Nigeria Moves to Implement 10-Year Agricultural Strategy as Federal Government Seeks Stronger State Action on Food Security

By Simpson Global Media News Desk

Federal Government pushes coordinated agricultural reform

Nigeria’s Federal Government has intensified efforts to strengthen food production and food security by advancing the implementation of a 10-year agricultural strategy aligned with the Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP), known as the Kampala Agenda 2026–2035.

The initiative is intended to improve agricultural productivity, encourage investment, expand access to modern farming techniques and strengthen coordination between federal and state governments. The strategy places agriculture within a broader food-system framework that includes production, nutrition, financing, trade, environmental resilience and institutional accountability.

According to a report published by BusinessDay on October 10, 2026, the Minister of Agriculture and Food Security, Abubakar Kyari, disclosed the government’s position during the second annual Community of Practice meeting involving commissioners responsible for agriculture, livestock, fisheries, health, environment, commerce and rural development in Maiduguri, Borno State.

Kyari said Nigeria had developed and validated a 10-year National Agrifood System Strategy and Action Plan to domesticate the Kampala Agenda. The government also identified irrigation, improved access to quality seeds and stronger agricultural research as important elements of its approach.

The announcement signals a move towards a coordinated national framework for agricultural development. However, the strategy’s impact will depend on how effectively its priorities are translated into programmes that farmers can access, finance that agricultural businesses can obtain and practical improvements in food availability and affordability.

Source: BusinessDay — FG rallies states to implement policy on food security.

Understanding the Kampala Agenda

The Kampala Agenda is a continental agricultural development framework covering the period from 2026 to 2035. It builds on African governments’ longstanding efforts to strengthen agricultural productivity, improve food security and make agriculture a more effective driver of economic development.

The framework adopts a broad approach to food systems rather than concentrating exclusively on the volume of crops harvested. Its priorities include sustainable production, investment, agricultural finance, nutrition, trade, inclusion, resilience and governance.

This approach recognises that food security involves several connected challenges. A country may produce substantial quantities of crops and still experience food shortages in particular regions if transportation is unreliable, storage facilities are inadequate, processing capacity is limited or households cannot afford available food.

Similarly, increasing yields does not automatically translate into better incomes for farmers. When markets are poorly organised, farm produce can sell at low prices during harvest periods while consumers continue to pay high prices because of distribution costs, losses and other supply-chain difficulties.

A comprehensive agricultural strategy therefore needs to consider the journey from the farm to the consumer. It must address access to land, seeds, fertilisers, machinery, water, labour, credit, extension services, storage, transportation and markets.

For Nigeria, the challenge is to turn these interconnected priorities into practical arrangements that reflect the needs of farmers in different states and agricultural zones.

Why state governments matter

Agriculture in Nigeria operates across diverse geographical and economic conditions. Farming systems in the northern savannah differ from those in the humid south, while coastal communities face different production challenges from farmers working in inland areas.

The differences affect the crops farmers grow, the length of growing seasons, the availability of water, transportation requirements and the type of agricultural investment needed.

State governments are particularly important because they work closely with local agricultural institutions, extension officers, community organisations and rural infrastructure programmes. They also influence land administration, local roads, water management and the delivery of agricultural support.

The Federal Government’s effort to involve state commissioners reflects the importance of coordination across these levels of government.

A national policy can establish common priorities, but states must adapt implementation to local conditions. Irrigation may be a major priority in an area where rainfall is unreliable, while drainage, flood management or improved post-harvest handling may be more urgent elsewhere.

States also need reliable information about the number and distribution of farmers, the crops they cultivate, the condition of rural infrastructure and the constraints affecting local markets.

Without such information, agricultural interventions risk being poorly targeted. Inputs may arrive after planting has begun, machinery may be deployed without adequate maintenance arrangements, or programmes may support production without ensuring that farmers have access to buyers.

Effective coordination should therefore involve clear responsibilities, measurable targets, transparent reporting and regular consultation with farming communities.

Irrigation and year-round production

One of the priorities identified in reporting on the government’s agricultural strategy is the expansion of all-season production through irrigation.

Rain-fed agriculture remains central to the livelihoods of many Nigerian farmers. However, dependence on seasonal rainfall can limit the number of growing cycles available to farmers and expose crops to drought, delayed rainfall or unusually heavy precipitation.

Irrigation can help farmers manage water more reliably, particularly where suitable water sources, infrastructure and agricultural practices are available.

It can also support production outside the main rainy season, potentially improving the regularity of supplies to markets and reducing periods when certain crops become less available.

Yet irrigation requires more than constructing canals or installing pumps. Farmers need systems that are affordable to operate, reliable access to water, appropriate equipment and technical knowledge about efficient water management.

Poorly managed irrigation can contribute to water depletion, soil salinity, waterlogging and conflicts over shared resources. These risks make planning, maintenance and environmental safeguards essential.

For smallholder farmers, the cost of pumps, fuel, electricity and repairs can be a major obstacle. Shared irrigation schemes, farmer cooperatives and carefully designed financing arrangements may help spread costs, provided that management responsibilities are clearly established.

The government’s stated interest in expanding all-season production will therefore need to be accompanied by practical decisions about where irrigation is viable, who will operate the systems and how farmers will afford the resulting production costs.

Quality seeds and improved farm productivity

Access to quality seeds is another priority associated with the national agricultural strategy.

Seed quality can influence germination, crop establishment, resistance to certain pests and diseases, maturity periods and eventual yields. However, farmers must also select varieties suited to their local climate, soil conditions, water availability and market requirements.

A seed variety that performs well in one location may be unsuitable in another. Agricultural extension services and research institutions consequently have an important role in helping farmers make informed decisions.

Availability is equally important. Farmers need to obtain appropriate seeds before the planting period, in quantities that match their needs and at prices they can afford.

Delayed distribution can undermine the benefits of improved varieties because planting outside the appropriate period may expose crops to additional weather and production risks.

Seed quality assurance also matters. Farmers need confidence that products sold as improved seeds meet applicable standards and that suppliers provide accurate information about the varieties being offered.

Strengthening agricultural input systems should therefore involve reputable suppliers, effective quality controls, accessible distribution networks and timely information for farmers.

The strategy’s emphasis on improved seed access will be most useful when it reduces the gap between agricultural research and the choices available to farmers in rural communities.

Agricultural research must reach the farm

Nigeria has agricultural research institutions and universities that work on crop varieties, livestock production, soil management, pest control, mechanisation and other farming challenges.

Research can improve productivity, but its value depends partly on whether the resulting knowledge and technologies reach the people who need them.

A promising crop variety, for example, may have limited impact if farmers cannot obtain its seeds. A new farming technique may remain unused if extension officers lack the resources to demonstrate it or if farmers cannot afford the equipment it requires.

The government has identified stronger links between research and practical agricultural challenges as part of its approach.

That objective calls for closer cooperation among researchers, extension services, farmers, processors and agricultural businesses.

Farmers should be involved in identifying research priorities because the most pressing challenges often vary by location. Some communities may need crops that mature more quickly, while others may require varieties with greater tolerance to drought, flooding or particular diseases.

Research also needs to address storage and processing. Reducing losses after harvest can be as important as increasing production because food that spoils before reaching consumers contributes neither to household nutrition nor to farmers’ earnings.

Demonstration plots, field schools, accessible technical guidance and partnerships with farmer organisations can help translate research findings into practical decisions.

Evaluation is equally important. Programmes should measure whether farmers adopt recommended practices, whether yields or incomes improve and whether the benefits justify the costs.

Food security extends beyond production

Food security is frequently discussed in terms of how much food a country produces. However, the concept also includes whether people can obtain sufficient, safe and nutritious food consistently.

Nigeria’s agricultural strategy must therefore connect farm production with food distribution, household purchasing power, nutrition and market access.

Even when food is available in markets, high prices can prevent lower-income households from buying adequate quantities. Transportation expenses, storage losses, processing costs and disruptions to supply can all influence the final price paid by consumers.

At the same time, farmers may struggle to earn a sustainable income when input costs rise faster than the prices they receive for their produce.

These pressures illustrate why agricultural policy must consider both producers and consumers.

Policies designed to reduce food prices should not undermine the ability of farmers to recover their production costs and reinvest in the next planting season. Equally, efforts to raise farm incomes should be accompanied by improvements in productivity, competition and distribution so that food remains accessible to households.

A functioning agricultural value chain can help reconcile these objectives by reducing avoidable costs, improving quality and connecting producers to dependable buyers.

The Kampala Agenda’s broader food-system approach provides a framework for considering these relationships. The practical test will be whether government programmes can produce measurable improvements in the availability, affordability and nutritional quality of food.

Smallholder farmers remain central

Smallholder farmers are important to Nigeria’s agricultural economy, and many rural households depend on farming for income, food and employment.

These farmers frequently face difficulties obtaining affordable credit, purchasing inputs in bulk, accessing machinery and negotiating favourable prices with buyers.

Small production volumes can also make transportation and processing more expensive on a per-unit basis. Farmers who sell individually may have less bargaining power than larger commercial producers.

The national strategy’s emphasis on investment, financing, technology and market access therefore has direct implications for smallholder agriculture.

Farmer cooperatives can help members pool resources, purchase inputs, share equipment and negotiate with buyers. However, cooperatives require effective management, transparent financial practices and clear rules governing membership and benefits.

Public programmes should also avoid assuming that all farmers have the same needs. A farmer cultivating a small rain-fed plot may require different support from a commercial producer operating irrigated land or a livestock enterprise.

Eligibility criteria should be clear, application procedures accessible and programme information available through channels that rural communities can use.

Women farmers and young people also need meaningful access to land, finance, training and markets. Agricultural development cannot achieve broad-based results if opportunities remain concentrated among groups that already have better access to resources.

Finance and investment will influence implementation

Agricultural production requires money at several stages. Farmers must pay for land preparation, seeds, fertilisers, labour, pest management, harvesting and transportation before receiving income from their produce.

The timing of these expenses can make agricultural finance particularly challenging. Revenue may arrive months after initial costs, while weather-related losses or changing market conditions can reduce the amount earned.

Commercial lenders may regard some agricultural activities as risky because of uncertain yields, seasonal cash flow and limited collateral.

A national strategy intended to encourage investment must therefore consider how finance can be made more accessible without creating unsustainable debt or poorly targeted subsidies.

Possible approaches include appropriately structured agricultural loans, cooperative financing, equipment leasing, warehouse-based financing where suitable, insurance and partnerships between financial institutions and agricultural businesses.

Each instrument has limitations. Loans must be repayable, insurance must provide meaningful protection under clearly stated terms, and public guarantees must be carefully managed to prevent excessive losses.

Financing should also reflect the type of investment involved. Short-term seasonal credit may suit the purchase of seeds and other inputs, while irrigation infrastructure, processing facilities and storage warehouses may require longer repayment periods.

For lenders, reliable records and transparent arrangements can improve the assessment of agricultural borrowers. For farmers, accessible information about interest rates, fees, repayment schedules and insurance exclusions can reduce the risk of entering unsuitable agreements.

The success of the national strategy will depend partly on whether financing reaches productive farmers and agricultural enterprises beyond the largest commercial operators.

Mechanisation and appropriate technology

Modern equipment can help farmers reduce labour bottlenecks, prepare land more quickly and carry out certain operations at the right time.

Mechanisation can be particularly valuable where labour is scarce or expensive, where large areas must be cultivated within a limited planting window or where manual operations constrain production.

However, purchasing machinery is not always the most practical option for individual smallholder farmers.

Tractors, harvesters and processing equipment require substantial investment, trained operators, maintenance and access to spare parts. Equipment may also remain underused if it is unsuitable for local farm sizes or unavailable when farmers need it.

Mechanisation services can offer an alternative. Under such arrangements, farmers pay for particular operations instead of purchasing entire machines.

Shared equipment schemes, private service providers and cooperative arrangements can help broaden access, provided that pricing is reasonable and operators maintain reliable schedules.

Technology can also improve agricultural decision-making. Weather information, mobile advisory services, digital marketplaces and electronic payment systems may help farmers plan production, obtain technical guidance and identify buyers.

Yet digital services cannot replace every form of physical support. Farmers still need roads, storage facilities, electricity, extension officers and reliable telecommunications where digital systems are used.

The government’s wider agricultural objectives should therefore encourage technology that addresses identifiable problems rather than treating the purchase or distribution of equipment as an end in itself.

Storage, processing and post-harvest losses

Increasing the amount harvested is only one part of improving food availability. A substantial challenge can arise after crops leave the field.

Perishable produce may deteriorate because of heat, inadequate packaging, delays in transportation or insufficient cold storage. Grains and other stored commodities can also suffer losses when storage facilities do not adequately control moisture and pests.

These problems can reduce farmers’ earnings and leave less food available for consumers.

Better storage can give farmers more flexibility over when to sell. However, storage is not automatically profitable: farmers must consider operating costs, quality requirements, market prices and the possibility that prices may fall while produce is being held.

Processing can create additional value by turning raw agricultural products into goods with longer shelf lives or broader commercial uses.

Examples include milling grains, processing cassava, producing packaged foods, extracting vegetable oils and converting agricultural materials into animal feed.

Such businesses can create employment beyond the farm and provide additional markets for agricultural output.

However, processors need dependable supplies of suitable raw materials, reliable power, working capital, quality control and access to customers. Farmers, in turn, need predictable purchasing arrangements and fair payment terms.

Coordinating production with processing demand can help reduce mismatches between what farmers grow and what markets require.

For the national strategy to deliver lasting benefits, storage and processing should be considered alongside seeds, irrigation and other production priorities.

Transportation and market access

The cost of moving food from farms to consumers can influence both farm-gate prices and retail prices.

Poor rural roads can increase journey times, damage produce and raise vehicle maintenance costs. Delays can be particularly costly for vegetables, fruit, dairy products and other goods that deteriorate quickly.

Farmers in remote communities may also have limited access to market information. Without reliable information about demand and prevailing prices, they can struggle to decide where to sell or what quantities to produce.

Better rural infrastructure and more efficient trading arrangements can help connect agricultural communities with larger markets.

Aggregation centres may enable farmers to combine produce from several farms, making it easier to transport commercial quantities and supply processors or retailers.

Digital marketplaces can help communicate prices and connect sellers with buyers, but their effectiveness depends on trust, product quality, reliable fulfilment and affordable transportation.

Market access also involves standards. Buyers may require consistent sizes, moisture levels, grading, packaging or food-safety practices.

Farmers need practical guidance on meeting those requirements, while processors and traders need dependable systems for checking quality and resolving disputes.

The government’s agricultural agenda will need to address these links if increases in production are to translate into stronger incomes and more dependable supplies.

Climate resilience and environmental protection

Agriculture is exposed to changing weather conditions, soil degradation, water shortages, flooding and pest pressures. These risks can affect planting decisions, crop survival, livestock health and the stability of farmers’ earnings.

A resilient agricultural system must help farmers manage uncertainty rather than depend entirely on favourable weather.

Measures may include improved water management, suitable crop varieties, soil conservation, diversified production, better weather information and agricultural insurance.

The appropriate response will differ by location. Some areas may require better drainage and flood protection, while others need more efficient irrigation or practices that conserve soil moisture.

Environmental safeguards are also important. Expanding cultivated land without adequate attention to soil fertility, forests and water resources can create longer-term problems that undermine agricultural productivity.

Irrigation schemes must account for water availability and competing demands. Fertiliser and pesticide use should follow appropriate guidance to protect crops, workers, consumers and the environment.

Climate-resilient agriculture is not simply about adopting a particular technology. It requires combining local knowledge, scientific evidence, accessible finance and practical support.

The national strategy’s emphasis on resilience can help integrate these concerns into agricultural planning, but the results will depend on implementation and continued monitoring.

Livestock, fisheries and a wider food system

Although crop production receives substantial attention in discussions of food security, Nigeria’s agricultural economy also includes livestock, fisheries and aquaculture.

These activities provide food, income, employment and raw materials for other businesses. They also face specific constraints involving animal health, feed costs, access to water, veterinary services, infrastructure and market organisation.

Livestock producers need effective disease prevention and surveillance, suitable feeding systems, reliable veterinary support and facilities that protect animal welfare and food safety.

Fish farmers may require dependable supplies of quality fingerlings and feed, while fishers and processors need appropriate handling, storage and transportation arrangements.

Agricultural planning should recognise the links among these sectors. Crop residues may provide animal feed where appropriate, while livestock manure can contribute to soil fertility when safely managed. Processing industries can create markets for agricultural products and by-products.

However, these opportunities require sound technical management. Poor disease control, unsafe handling and inadequate waste management can create significant risks.

The involvement of commissioners responsible for agriculture, livestock, fisheries, health, environment, commerce and rural development in the Maiduguri meeting reflects the interconnected nature of these policy areas.

Coordinated planning can help ensure that interventions in one sector do not create avoidable problems in another.

What farmers need from agricultural extension services

Agricultural extension services help connect research findings and government programmes with farmers’ day-to-day decisions.

Extension officers can provide guidance on seed selection, planting dates, soil management, pest control, irrigation, harvesting, storage and the safe use of agricultural inputs.

They can also communicate farmers’ concerns to researchers and government agencies.

For extension services to be effective, officers need adequate training, transportation, field resources and access to current technical information.

The scale and distribution of farming communities can make regular visits difficult. Digital advisory services and farmer-to-farmer learning may help extend coverage, but they should complement rather than automatically replace face-to-face support.

Information must also be understandable and relevant to local conditions. Advice that does not account for a farmer’s available resources may be difficult to implement, even when it is technically sound.

Extension services should therefore connect recommendations with realistic financing, input availability and market opportunities.

A farmer who receives advice to adopt an improved seed variety must be able to obtain that seed. A producer encouraged to increase output should have a reasonable understanding of potential buyers and storage options.

Connecting advice to practical resources can improve the likelihood that agricultural programmes lead to lasting changes.

Monitoring results and public accountability

A 10-year agricultural strategy requires a way to assess whether its programmes are producing the intended results.

The existence of a policy document or the announcement of a new programme does not, by itself, demonstrate improved agricultural performance.

Monitoring should examine both implementation and outcomes. Relevant measures may include the number of farmers reached, the timing of input distribution, access to irrigation, crop yields, post-harvest losses, agricultural investment and the performance of supported facilities.

Food-system outcomes should also be considered, including market availability, the affordability of nutritious food and changes in the incomes of participating farmers.

Figures must be collected consistently and interpreted carefully. An increase in the number of farmers registered for a programme, for example, does not necessarily mean that those farmers received the promised assistance or benefited from it.

Independent evaluation can help identify which interventions work, which require adjustment and which should be discontinued.

Public reporting can also help communities understand how agricultural funds are being used and whether stated objectives are being achieved.

The federal and state governments will need clear responsibilities for collecting information, publishing results and responding when implementation falls behind schedule.

Transparent reporting is particularly important when programmes involve public subsidies, agricultural credit, equipment purchases or contracts for infrastructure.

Farmers’ concerns and the importance of consultation

Agricultural policies are more likely to address real problems when farmers have meaningful opportunities to communicate their experiences.

Farmers can identify obstacles that may not be apparent from policy documents alone. These may include delays in obtaining inputs, the cost of transporting produce, the difficulty of accessing credit, equipment breakdowns or uncertainty about buyers.

Consultation should include farmers from different regions and production systems, as well as women, young people, livestock keepers, fishers, processors and agricultural traders.

The needs of large commercial enterprises may differ substantially from those of households cultivating small plots. A policy that works for one group may not be suitable for another.

Farmer organisations and cooperatives can help communicate concerns, but they should not be treated as substitutes for wider consultation.

Government agencies should explain how feedback is used and provide information about programme eligibility, application processes, delivery schedules and complaint mechanisms.

Such arrangements can improve trust and help identify implementation problems before they become widespread.

The role of the private sector

Public investment alone is unlikely to provide every service and facility needed across Nigeria’s agricultural value chains.

Private businesses can contribute through input supply, mechanisation services, processing, storage, transportation, logistics, finance and agricultural technology.

Investment can create employment and provide farmers with additional markets, but it requires a reasonably predictable business environment.

Investors need clear rules, dependable infrastructure, access to finance and confidence that contractual arrangements will be respected.

Small agricultural businesses may require different support from larger companies. Smaller firms can struggle with working capital, electricity costs, equipment financing and the expense of meeting formal market requirements.

Public policy can help by improving infrastructure, supporting technical training, encouraging transparent market arrangements and reducing unnecessary administrative barriers.

Partnerships should be structured so that responsibilities and risks are clear. Public authorities need to ensure that agreements deliver their intended benefits and that support reaches the communities identified as beneficiaries.

Investment should also be assessed by its contribution to productive capacity, employment, farmer incomes and reliable food supplies, rather than solely by the amount of money announced.

Regional cooperation and agricultural trade

Agricultural markets do not stop at state or national borders. Farmers, traders and processors may depend on buyers and suppliers in other parts of Nigeria or across neighbouring countries.

Trade can help move food from areas with a surplus to areas experiencing shortages. It can also create opportunities for agricultural businesses to reach larger markets.

However, cross-border and domestic trade require reliable transport, appropriate quality standards, transparent procedures and effective management of plant and animal health risks.

Poorly coordinated restrictions or inconsistent requirements can increase costs and disrupt legitimate trade. Conversely, inadequate controls can expose agricultural systems to pests, diseases and unsafe products.

Nigeria’s alignment with a continental agricultural framework creates an opportunity to connect domestic priorities with broader regional goals.

Such cooperation could support information sharing, research partnerships, agricultural investment and more consistent approaches to trade and food-system resilience.

The benefits will depend on practical agreements and the capacity of institutions to implement them.

What the October announcement establishes — and what remains unclear

The October 10 report establishes that the Federal Government is advancing the implementation of the Kampala Agenda 2026–2035 through a national agrifood strategy and is seeking stronger participation by state governments.

It also identifies irrigation, improved seed access and stronger agricultural research as important areas of focus.

However, the published report does not provide a comprehensive implementation timetable, a detailed national funding breakdown or state-by-state targets for the strategy. It also does not establish how much additional food production will result or how quickly consumers might see changes in prices.

Those questions are important because a 10-year framework must be translated into annual budgets, specific programmes and measurable milestones.

Farmers and agricultural businesses will need to know which interventions are available, how to qualify, where support will be delivered and when it can be accessed.

State governments will need clarity about their responsibilities and the resources available to meet them.

The public will also need reliable information about progress, including whether programmes are reaching their intended beneficiaries and whether outcomes justify the resources invested.

Until those details are made available, the strategy should be understood as a policy and implementation direction rather than proof that the country’s food-security challenges have already been resolved.

What happens next

The next important stage is the translation of the national framework into coordinated actions by federal agencies, state governments and agricultural stakeholders.

That process is likely to require alignment between agricultural plans and budgets, the identification of priority investments, clearer responsibilities for implementation and mechanisms for measuring progress.

States will need to consider which interventions are most appropriate for their farming communities, while federal institutions can support coordination, research, standards and nationwide priorities.

Agricultural programmes will also need to be connected to private investment, financing, extension services, processing and markets.

For farmers, the most meaningful evidence of progress will be practical improvements: inputs available when needed, more reliable access to water, affordable equipment services, useful technical advice, dependable buyers and reduced losses after harvest.

For consumers, the relevant measures will include the availability, affordability and nutritional quality of food.

For government, transparent monitoring can help distinguish between activities that have been announced and outcomes that have actually been achieved.

The strategy’s long time horizon provides an opportunity to pursue sustained reforms, but it also makes consistent implementation essential. Progress will depend on whether governments maintain priorities across budget cycles and respond to changing conditions in the agricultural sector.

Conclusion

Nigeria’s move to implement a 10-year agrifood strategy aligned with the Kampala Agenda 2026–2035 represents an effort to strengthen coordination around food production, agricultural investment and food security.

The priorities identified by the Federal Government — including irrigation, quality seeds, research and stronger cooperation with state governments — address important components of agricultural development.

However, no single intervention can resolve the challenges facing the country’s food system. Improvements in production must be supported by finance, infrastructure, extension services, storage, processing, trade and effective market access.

The strategy’s success will ultimately be judged by its results rather than its announcements.

Farmers will need to see whether programmes improve their ability to produce and sell food profitably. Agricultural businesses will need conditions that support investment and expansion. Consumers will need reliable access to safe and nutritious food at prices they can afford.

As implementation progresses, clear responsibilities, realistic budgets, public reporting and meaningful consultation with farmers will be essential.

The October announcement establishes the government’s stated direction. The central task now is to turn that direction into sustained, measurable improvements across Nigeria’s agricultural economy.