A Cognitive Contrastive Study of Conceptual Metaphors in Policy Documents: African Union-Agenda2063 and UN-Agenda2030 as Case Studies

1. INTRODUCTION

The world is facing serious challenges on the economic, social and environmental levels. Therefore, world leaders seek to devise long-term development plans to improve peoples’ lives and save the environment. Among these plans are the African Union Agenda2063: The Africa We Want (AU-Agenda2063) and the United Nations Agenda2030 (UN-Agenda2030) for sustainable development.

In Africa, African leaders realized the necessity of prioritizing “inclusive social and economic development, continental and regional integration, democratic governance and peace and security amongst other issues aimed at repositioning Africa to becoming a dominant player in the global arena.” (African Union, 2024) Therefore, the foundation of AU-Agenda2063 goes back to May 2013 when African leaders signed the 50^th Anniversary Solemn Declaration during the Golden Jubilee celebrations of the formation of the Organization of African Unity (OAU) (now called African Union (AU)). AU-Agenda2063 was adopted in Addis Ababa, 2015 and Africans from all walks of life and the Diaspora contributed to the Agenda’s input. The Agenda is characterized by being a 50-year plan for Africa (from 2013-2063). It includes seven Aspirations and 20 goals.  According to Thusi et al. (2024, p. 58), “it intends to set the framework for correcting past wrongs and making the twenty-first century authentically African.”

UN-Agnda2030 was adopted by all UN member states in 2015 and includes 17 sustainable development goals (SDGs), calling for all world countries to work collaboratively towards improving peoples’ lives with regard to education, health, reducing inequality, ending violence, eradicating poverty, supporting economic growth and protecting the environment. According to the UN, “The SDGs reflect an understanding that sustainable development everywhere must integrate economic growth, social well-being and environmental protection.” (United Nations, 2024)

Since both Agendas are formal policy documents, their language is carefully chosen to communicate their intended messages. With the public audience in mind, ideas and abstract concepts in both Agendas are presented in a way that makes them easier to be understood by the public. Conceptual metaphors, which is the focus of the present study and which will be discussed under Theoretical Framework, are one of the means of bringing abstract concepts closer to the public minds. Therefore, examining the conceptual metaphors in both Agendas helps understand the abstract concepts included in each Agenda to reveal the priorities, the ideologies and the sociocultural and geopolitical backgrounds that influence how metaphors are generated in them.       

2. AIM OF THE STUDY

The study aims to identify, compare and contrast conceptual metaphors in AU-Agenda2063 and UN-Agenda2030 for sustainable development to reveal how issues related to sustainable development are conceptualized in each Agenda. Moreover, through comparing and contrasting the conceptual metaphors, the study attempts to reveal each Agenda’s major concerns pertaining to sustainable development and to reveal the similarities and differences in conceptualizing common issues. The impetus of the study arose from the assumption that metaphors diverge between both Agendas due to sociocultural and geopolitical factors. In order to fulfil the aim of the study, the following research questions are proposed.

Research Questions

• What are the conceptual metaphors in AU-Agenda2063 and UN- Agenda2030?
• What are the shared target concepts/domains in both Agendas and how are they conceptualized differently or likewise?
• What are the most frequently employed source domains in each Agenda and what does that frequency reveal about each Agenda’s priorities/ideologies?
• How do the sociocultural and geopolitical factors contribute to metaphor variation between both Agendas?

3. DATA ANAD METHODOLOGY

The data of the study comprises the African Union Agenda2063: The Africa We Want (AU-Agenda2063) and the United Nations Agenda2030 (UN-Agenda2030) for sustainable development. These two Agendas were specifically selected for analysis since they deal with important sustainable development issues, where AU-Agenda2063 presents the African regional view of these issues and UN-Agenda2030 presents the international view of the same issues. Thus, there has been an interest in examining the similarities and differences in the regional and the international views and disclosing the sociocultural and geopolitical aspects governing metaphors in each Agenda.

AU-Agenda2063 was downloaded from the official website of the African Union while UN-Agenda2030 was downloaded from the UN official website. The downloaded Pdf files are the English version of both documents. Both pdf files were converted into word files online, what rendered the AU 74854-word document and the UN 15549-word document.

The study adopted qualitative and quantitative analyses to identify and highlight the frequency of conceptual metaphors in both Agendas. Both kinds of analysis were done manually and combined to help understand the nature of the metaphors in each Agenda and to reveal each Agenda’s priorities.

The main theoretical framework employed in the study was Lakoff and Johnson’s Conceptual Metaphor Theory (CMT) (1980, 2003). This framework was specially chosen since it contributes significantly to revealing how issues are conceptualized, what accordingly justifies the actions taken to deal with these issues. Additionally, no study has examined and compared conceptual metaphors in AU-Agenda2063 and UN-Agenda2030 with respect to conceptual metaphors, based on the literature review. Since metaphors might be subjectively identified and interpreted, Pragglejaz Group’s Metaphor Identification Procedure (MIP) (2007) framework for identifying metaphors was followed. The framework steps include reading first the whole text to have a general understanding of the meaning and then identifying the lexical units in the text. Following, the meaning of each lexical unit in context is established to determine if it has a more basic current meaning in other contexts and if so a decision on whether the contextual meaning contrasts with the basic meaning should be taken and if there is a contrast, the lexical unit is marked as metaphorical (Group, 2007).

The metaphoric expressions in each Agenda were identified according to Group’s MIP (2007). Then, they were categorized based on their target domains to identify the shared target domains in both Agendas and the peculiar ones to each Agenda in order to explore the focal concerns in each Agenda. Through quantitative analysis, the frequently used source domains in each Agenda were discerned to unveil the ideologies and cultural values of each Agenda. A comparison between both Agendas to highlight the similar and the different metaphors in them was finally drawn to understand the sociocultural and geopolitical influences that guide the formulation of metaphors in each Agenda.

The study starts by introducing a brief background about AU-Agenda2063 and UN-Agenda2030. Then the aim of the study and its research questions are presented followed by a discussion of the theoretical framework adopted in the study and earlier research on conceptual metaphors and the two Agendas. Data and methodology in the study are then presented followed by the results and discussion on the analysis of metaphors in both Agendas. Finally, concluding remarks are presented with recommended further research.

4. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

4.1 Theoretical Framework

This section presents the theoretical framework adopted in the study. It focuses on the Conceptual Metaphor theory (CMT) as introduced by Lakoff and Johnson (1980, 2003). It also includes contributions by scholars who are interested in metaphors from a cognitive perspective.

Lakoff and Johnson introduced their seminal work Metaphors We Live By (2003) to present their views about metaphors. Seeing metaphor from the cognitive perspective, they maintain that “metaphor is pervasive in everyday life, not just in language, but in thought and action” (p. 1). They (1980) add that our conceptual system is “fundamentally metaphorical in nature” (p.1). Lakoff (1993) also states that “the locus of metaphor is not in language at all, but in the way we conceptualize one mental domain in terms of another” (p. 203). Thus, metaphor according to Lakoff and Johnson is part of our conceptual system rather than only a figurative tool in language to achieve rhetorical flourish. It reflects how we see the world and behave accordingly.

Kövecses (2020, p. 2) maintains that “a conceptual metaphor is a systematic set of correspondences between two domains of experience.” He (2010) expounds that a conceptual metaphor comprises “two conceptual domains, in which one domain is understood in terms of another” (p. 4). These two conceptual domains are called source domain and target domain. The source domain is the conceptual one from which features and structures are borrowed and mapped onto the abstract target domain to help understand it. Kövecses (2010) differentiates between the conceptual metaphor, where its form is CONCEPTUAL DOMAIN A IS CONCPTUAL DOMAIN B, and the metaphorical linguistic expressions which are the words or phrases used to convey the metaphor. For example, the conceptual metaphor THEORIES ARE BUILDINGS can be realized through the metaphorical expressions “the theory needs more support”; “is that the foundation for your theory?” and similar expressions which are unconsciously used in everyday life and shape how we understand theories.

Evans and Green (2006, p. 298) contend that “aspects of the source domain that are not explicitly stated in the mappings can be inferred.” This means that metaphoric mappings carry entailments or inferences. For example, in the metaphor AN ARGUMANT IS A JOURNEY, participants in the argument correspond to travelers who might be lost or fail to reach their destination. The entailment that these events can also happen in the target domain ARGUMENT is due to the correspondence between the source and target domains.

Lakoff and Johnson (1980, 2003) identify three types of conceptual metaphors: orientational, structural and ontological metaphors. For them (1980), orientational metaphors are based on our cultural and physical experiences and can vary due to cultural differences. For example, some cultures conceptualize the future as being ahead of us while others see it in the back. They suggest polar spatial orientations such as UP-DOWN, FRONT-BACK, DEEP-SHALLOW, IN-OUT, CENTRAL-PERIPHERAL and ON-OFF. Examples of the UP-DOWN structure as suggested by Lakoff and Johnson (1980) are: HAPPY IS UP/SAD IS DOWN; CONSCIOUS IS UP/UNCONSCIOUS IS DOWN; HAVING CONTROL OR FORCE IS UP/BEING SUBJECT TO CONTROL OR FORCE IS DOWN and RATIONAL IS UP/EMOTIONAL IS DOWN.

The ontological metaphor is referred to as the physical metaphor by Lakoff and Johnson (1980). Ontological metaphors are used to understand world experiences in terms of objects, substances and containers. Besides, personification is another type of ontological metaphors where “a wide variety of experiences with nonhuman entities” can be understood in terms of “human motivations, characteristics, and activities” (Lakoff & Johnson, 2003, p. 28).

Finally, structural metaphors refer to understanding and explaining the abstract target concept through the structure of the source domain (Kövecses, 2010). For example, through the structural metaphor TIME IS MOTION, the concept of time is structured according to space and motion and mappings such as “the passing of time is motion” and “future times are in front of the observer/past times are behind the observer” reflect that structure (p. 37).

The effect of culture on conceptual metaphors is extensively discussed by Kövecses who introduced his theory of metaphor variation (2005). Kövecses (2005) suggests that metaphors vary cross-culturally. He elaborates that a culture might use a number of source domains to conceptualize a target domain or a specific source domain to conceptualize different target domains. Furthermore, particular conceptual metaphors might be unique to certain cultures, what entails that both the target and the source domains are peculiar to that culture. Kövecses (2005) identifies two reasons for metaphor variation. They are “differential experience” and “differential cognitive preferences or styles” (p. 231). He elaborates that different experiences that govern metaphor variation are represented in context awareness, differential memory (history), different concerns and interests and their various sub-cases. Meanwhile, he means by differential cognitive preferences “viewpoint preference” (p. 252).

The following section presents earlier studies related to the present study.

• Literature Review

4.2.1 Studies on Conceptual Metaphors

Diverse studies were interested in showing the effect of conceptual metaphors as a persuasive tool in different kinds of discourse. They also tried to uncover the cross-linguistic/cultural differences in metaphors. Some of these studies are in the fields of media (Changchao and Zhenkui, 2024; Petiy, 2023; Adam and Wahyuni, 2020); politics (Deng and Jiang, 2023; Boussaid, 2022; Malah and Taiwo, 2020); economy (Gil, 2019; Gao, 2016); medicine (Abdel-Qader and Al-Khanji, 2022; Sarif S et al., 2021)  and sports (Alzawaydeh and Alghazo, 2018).

In the media, Changchao and Zhenkui (2024) examined the persuasive role of conceptual metaphors in Chinese digital editorial storytelling. They analyzed 50 stories from China Daily and concluded that the three types orientational, ontological, and structural metaphors are present in the data and reflect Chinese economic and sociopolitical aspects, creating a persuasive effect on the public.

Petiy (2023) studied how the English-language mass media described the war in Ukraine. The researcher analyzed news and opinion articles from The New York Times, CNN, The Washington Post, BBC News, The Guardian, and The Independent and found that the Ukraine-Russian war is commonly conceptualized in the mass media by using metaphors from the domains of natural disasters, sports, illness, power, and the arts to persuade the audience.

Relatedly, Adam and Wahyuni (2020) investigated the conceptual metaphors in news articles about the climate crisis from The Guardian online news website. They concluded that climate crisis is conceptualized as a War, an Object in Motion, Directionality, a Vehicle, a Destination, a Political Ideology, a Wrestler, a Chemical Substance, and a Natural Disaster, generating a sense of urgency to take actions to stop further climate degradation.

In political discourse, Deng and Jiang (2023) explored how ecological civilization, which is a concept introduced by China as opposed to the industrial civilization in the West, is conceptualized. They analyzed extracts from The Dataset of President Xi Jinping’s Major Speeches on ecological concepts and found that the five metaphors JOURNEY, PLANT, WAR, LIFE and DISEASE are employed in the President’s speeches to conceptualize ecological civilization. They also found that these metaphors are interrelated and are derived from China’s traditional medicine and Confucian cultural experiences. This conclusion highlights how culture affects the kind of conceptual metaphors employed.

Not only does culture affect the employment of metaphors in political discourse, but also political ideologies and the general spirit of the different periods of history do. This is shown in Boussaid’s (2022) study where he comparatively examined the conceptual metaphors in Joe Biden’s (2021) and George Washington’s (1789) inaugural speeches. The researcher concluded that the metaphor variation between both speeches is due to the different ideologies and the dominant atmosphere in the country at both times. He also concluded that Biden attaches high importance to “persuasive rhetoric” through using conceptual metaphors.

In a similar vein, Malah and Taiwo (2020) explored conceptual metaphors in the former President of Nigeria Muhammadu Buhari’s four political speeches: Presidential Primaries Speech, Acceptance Speech, Victory Speech and Presidential Inaugural Speech. They concluded that the president effectively uses metaphors to demonstrate his “integrity” as well as his anti-corruption and political ideologies. He also depends on HUMAN metaphors (32%), WAR metaphors (21%) and JOURNEY metaphors (16%) to convey his ideas.

Regarding the economic discourse, Gil (2019) compared Spanish and English economic reports in the press during the pre-election week of 2015. She selected English and Spanish reports in six newspapers representing different political ideologies (left, centre and right). Part of her focus was on the relationship between the metaphor frequency and persuasion. She found that there is no relation between metaphor frequency and persuasion. She applied the Chi-Square test and concluded that “the ideology of a given newspaper does not have an effect on the frequency of persuasion through metaphor, at least in numerical terms.”

Another cross-linguistic/cultural study related to economic discourse was conducted by Gao (2016). The researcher compared metaphors used in English and Chinese economic news headlines and concluded that despite the similarity in conceptualizing economic concepts, differences exist due to the different cultural and physical contexts.

With respect to the medical discourse, various studies have been conducted to explore the corona virus-related conceptual metaphors. For example, Abdel-Qader and Al-Khanji (2022) studied the density and the effect of metaphors in three of Biden’s speeches on COVID-19. They concluded that metaphor plays an influential role in simplifying ideas and persuasion.

Likewise, Sarif S. et al. (2021) described the conceptual metaphors in the Japanese Prime Minister’s Press Conference, Shinzo Abe on March 14 and 28, 2020. They concluded that the prime minister depends on the structural metaphors to communicate the dangers of COVID-19 and simplify his intended message for the audience.

Metaphors in sports discourse were further examined in a comparative study by Alzawaydeh and Alghazo (2018). They compared conceptual metaphors in football news headlines in English and Arabic and found that the metaphor FOOTBALL IS WAR is common in English and Arabic headlines, suggesting that football is conceptualized similarly regardless of the cultural and the physical environment.

4.2.2 Linguistic Studies on AU-Agenda2063 and UN-Agendas2030

Hassan (2022) examined the frequency and function of modal verbs in communicating the UN-Agenda2030 messages. She conducted a critical discourse analysis using Fairclough’s model and the corpus tool AntConc 3.5.9 and found that the main categories of modal verbs in the Agenda are ability, possibility, obligation, necessity, volition and prediction, indicating that modal resources are employed to emphasize the importance and seriousness of the issues in the Agenda.

Ala-Uddin (2019) explored how sustainable development goals are framed discursively in UN-Agenda2030 drawing on Fairclough’s (1995) three-dimensional framework. His analysis showed three discursive patterns. First, challenges referred to in Article 14 are presented “seductively” to justify interventions for attaining the goals. Second, neoliberal economy is fortified, making small islands and developed countries under the capitalist umbrella. Third, globalization benefits are presented as not being distributed evenly between developed and developing countries. 

A different study by Machin and Liu (2023) conducted a multimodal critical discourse analysis to documents related to the UN-Agenda2030 which show infographics, charts, tables and bullet points. They aimed to find out how these modes of communication in the selected documents have rhetorical power. They concluded that the Agenda is presented primarily as a “moral process”, engaging and highly technical. They also found that the Agenda features instances of contradictions, vague buzzwords and absence of causes of world challenges.

From the literature reviewed above, it is seen that no study has comparatively addressed AU-Agenda2063 and UN-Agenda2030 in terms of conceptual metaphors. Therefore, the present study fills this gap in the literature and attempts to additionally reveal the sociocultural and the geopolitical circumstances that affect the formation of conceptual metaphors in both Agendas.

5. RESULTS

This section presents the results of analyzing the conceptual metaphors in AU-Agenda2063 and UN-Agenda2030 for sustainable development. The qualitative analysis is supported by the quantitative analysis to highlight the target domains and the most frequently employed source domains to reveal both Agendas’ priorities and their sociocultural and geopolitical backgrounds that affect the way metaphors are formed.

Table 1: Target domains and their underlying metaphors in AU-Agenda2063 and UN-Agenda2030

Table 1 presents the target domains identified in AU-Agenda2063 and UN-Agenda2030 and their related conceptual metaphors. It shows that 34 metaphors are recognized in AU-Agenda2063 while 19 metaphors are found in UN-Agenda2030, with nine target domains shared by both Agendas (AGENDA, DEVELOPMENT, ECONOMY, STRATEGIES, EFFORTS, EDUCATION, ENVIRONMENT, CHALLENGES and INSTITUTIONS); four target domains peculiar to AU-Agenda2063 (AFRICA, RESOURCES, LAW and ACHIEVING GOALS) and three target domains peculiar to UN-Agenda2030 (SOCIETIES, PLANET and BENEFITS). Table 1 indicates that while both Agendas share interest in development-related issues such as economy, strategies, efforts, education, challenges and institutions as well as environment-related issues, each Agenda still has its own specific concerns. On the one hand, AU-Agenda2063 focuses on the African identity, continental resources, law and its role in Africa and achieving the continental goals. On the other hand, UN-Agenda2030 focuses on issues related to the planet as a whole, global societies and achieving worldwide benefits.

Diagrams 1 and 2 provide visual illustrations of the percentages of the conceptual metaphors related to each identified target domain in each Agenda. Diagram 1 is dedicated to AU-Agenda2063 while Diagram 2 is dedicated to UN-Agenda2030.

Diagram 1: Percentages of metaphors related to target domains in AU-Agenda2063

Diagram 2: Percentages of metaphors related to target domains in UN-Agenda2030

Diagram 1 clarifies that the highest percentage of metaphors in AU-Agenda2063 goes for RESOURCES target domain (21%), followed by AFRICA target domain (18%). Meanwhile, Diagram 2 shows that the highest percentage of metaphors in UN-Agenda2030 goes for DEVELOPMENT target domain (21%). These percentages stress that AU-Agenda2063 is more concerned with maximizing the benefits from the continental resources and strengthening African identity and Pan-Africanism whereas UN-Agenda2030 is highly concerned with achieving global development at various levels.

The analysis highlights eleven varied source domains employed to conceptualize the target domains identified in AU-Agenda2063 and UN-Agenda2030. These source domains are BUILDING, PERSON, VEHICLE, MACHINE, JOURNEY, PLANT, VALUABLE OBJECT, WAR, PRODUCT, CONTAINER and MEDICINE. They are presented in the following Diagram 3 with percentages of their frequencies in both Agendas.

Diagram 3: Percentages of source domains in AU-Agenda2063 and UN-Agenda2030

Diagram 3 shows that the top source domains BUILDING, PERSON and CONTAINER are frequently employed with the same percentage (15%) in the African Agenda. As for the UN Agenda, the most frequently employed source domain is BUILDING domain (32%) while the second top source domains are PERSON and VEHICLE (16% each). These percentages indicate that both Agendas draw largely on the domain BUILDING to conceptualize their target domains, reflecting the Agendas’ drafters’ belief in the necessity of setting systematic plans and frameworks for the development work to secure economic, social, developmental and environmental stability. They also signify the conviction that cooperation, hard work and perseverance are key qualities for making progress.

6. DISCUSSION

Based on the analysis, six out of nine shared target domains (AU-AGENDA2063, DEVELOPMENT, ECONOMY, EDUCATION, ENVIRONMENT and CHALLENGES) are conceptualized in the same way in both Agendas. Accordingly, the following conceptual metaphors are identified in both Agendas: AGENDA2063 IS A BUILDING; DEVELOPMENT/GROWTH IS A JOURNEY; DEVELOPMENT/HUMAN PROGRESS IS A VEHICLE; ECONOMY IS A PLANT; EDUCATION/LEARNING IS A JOURNEY; ENVIRONMENT IS A VALUABLE OBJECT and CHALLENGES ARE PERSONS. The following examples from each Agenda clarify the similarities in conceptualizing these six shared domains.

AGENDA2063 IS A BUILDING

• “Agenda2063 is founded first and foremost on the Constitutive Act of the Union, and the Africa Union vision of a prosperous, united and integrated continent …” (AU-Agenda2063)

• “… and reaffirm the importance of supporting the African Union’s Agenda2063 and the programme of the New Partnership for Africa’s Development, …” (UN-Agenda2030)

In the first example, AU-Agenda2063 is construed as a building through the verb “is founded”. So, as buildings are founded on solid infrastructure to be stable, Agenda2063 has bases such as the Constitutive Act of the Union to support it. Meanwhile, “supporting” in example two suggests that AU-Agenda2063 has a structure that secures stability and sustainability in Africa when given due assistance. Conceptualizing Agenda2063 as a building signifies the belief in both Agendas that it is based on structured framework, making it reliable for fulfilling its goals.

DEVELOPMENT/GROWTH IS A JOURNEY

• “… to put the continent on a new positive trajectory of growth, peace and prosperity” (AU-Agenda2063)

• “It is “we the peoples” who are embarking today on the road to 2030” (UN-Agenda2030)

• “Our journey will involve Governments as well as parliaments, the United Nations system and other international institutions, local authorities, indigenous peoples, civil society, business and the private sector, the scientific and academic community…” (UN-Agenda2030)

In these examples, “trajectory”, “journey”, “embarking” and “on the road” suggest that progress towards global sustainable development and achieving growth and stability in Africa are the final destination intended by world leaders. To reach these destinations, the world moves on a journey track where it might encounter potential obstacles which require patience and wisdom to be dealt with. The JOURNEY metaphor also implies that development and growth take time and is not easy. Specifically, “trajectory” in example three is described as “positive” and “new”, suggesting the forward-looking vision of the decision-makers in Africa and their optimistic approach towards dealing with the continent’s challenges. It reflects the sociocultural background that earlier attempts to achieve development in the continent were not rewarding and there is a need for new means. Example five presents different contributors to sustainable development as passengers accompanying each other throughout the journey, indicating that achieving development requires collaboration. Cognitively, this JOURNEY metaphor reflects the cultural view in both Agendas that development requires a sense of shared purpose, long-term plan and cooperation.

DEVELOPMENT/HUMAN PROGRESS IS A VEHICLE

• “With 60 per cent of the world’s arable land, agriculture is Africa’s greatest potential and can serve as the main engine to propel the continent’s growth and transformation” (AU-Agenda2063)

• “The spread of information and communications technology and global interconnectedness has great potential to accelerate human progress …” (UN-Agenda2030)

“Engine” and “to propel” in example six are used in the context of speaking about vehicles, their speed, source of power and movement forward. Thus, economic growth and transformation in Africa are conceptualized as vehicles that are powered to start and move forward and can go fast. Here, the source of power is agriculture, reflecting the sociocultural background in the continent where Africa is largely an agricultural continent. The VEHICLE metaphor in example six brings to mind some aspects of a vehicle that it might face obstacles which can be overcome by good management and patience. Meanwhile, human progress is framed in example seven as a vehicle that begins to go faster thanks to information technology, stressing the positive impact of information technology on humanity. The metaphor highlights the sociocultural view of technology as the highly effective means of development. These conceptualizations reflect the belief, in both Agendas, in the values of shared responsibility, wise management, collaboration for developing information technology and overcoming challenges facing humanity.

ECONOMY IS A PLANT

• “Although modest progress is being made, Africa has still not reaped the benefits that accrue from trading with itself, or with the rest of the world, ….” (AU-Agenda2063)

• “Private business activity, investment and innovation are major drivers of productivity, inclusive economic growth and job creation.” (UN-Agenda2030)

In example eight, the verb “reaped” is borrowed from the PLANT source domain, suggesting that economic activities represented in trade are like trees with fruits, which are the benefits of these economic activities. The PLANT metaphor reflects the sociocultural background where Africa depends widely on agriculture. Meanwhile, example nine suggests that economy is like a plant that can grow when given adequate support, represented in encouraging private business, innovation and investment. These two examples reflect both Agendas’ view that achieving economic progress cannot occur by chance; rather, it needs nurturing and support like plants.

EDUCATION/LEARNING IS A JOURNEY

• “In the Africa of 2063, at least 70per cent of all high school graduates will go on to have tertiary education at technical and vocational education and training (TVET) institutions, and Universities …” (AU-Agenda2063)

• “All people, irrespective of sex, age, race or ethnicity, and persons with disabilities, migrants, indigenous peoples, children and youth, especially those in vulnerable situations, should have access to life-long learning opportunities …” (UN-Agenda2030)

In example ten, the verb “go on” denotes that tertiary technical and vocational education is one of Africa’s targets by 2063. Seeing continuing with technical and vocational education in Africa as a journey signifies that these two kinds of education will lead to profitable goals in the long run and implies that they might face challenges which can be overcome as long as they are pursued relentlessly. Focusing on resuming technical and vocational education reflects the sociocultural circumstances in Africa where there is a high percentage of illiterate people. This conceptualization stresses that African leaders believe in the importance of education, especially technical and vocational education, for the advancement of Africa. The adjective “life-long” in example eleven implies that learning continues throughout the individual’s life and its goal is to be a qualified person who participates positively in society. Cognitively, the JOURNEY frame demonstrates that education is perceived in both Agendas as a profitable process when pursued patiently being equipped with the necessary skills to face potential obstacles throughout the process.

ENVIRONMENT IS A VALUABLE OBJECT

• “By 2063, Africa’s biodiversity, including its forests, wild life, wetlands (lakes and rivers), genetic resources, as well as aquatic life, most notably fish stocks and coastal and marine ecosystems, including trans-boundary natural resources will be fully conserved and used” (AU-Agenda2063)

• “By 2020, sustainably manage and protect marine and coastal ecosystems to avoid significant adverse impacts, including by strengthening their resilience, and take action for their restoration in order to achieve healthy and productive oceans.” (UN-Agenda2030)

Example twelve constitutes part of the African Agenda’s Aspiration #1 where the verbs “conserved” and “used” suggest that Africa’s biodiversity is like objects that can be controlled, protected and exploited. Meanwhile, the verbs “manage” and “protect” and the noun “resilience” in example thirteen suggest that ecosystems are like substances that might be depleted if not preserved and managed well. Additionally, “restoration” implies that the ecosystems were once in good condition and as valuable objects they need to be cleaned and repaired to be useful for humanity. This conceptualization highlights both Agendas’ cultural view of biodiversity and ecosystems as elements worthy of protection.

CHALLENGES ARE PERSONS

• “Continue the global struggle against all forms of racism and discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerances” (AU-Agenda2063)

• “We are resolved to free the human race from the tyranny of poverty” (UN-Agenda2030)

Through example fourteen, challenges in Africa are generally conceptualized as human beings and more specifically as enemies, among which are racism, xenophobia and intolerance. The noun “struggle” and the preposition “against” stress that the continent’s challenges are people who are fought against. Meanwhile, “poverty” in example fifteen is compared to a tyrant who oppresses people and thus they cannot make progress. The sociocultural and geopolitical environment is echoed in these two examples where in example fourteen Africa is presented as the continent which has been subject to long periods of racism, xenophobia and colonialism whereas human race is presented in example fifteen as being suppresses by poverty. This framing of challenges reflects both Agendas’ view that discrimination, intolerance, xenophobia and poverty are real problems that need immediate solutions to help humanity achieve development.

Despite the complete agreement between AU-Agenda2063 and UN-Agenda2030 on conceptualizing EDUCATION and ENVIRONMENT, each Agenda sees additional dimensions to the shared target domains AU-AGNEDA2063, DEVELOPMENT, ECONOMY, CHALLENGES. For example, the African Agenda conceptualizes AU-Agenda2063 as a person and a valuable object, besides a building. As for DEVELOPMENT, UN-Agenda2030 compares it to a building and a machine, besides a journey and a vehicle. As for ECONOMY, UN-Agenda2030 presents it as a vehicle, along with a plant whereas AU-Agenda2063 presents it as a person, a journey and a container along with a plant. Finally, CHALLENGES are presented as containers and plants in addition to persons in AU-Agenda2063 while UN-Agend2030 sees that DEALING WITH CHALLENGES IS A WAR.

The rest of the common target domains between both Agendas (STRATEGIES, EFFORTS, INSTITUTIONS) are conceptualized in totally different ways in each Agenda as displayed in Table I. For example, STRATEGIES are presented in AU-Agenda2063 as containers and in UN-Agenda2030 as buildings. EFFORTS are presented in AU-Agenda2063 as plants and in UN-Agenda2030 as buildings and persons. Meanwhile, INSTITUTIONS are conceptualized in AU-Agenda2063 as vehicles and in UN-Agenda2030 as buildings. This variation in conceptualizing the shared target domains reveals the different sociocultural and geopolitical backgrounds in both Agendas, which are highlighted through the following examples.

(AU-Agenda2063)

STRATEGIES ARE CONTAINERS

• “To succeed, Agenda2063 should be embedded in national and regional plans and frameworks.”

Plans and frameworks are part of the development strategies and “embedded in” in example sixteen suggests that national plans and frameworks are like a container filled with objects, represented in the AU-Agenda2063, which need protection. Through the metaphor, national and regional plans and frameworks are conceptualized as having borders that protect what is inside them, implying that they are good sources of protection for Africa.

EFFORTS ARE PLANTS

• “Agenda2063 is the fruit of an immense collaborative effort to reflect on the ‘Africa We Want by 2063’”

Collective African efforts are compared in this example to a tree with fruits, represented in AU-Agenda2063. The metaphor highlights the cultural belief in the African Agenda that efforts require time, patience and shared responsibility to be productive.

AFRICAN INSTITUTIONS ARE VEHICLES

• “The AU-approved Africa Credit Guarantee Agency (ACGA) and African Investment Bank (AIB) are two major continental development financing vehicles that should enhance quite significantly the continental development finance architecture.”

The financial African institutions Africa Credit Guarantee Agency and African Investment Bank are explicitly referred to as the means (vehicles) of strengthening the African financial situation. Conceptualizing institutions as vehicles proclaims that institutions might not be productive at times and need continuous review and assessment.

Ideologically, the CONTAINER metaphor, which is one of the top employed source domains in AU-Agenda2063, highlights the cultural and geopolitical belief that Africa is self-sufficient in managing its resources and planning for its progress without demanding external help whereas the PLANT metaphor reflects the sociocultural influence of Africa’s physical environment, being an agricultural continent, as well as the political will to be a self-sustaining continent. Finally, the VEHICLE metaphor underscores the sociocultural principle of depending on fostering dependence on the African institutions for financing development projects. Meanwhile, from the geopolitical perspective, although Africa is not a rich continent and has been subject to colonialism for long periods in history because of its priceless resources, it seeks to depend on its resources and project itself as a continent that has its own political power.

(UN-Agenda2030)

STRATEGIES ARE BUILDINGS

• “Cohesive nationally owned sustainable development strategies, supported by integrated national financing frameworks, will be at the heart of our efforts.”

In example nineteen, national strategies are perceived as buildings based on purposeful national funding plans to guarantee their effectiveness in bringing about stability and sustainable development in each individual nation.

EFFORTS ARE BUILDINGS

• “… national development efforts need to be supported by an enabling international economic environment …”

This example shows that national efforts need to be based on stable foundations represented in supportive international economic environments. Although the Agenda admits the countries’ sovereignty, this example demonstrates that countries still need international economic support, reflecting the geopolitical background that wealthier countries still have influence in the world economy dynamics.

EFFORTS ARE PERSONS

• “Cohesive nationally owned sustainable development strategies, supported by integrated national financing frameworks, will be at the heart of our efforts.”

Efforts are presented in this example as people who have hearts, drawing attention to the significant impact of exerting efforts in the development process. Here, the cultural belief that each country has its potential to finance its development projects is manifest.

INSTITUTIONS ARE BUILDINGs

• “Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels”

Comparing institutions to buildings in example twenty-two suggests that they are based on stable foundations, ensuring their reliability and their significant role in attaining national development. It reflects the sense of shared responsibility and stresses that institutions require stability to be effective.

Ideologically, the BUILDING metaphors above, which constitute the top employed source domain in UN-Agenda2030, underscore the sociocultural principle that institutions help keep development work organized and that they are therefore subject to accountability. Geopolitically, they stress that UN-Agenda2030 is universal for all developed and developing countries alike and that each country has control over its own resources. Finally, they emphasize the UN’s respect for each country’s peculiarities.

At this point of analysis, the similarities and differences in conceptualizing the shared target domains in AU-Agenda2063 and UN-Agenda2030 are presented. The following part explains the differences between both Agendas in terms of target domains and their underlying metaphors as shown in Table I above. On the one hand, the distinctive target domains and their related metaphors in AU-Agenda2063 are AFRICA (AFRICA IS A BUILDING, AFRICAN UNION IS A BUILDING, AFRICA’S IDENTITY IS A BUILDING, AFRICA IS A PERSON, AFRICA IS A CONTAINER, PAN-AFRICANISM IS A PLANT); RESOURCES (RESOURCES ARE BUILDINGS, RESOURCES ARE PERSONS, RESOURCES ARE VEHICLES, RESOURCES ARE VALUABLE OBJECTS, RESOURCES ARE MACHINES, RESOURCES ARE PRODUCTS, RESOURCES ARE MEDICINE); LAW (LAW IS A CONTAINER) and  ACHIEVING GOALS (ACHIEVING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IS A WAR, ACHIEVING POLITICAL GOALS IS A WAR, PROTECTING AFRICA’S SECURITY AND INTEREST IS A WAR). On the other hand, the distinctive target domains and their related metaphors in UN-Agenda2030 are SOCIETIES (SOCIETIES ARE BUILDINGS); PLANET (PLANET IS A PERSON) and BENEFITS (BENEFITS ARE PLANTS). These distinctive target domains and their underlying metaphors derive from different sociocultural and geopolitical backgrounds and represent each Agenda’s priorities/ideologies.

AU-Agenda2063’s Distinctive Target Domains and their Related Metaphors

AFRICA IS A BUILDING

• “Aspiration 4 (A peaceful and secure Africa): strengthening governance, accountability and transparency as a foundation for a peaceful Africa; …”

In example twenty-three, “strengthening” and “foundation” delineate Africa as a construction with a supported basis that secures a peaceful and a stable continent.

AFRICAN UNION IS A BUILDING

• “Facilitate the ratification by member states the protocols on the amendments to the Constitutive Act to enable the Diaspora participate in the building of the African Union”

Here, the African Union is compared to a construction that needs to be built with the participation of those African people who moved away from the continent. It indicates that the African Union is structurally organized and that the Diaspora has a sociocultural and political significant role in stabilizing the AU structure.

AFRICA’S IDENTITY IS A BUILDING

• “Religion and religious expressions play a profound role in the construction of the African identity and social interaction”

Through this example, Africa’s identity is conceptualized as a building whose basis is religion.

Ideologically speaking, these three metaphors of building echo the sociocultural belief that peace, unity, good governance, the Diaspora and religion are all fundamental to Africa’s progress. They highlight the geopolitical context where Africa has been subject to colonialism and discrimination for a long time, justifying its future steps to re-establish its identity and become gradually stronger.

AFRICA IS A PERSON

• “… so that the continent is capable of defending itself”

In this example, Africa is compared to a person who is strong enough to defend himself/herself.

From the sociocultural perspective, this metaphor exhibits the belief that the individual is the critical factor to lead development. It further highlights the belief that there is social obligation to unite to protect the continent. This metaphor reflects the geopolitical environment in Africa where the same resources that led to colonization can enable the continent to face external threats.

AFRICA IS A CONTAINER

• “The dwindling and unpredictability of development assistance compels Africa to look inwards for domestic resources …”

Here, Africa is construed through the preposition “inwards” as a container with components represented in domestic resources. This metaphor reflects the cultural and geopolitical views that Africa can depend on its continental resources and can protect its interests from outside dangers.

PAN-AFRICANISM IS A PLANT

• “By 2063, the fruits of the values and ideals of Pan Africanism will be manifest everywhere …”

Through this example, Pan-Africanism is compared to a tree with fruits that grow over the years and can eventually be clearly seen by 2063 everywhere. Likening Pan-Africanism to a plant reflects the cultural and geopolitical beliefs that supporting Pan-Africanism leads to preserving unity and solidarity among African nations.

RESOURCES ARE BUILDINGS

• “Protecting and building productive assets in case of emergencies triggered by floods, droughts, crop failures”

“Assets” in example twenty-nine are presented as rescue resources for Africa and “building” suggests that their development is similar to constructing a building.

RESOURCES ARE PERSONS

• “Africa’s natural resources play a critical role for vast segments of Africa’s population who depend on the continent’s biodiversity, …”

Here, Africa’s natural resources are described as people who significantly contribute to the continent’s progress.

RESOURCES ARE VEHICLES

• “Africa’s conflicts also led to the diversion of resources away from critical development imperatives”

Resources in this example are compared to vehicles which change their direction and “diversion” refers to the change in the way resources are allocated.

RESOURCES ARE VALUABLE OBJECTS

• “… and host some of the world’s most precious biological resources,…”

This example refers to African small island states and compares their biological resources to invaluable and priceless objects, drawing attention to their rareness and the need to preserve them.

RESOURCES ARE MACHINES

• “A global strategy to optimize the use of Africa’s resources”

African resources in this example are compared to machines that can be improved to work more efficient.

RESOURCES ARE PRODUCTS

34- “Investing in higher education   will ensure that African countries produce the critical stock of human capital (engineers, doctors, accountants, lawyers, etc.) required to build modern competitive societies …”

Through this example, human capital is conceptualized as a resource for continental growth. It is further described as “critical”, highlighting its pivotal role in the continent’s development.

RESOURCES ARE MEDICINE

35- “By injecting resources into local economies well designed social protection programs can yield dividends and spillovers in terms of local economic growth …”

Resources in this example are compared to a drug used to treat an illness represented in weak and unstable local economies.

Conceptualizing resources in AU-Agenda2063 as buildings and persons, two of the top employed source domains in the Agenda, reflects the African sociocultural and geopolitical peculiarities. Thus, BUILDING domain reveals the sociocultural need for stability and security after long periods of conflict. Moreover, it emphasizes that stability, security and development are achieved through persistent collaborative work. Meanwhile, PERSON domain underscores the ideology that manpower is an essential factor in Africa’s development.

Perceiving resources as vehicles, machines, valuable objects, products and medicine echoes the sociocultural background in the African Agenda. These metaphors reflect Africa’s desire to overcome obstacles, move forward and achieve progress in different fields after years of stagnation. They also ideologically reflect the desire to take control of one’s own destiny, foster solidarity and promote Pan-Africanism. These metaphors resonate with the principles of self-sufficiency and capability of satisfying one’s own needs without external assistance, legitimizing its future plans.

From the geopolitical perspective, these metaphors highlight Africa’s intention to reverse the situation where colonial powers used to benefit from the continent’s resources leaving the Africans behind. They highlight the vision towards planning for benefiting from one’s own resources to achieve self-dependence and reduce external foreign investment, leading to economic sovereignty and establishing Africa as a powerful geopolitical actor in the international arena.

LAW IS A CONTAINER

• “Universal access to quality, accredited education at all levels will be enshrined in law”

Using the preposition “in” leads to conceptualizing law as a container where material contents, represented in quality education access, are saved. This metaphor reflects the sociocultural belief that law is a source of protection and accordingly needs to be enforced. Geopolitically, the CONTAINER metaphor stresses the African sovereignty and self-sufficiency.

ACHIEVING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IS A WAR

• “For many decades, many African countries struggled with the challenges of deficits in governance, ….”

The verb “struggled” implies that working towards Africa’s economic advancement is like fighting in a war. Specifically, the example emphasizes that the reason for struggle has been financial deficits in governments.

ACHIEVING POLITICAL GOALS IS A WAR

• “Situates Agenda2063 in the historical context of Pan Africanism, African Renaissance and the struggle for self- determination and economic independence;…”

The noun “struggle” demonstrates Africa’s fight to obtain desired aims among which are self-determination and economic independence. It further highlights relentless pursuit of protecting Africa’s sovereignty against threats and external interference.

This framing underscores the sociocultural and geopolitical conviction that attaining Africa’s independence is not easy and requires persistence and strong will. It additionally denotes that the continent’s geographic location has made it a source of attraction for external powers.

PROTECTING AFRICA’S SECURITY AND INTEREST IS A WAR

• “Appropriate majority contributions in defending the continent’s security and interest”

This example is used in AU-Agenda3063 in the context of noting means of securing peace in Africa. The noun “defending” implies that Africa’s security and interests are vulnerable to threat and consequently need effective strategic tactics to protect them. This framing emphasizes the African geopolitical ideology that Africa’s security and interest is the responsibility of the African people who suffered a lot under colonization.

UN-Agenda2030’s Distinctive Target Domains and their Related Metaphors

SOCIETIES ARE BUILDINGS

• “The new Agenda recognizes the need to build peaceful, just and inclusive societies that provide equal access to justice and that are based on respect for human right ….”

This example presents societies as being in the process of constructing a system for themselves, applying the principles of peace, justice, inclusion and respect for human rights.

PLANET IS A PERSON

• “We are resolved to free the human race from the tyranny of poverty and want and to heal and secure our planet”

The verb “heal” in example forty-one suggests that the planet is like an ill person who suffers from various health problems that threaten development.

BENEFITS ARE PLANTS

• “…, helping our countries to reap the demographic dividend, including through safe schools and cohesive communities and families”

In this example, social benefits, among which is good education for all levels and all people worldwide, are compared to ripe fruits ready to be harvested.

These three metaphors demonstrate that among the UN priorities are world societies progress, the Earth planet and world welfare. Seeing societies as buildings echoes the sociocultural ideology that since humans are social beings, developing societies, like constructing buildings, requires cooperation, shared responsibility and respect for human rights. It also underscores that societies develop through following structured systems. Furthermore, it reflects the ideology that countries have the sovereignty to work towards their peoples’ national interests.

Concurrently, personifying the planet stems from the social value that the planet, like human beings, needs protection and immediate solutions for its problems. Culturally, personifying the planet in this universal Agenda can be understood with reference to ancient cultures which used to attribute human-like characteristics to nature. The geopolitical ideology in the PERSON metaphor can be understood through the fact that vulnerable and conflict-affected countries need peace and stability to be able to run development projects.

Finally, seeing benefits as plants reflects the sociocultural context that achieving benefits takes time and requires continuous sustenance. Geopolitically, the PLANT metaphor presents a neutral view where no particular ideological or political orientation is adopted for development, since plants reflect universal nature. Besides, since the Agenda is a global document, it is based on the ideology of uniting nations towards a shared long-term aim rather than focusing on individual immediate gains. Additionally, as plants need healthy environment to flourish, global sustainable development similarly requires conducive international cooperation instead of world conflict.

7. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The present study focused on examining conceptual metaphors in the policy documents AU-Agenda2063 and UN-Agenda2030 to explore how development-related issues are conceptualized in both Agendas. By adopting Lakoff and Johnson’s Conceptual Metaphor Theory (1980, 2003) and following Group’s (2007) Metaphor Identification Procedure, the analysis provided answers to the study’s four research questions. The first research question focuses on identifying the conceptual metaphors in both Agendas and the analysis revealed that there are 19 conceptual metaphors in UN-Agneda2030 and 34 conceptual metaphors in AU-Agenda2063, reflecting different ways of framing issues, as shown in Table 1 in the Results section.

For the second research question, which is about the common target domains in both Agendas, the analysis categorized the following common development-related target concepts/domains in both Agendas: AGENDA, DEVELOPMENT, ECONOMY, STRATEGIES, EFFORTS, EDUCATION, ENVIRONMENT, CHALLENGES and INSTITUTIONS. EDUCATION and ENVIRONMENT are perceived in the same way in both Agendas by employing the same source domains, testifying to the universality of human nature. Education is perceived as a journey and environment is perceived as a valuable object. Meanwhile, the rest of the shared target concepts/domains are variously conceptualized. This is shown through perceiving AU-Agenda2063 as a building, a vehicle, a person and a valuable object; DEVELOPMENT as a building, a journey, a machine and a vehicle; ECONOMY as a plant, a vehicle, a person, a journey and container; STRATEGIES as buildings and containers; EFFORTS as buildings, persons and plants; CHALLENGES as persons, containers and plants and INSTITUTIONS as buildings and vehicles.

As for the third research question about the dominant source domains in each Agenda and the significance of such dominance, the analysis disclosed that the dominant source domains in the African Agenda are BUILDING, PERSON and CONTAINER, each representing 15% of all source domains in the Agenda. Meanwhile, the most frequently used source domain in the UN Agenda is BUILDING, constituting 32% of all source domains in the Agenda while PERSON and VEHICLE source domains are the second top employed source domains (16% each). These percentages signify the chief belief in both Agendas in the importance of following systematic plans to make development as well as the fruitfulness of perseverance, cooperation and hard work in achieving success.

The analysis highlighted a number of metaphors specific to each Agenda, providing the answer for the fourth research question about the influence of sociocultural and geopolitical factors on metaphor variation between both Agendas. These metaphors reflect each Agenda’s issues and priorities, justifying their future policies. For example, the African Agenda pays much attention to particular domains such as AFRICA, RESOURCES, LAW and ACHIEVING GOALS based on the context where Africa is socio-culturally diverse, rich in natural resources and characterized by its attractive geographical location, which made it coveted by colonial powers. Thus, the following metaphors are identified: AFRICA IS A BUILDING; AFRICA IS A PERSON; AFRICA IS A CONTAINER; AFRICAN UNION IS A BUILDING, highlighting the role of the sociocultural diverse African population in maintaining peace and unity, respecting religion and bringing back the Diaspora to participate in Africa’s revival. Other metaphors are AFRICA’S IDENTITY IS A BUILDING, reflecting the geopolitical context where Africa has been under colonization for long periods of time and PAN-AFRICANISM IS A PLANT, reflecting the context where Africa suffers from disagreements and needs to be united. The African Agenda embodies other peculiar metaphors related to conceptualizing RESOURCES as buildings, persons, vehicles, valuable objects, machines, products and medicine, indicating that the sociocultural diversity is a contributing factor to achieving unity, stability, solidarity and self-sufficiency. Among other metaphors specific to the African Agenda are LAW IS A CONTAINER, reflecting the context that sociocultural diversity needs law to ensure that the different social groups’ rights are protected. Finally, the metaphors ACHIEVING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IS A WAR; ACHIEVING POLITICAL GOALS IS A WAR and PROTECTING AFRICA’S SECURITY AND INTEREST IS A WAR are pinpointed in the African Agenda, reflecting the geopolitical context where Africa’s geographical location made it source of attraction to colonial powers and thus it had been under colonization for long time.

Meanwhile, the UN Agenda focuses on domains different from those in the African Agenda, based on the UN’s sociocultural role as an international organization and on its geopolitical role in organizing relations between economically or politically conflicting nations. Thus, the following metaphors are found in the UN Agenda: SOCIETIES ARE BUILDINGS and PLANET IS A PERSON, reflecting the UN’s responsibility towards world societies since it incorporates socio-culturally diverse member states. Another different metaphor specific to the UN Agenda is BENEFITS ARE PLANTS, suggesting the geopolitical context where the role of the UN is to organize relations between world nations for world welfare.

For better understanding of the role of language in expressing ideas and ideologies, further research might employ different linguistic frameworks on the Agendas investigated in the present study. More policy documents can also be comparatively studied using cognitive frameworks to delve deeper into how issues are similarly or differently conceptualized.