functional grammar (4th ed.). Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
9. Krzyżanowski, M., & Wodak, R. (2011). Political strategies and language policies: The European Union Lisbon strategy and its language policy. Language Policy, 10(2), 115–136. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
10. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. University of Chicago Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
11. Lumala, P. M., Cruz, J., & Connaughton, S. (Eds.). (2026). The handbook of communication in Africa. Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
12. Martin, G. (2020). Pan-Africanism and African unity. In D. K. Mwangi & M. O. Adedeji (Eds.), Routledge handbook of Pan-Africanism (pp. 45–60). Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
13. Martin, J. R., & White, P. R. R. (2005). The language of evaluation: Appraisal in English. Palgrave Macmillan. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
14. Moyo, D. (2020). The handbook of media and mass communication theory in Africa. Springer. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
15. Murithi, T. (2017). The African Union: Pan-Africanism, peacebuilding and development. Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
16. Ndlela, M. N. (2021). Communication, participation and development in Africa. In M. N. Ndlela & W. Mano (Eds.), Communication and participation in Africa (pp. 3–17). Palgrave Macmillan. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
17. Oloruntoba, S. O. (2021). Agenda 2063, African integration, and the future of the continent. In S. O. Oloruntoba & T. Falola (Eds.), The Palgrave handbook of African political economy (pp. 187–202). Palgrave Macmillan. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
18. Servaes, J. (2008). Communication for development and social change. Sage. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
19. Thompson, G. (2014). Introducing functional grammar (3rd ed.). Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
20. Tufte, T. (2017). Communication and social change: A citizen perspective. Polity Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
21. van Leeuwen, T. (2008). Discourse and practice: New tools for critical discourse analysis. Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
22. Waisbord, S. (2014). Communication for development and social change. In R. S. Fortner & P. M. Fackler (Eds.), The handbook of media and mass communication theory (pp. 767–783). Wiley. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
23. Wasserman, H. (Ed.). (2018). Media, communication and the struggle for democratic change in Africa. Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
24. Wodak, R. (2009). “Unity in diversity”: The European Union and the discursive construction of identities. In C. Caldas-Coulthard & R. Iedema (Eds.), Identity trouble (pp. 123–142). Palgrave Macmillan. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
25. Ziai, A. (2016). Development discourse and global history: From colonialism to the sustainable development goals. Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
Metrics
Views & Downloads
Similar Articles
- Communication Strategies among Promoters During MATTA Fair 2025
- An Examination of Colleen Ballinger’s Experience in Social Media: Cancel Culture Chronicle
- Communication Patterns in Conflict Interactions in Premarital Couples Who Are in Abusive Relationships
- Social Media Use on Mental Health Outcomes among Adolescents and Young Adults in Port Harcourt City
- (Un)Successful Error Repairs in L2 Communication