Federal Government pushes coordinated agricultural reforms
The Federal Government has called on state governments and agricultural stakeholders to accelerate the implementation of a 10-year continental agricultural development agenda, warning that stronger coordination and practical action are essential to improving food production, strengthening rural livelihoods and building a more resilient Nigerian food system.
The renewed push centres on the Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP) Kampala Declaration for 2026–2035, an African Union-backed framework intended to strengthen agricultural productivity, food security, nutrition, investment and the wider agrifood economy across the continent.
Nigeria’s Minister of Agriculture and Food Security, Senator Abubakar Kyari, made the call during the second annual Community of Practice meeting involving commissioners responsible for agriculture, livestock, fisheries, health, environment, commerce and rural development. The meeting took place in Maiduguri, Borno State.
According to a report published by BusinessDay on October 10, the Federal Government has begun implementing the Kampala agenda and is urging states to adapt the continental framework to their own agricultural priorities.
The Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security has also said Nigeria has developed and validated a 10-year National Agrifood System Strategy and Action Plan to align the country’s agricultural transformation efforts with the continental programme.
The initiative comes as farmers, food processors, traders and consumers continue to face challenges linked to production costs, weather variability, insecurity, storage limitations and access to markets.
The central challenge is no longer simply to announce agricultural programmes. It is to ensure that national commitments are translated into funded state-level plans, practical support for farmers, reliable infrastructure and measurable improvements in food availability and affordability.
Sources: BusinessDay — FG rallies states to implement policy on food security; Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security — FG, states, non-state actors and development partners unite to implement CAADP Kampala Agenda.
What is the Kampala Declaration?
The Kampala Declaration is a continental commitment designed to guide agricultural and food-system development across African countries during the 2026–2035 period.
Its broad purpose is to help African governments move towards more productive, resilient and sustainable agrifood systems. The framework recognises that food security depends on more than increasing the quantity of crops harvested. It also involves nutrition, investment, agricultural processing, market access, infrastructure, environmental sustainability and the livelihoods of people working throughout the food value chain.
For Nigeria, the agenda offers a framework for coordinating policies that are frequently handled by different ministries, agencies and levels of government.
Crop production, for example, depends on access to land, water, seeds, fertilisers, machinery, finance and extension services. Livestock production requires veterinary services, animal feed, water, breeding support and suitable processing facilities. Food distribution depends on transport networks, storage, market infrastructure and effective trade arrangements.
These elements are interconnected. Increasing output without improving storage and transportation can leave farmers struggling to sell their produce profitably. Improving market access without addressing production costs may still leave food expensive for consumers.
A coordinated agricultural strategy therefore needs to address the entire system, from the farm to processing facilities, wholesale markets, retailers and households.
The Kampala framework is intended to help governments organise these priorities within a longer-term development agenda rather than relying exclusively on isolated interventions.
For Nigeria, its success will depend on how effectively federal and state authorities translate broad objectives into programmes that respond to local agricultural conditions.
Why state governments are central to implementation
Agriculture is practised under different conditions across Nigeria, making state-level planning essential.
Some states have significant potential in rice, maize, cassava and other staple crops. Others have important livestock, fisheries, horticulture or tree-crop industries. Differences in rainfall, soil conditions, irrigation infrastructure, transport access and local markets also affect which interventions are likely to produce the best results.
The Federal Government has therefore emphasised the importance of state participation in implementing the continental agenda.
At the Maiduguri meeting, representatives from agriculture, livestock, fisheries, health, environment, commerce and rural development discussed the need for coordinated action across these sectors.
The Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security said states have a central role in turning national priorities into plans, budgets and practical measures for farmers, businesses and communities.
This approach recognises that a national strategy cannot deliver results unless state governments determine how its objectives will be applied locally.
For example, a state with significant irrigation potential may prioritise water infrastructure and dry-season farming. A state with strong livestock production may focus on veterinary services, animal feed, processing facilities and market access. Areas affected by insecurity may need to concentrate on restoring access to farmland and supporting displaced farming communities.
State governments also have an important role in agricultural extension services, local market development, rural roads and partnerships with farmer organisations.
The challenge is to ensure that state plans are sufficiently specific to address local problems while remaining consistent with national food-security objectives.
Without coordination, different levels of government may introduce overlapping programmes, duplicate beneficiaries or invest in projects that do not connect with wider agricultural supply chains.
Better coordination could help public resources reach more farmers and support a more consistent approach to agricultural development.
Nigeria’s 10-year agrifood strategy
The Federal Government has said Nigeria has developed and validated a 10-year National Agrifood System Strategy and Action Plan aligned with the Kampala agenda.
The strategy is intended to provide a longer-term framework for improving the country's agricultural and food systems.
The ministry has emphasised that agricultural challenges are multidimensional and require cooperation among government institutions, development partners, the private sector and communities.
A national plan of this kind can help identify priorities, establish responsibilities and provide a framework for monitoring progress over time.
However, the existence of a strategy is only an initial step. Implementation requires budgets, technical capacity, reliable information, clear institutional responsibilities and mechanisms for measuring outcomes.
A plan can identify improved seed access as a priority, for instance, but farmers will only benefit if suitable seeds are available at the right time, sold through reliable channels and supported by appropriate agronomic advice.
Similarly, a commitment to improve irrigation needs to be backed by investment in water infrastructure, maintenance arrangements and training in efficient water management.
The strategy must also take account of the financial circumstances of smallholder farmers, who may be unable to afford expensive equipment or absorb losses caused by poor weather, pests and volatile prices.
For larger commercial farms and agribusinesses, access to finance, infrastructure, predictable policies and reliable supply chains may be more important constraints.
A successful national framework should therefore accommodate different farm sizes and agricultural business models instead of assuming that one intervention will meet every producer’s needs.
Food security requires more than increasing farm output
Food security is often discussed primarily in terms of agricultural production, but the issue is broader.
A country may produce substantial quantities of food and still experience hunger if households cannot afford it, transport networks are unreliable or supplies are lost before reaching consumers.
Food security generally involves availability, access, utilisation and stability. These dimensions reflect whether food is available, whether people can afford and obtain it, whether their diets provide adequate nutrition and whether access remains dependable over time.
Nigeria’s agricultural strategy must address all four dimensions.
Increasing the production of staple crops can improve availability, but household purchasing power also affects access. Storage, food safety and processing influence the quality and usefulness of available supplies. Climate shocks, conflict and market disruptions can undermine stability.
Agricultural policies must consequently connect farmers with consumers through reliable distribution systems and markets.
Investment in rural roads can reduce the time and cost required to move produce. Appropriate storage facilities can help preserve perishable foods. Processing can extend shelf life and create products that are easier to transport and market.
These improvements can also create jobs beyond primary farming, including in packaging, logistics, refrigeration, food processing and retail.
The Kampala agenda provides an opportunity to connect these priorities within a longer-term national approach.
But the benefits will depend on whether government programmes address the practical constraints experienced by farmers and food businesses.
Farmers need affordable inputs and dependable support
One of the major challenges facing agricultural producers is the cost and availability of farm inputs.
Seeds, fertilisers, crop-protection products, fuel, machinery and labour can account for a substantial share of production expenses. When prices rise, farmers may reduce the area they cultivate, use fewer inputs or delay operations.
Such decisions can affect yields and overall production.
Access to appropriate inputs is therefore an important component of agricultural development. However, distributing inputs alone is not enough.
Farmers need products suited to local conditions, information on correct application, and access to extension workers who can advise them on crop management, soil fertility and pest control.
Poorly targeted support can waste resources, while inappropriate chemical use can damage crops, harm the environment and create food-safety risks.
The federal and state governments need systems that identify genuine farmers, assess local requirements and deliver assistance in time for the relevant planting or production cycle.
Transparency is equally important. Farmers should know the eligibility requirements for support programmes and understand how beneficiaries are selected.
For input-support schemes to produce lasting results, they should also be evaluated against measurable outcomes, such as increased productivity, reduced production costs and improved farm incomes.
The Kampala agenda's emphasis on implementation offers a framework for strengthening these practical aspects of agricultural support.
Irrigation and year-round production
The Federal Government has identified expanded all-season production and improved access to quality seeds among the priorities associated with its agricultural strategy.
Irrigation can help farmers reduce their dependence on rainfall and produce crops during periods when rain-fed cultivation is difficult.
It can also support dry-season farming, potentially increasing the number of production cycles available to farmers and improving the regularity of supplies to markets.
However, irrigation development requires careful planning. Water availability, soil conditions, equipment maintenance, energy costs and the rights of communities using the same water sources must all be considered.
Poorly managed irrigation can contribute to water depletion, soil salinity and environmental damage. Infrastructure that is built without a sustainable maintenance plan may also deteriorate before farmers receive its full benefits.
Public investment should therefore combine infrastructure development with technical training, water management and clear arrangements for operating and maintaining facilities.
Where irrigation is appropriate, it can improve resilience to erratic rainfall and support agricultural production during periods of the year when market supplies are limited.
It may also create opportunities for farmers to grow vegetables and other crops that provide income between major harvests.
The benefits will be greatest when water infrastructure is linked to reliable access to seeds, inputs, storage and markets.
Climate change increases the urgency of agricultural reform
Climate variability is becoming an important concern for farmers and food-system planners.
Erratic rainfall, prolonged dry spells, flooding, rising temperatures and changing pest patterns can disrupt planting schedules, reduce yields and damage farmland.
Nigerian farmers operate across diverse climatic zones, meaning that the effects of weather conditions differ from one region to another.
Some communities face water shortages and increasing pressure on grazing land, while others are vulnerable to flooding and erosion. In both situations, farmers need access to information and practical measures that help them manage risk.
Climate-resilient agriculture can include improved seed varieties, soil conservation, water management, diversified crops and better access to seasonal forecasts.
Agricultural extension services can help farmers interpret forecasts and adapt planting or harvesting decisions to expected conditions.
Governments can also support early-warning systems that help communities prepare for floods, droughts and other hazards.
However, adaptation requires more than providing information. Farmers may need access to credit, equipment and alternative inputs to act on the advice they receive.
Smallholder producers with limited savings may be unable to recover quickly after a failed harvest. Agricultural insurance and suitable financing arrangements can help manage some of these risks, although they must be designed to remain accessible and practical.
The Kampala agenda provides a basis for linking agricultural productivity with resilience, but implementation must reflect local climate conditions and the needs of vulnerable communities.
Security and access to farmland
Security remains an important issue for agricultural production in parts of Nigeria.
When farmers cannot safely reach their fields, agricultural activity can decline regardless of whether seeds, fertilisers or other inputs are available.
Insecurity can disrupt planting and harvesting, damage equipment, interrupt the movement of produce and discourage investment in farming and processing.
It can also affect livestock production by limiting access to grazing areas, markets, veterinary services and water points.
The consequences may extend into food markets when reduced output or interrupted transport affects supplies.
The relationship between security and food production means that agricultural policy cannot be implemented effectively without cooperation with the institutions responsible for public safety and rural development.
State governments and relevant federal agencies need to consider the specific risks affecting farming communities and market routes.
Support for affected farmers may include restoring access to farmland, rebuilding damaged facilities and helping producers return to normal operations when conditions permit.
Where displacement has occurred, agricultural assistance may need to account for the loss of land access, equipment, livestock and income.
Security measures should also be accompanied by efforts to rebuild livelihoods and restore trust in affected communities.
The broader objective is to create conditions in which farmers can produce food, move their goods and invest in their businesses without facing unacceptable risks.
Reducing post-harvest losses
Another priority for agricultural development is reducing the amount of food lost after harvest.
Post-harvest losses can occur during harvesting, handling, transportation, storage, processing and distribution. The scale and causes vary by crop, location and production system.
Fresh vegetables and fruits are particularly vulnerable to spoilage when cooling facilities and rapid transport are unavailable. Grains and legumes can suffer losses through moisture, insects, rodents and poor storage practices.
These losses reduce the amount of food available for sale and can lower farmers’ incomes.
Improved storage facilities, suitable packaging, better handling methods and access to processing can help preserve produce and reduce waste.
Cold rooms can be useful for perishable commodities, but they require dependable electricity, maintenance and sufficient commercial demand to remain viable.
For rural communities, shared storage and processing facilities may offer a more practical option than requiring every farmer to purchase expensive equipment individually.
Cooperatives and farmer organisations can help producers pool their output, improve their bargaining power and share the costs of certain facilities.
Such arrangements work best when they are professionally managed and supported by transparent rules.
Reducing post-harvest losses can improve food availability without requiring every additional unit of food to come from expanding cultivated land.
It can also strengthen supply reliability, especially for urban markets that depend on produce transported from distant farming areas.
Agricultural processing and value addition
Nigeria’s agricultural development agenda must also consider how much value is retained after crops leave the farm.
Raw agricultural commodities often require additional processing, packaging, storage and marketing before they reach final consumers.
Local processing can create jobs, extend product shelf life and open access to markets that require specific product forms or packaging standards.
For example, cassava can be processed into garri, flour and other products. Plantain can be converted into flour, while grains and oilseeds can supply food manufacturers and other industries.
Processing can also help producers manage seasonal fluctuations by turning perishable crops into products that can be stored for longer periods.
However, agricultural processing businesses face their own challenges, including electricity costs, machinery expenses, access to finance, packaging requirements and inconsistent supplies of raw materials.
If farmers cannot reliably supply processors, factories may operate below capacity. If processors cannot offer competitive prices, farmers may prefer other buyers or leave produce unsold.
This makes coordination between producers, processors, transporters and financial institutions essential.
Governments can help by improving infrastructure, supporting appropriate technical training and creating a policy environment in which agricultural businesses can invest with greater confidence.
The objective should be to build commercially sustainable value chains rather than create processing facilities that lack reliable supplies or markets.
Finance and investment must reach agricultural producers
Agriculture requires capital at different stages of the production cycle.
Farmers need funds to purchase inputs and pay workers before harvest, while processors and traders require financing to buy, store and transport produce.
Yet agricultural lending can be challenging because farm income is seasonal and production is exposed to weather, pests, disease and market-price changes.
Smallholder farmers may also lack formal records or collateral that lenders typically require.
A coordinated agricultural strategy should therefore consider financing arrangements that reflect the realities of agricultural production.
These may include suitable seasonal credit, cooperative financing, agricultural insurance, credit guarantees and partnerships with responsible financial institutions.
The design of such programmes matters. Loans that become due before a crop generates income can create additional pressure on farmers, while insurance products that are difficult to understand or claim may fail to provide meaningful protection.
Financial support should be linked to sound production plans, market opportunities and appropriate risk management.
Public programmes also need transparent eligibility rules and monitoring to ensure that assistance reaches intended beneficiaries.
Investment in rural infrastructure can complement financial support by reducing the risks and costs faced by farmers and agribusinesses.
When roads, electricity, water, storage and market facilities improve, agricultural enterprises may become more attractive to private investors.
Research, extension and improved seeds
Agricultural research and extension services are important to improving productivity over the long term.
Research institutions develop and test crop varieties, livestock practices, soil-management techniques and other innovations. Extension workers help farmers understand how to apply suitable technologies under local conditions.
Improved seeds can contribute to better yields, resilience and crop quality, but performance depends on the variety, the environment and the way it is managed.
Farmers need access to reliable seed suppliers and information about which varieties are suitable for their crops and production conditions.
The quality of agricultural advice also matters. Recommendations must reflect local soils, weather, pests, available resources and the farmer’s objectives.
Stronger links between researchers, extension workers, seed companies and farmer organisations can help ensure that useful innovations reach producers.
Farmers should also have opportunities to provide feedback on new technologies so that researchers understand the practical challenges encountered in the field.
The Kampala agenda's emphasis on implementation creates an opportunity to strengthen these connections and reduce the gap between research findings and everyday farming practices.
The role of cooperatives and farmer organisations
Cooperatives and farmer organisations can help small-scale producers address challenges that are difficult to manage individually.
By working collectively, farmers may be able to purchase inputs in larger quantities, share equipment, arrange transport and negotiate with buyers.
Collective organisation can also improve access to training, information and certain forms of finance.
However, cooperatives need effective governance, transparent financial management and clear accountability to members.
Poorly managed organisations may lose members’ trust or fail to deliver the benefits they promise.
Government support should therefore include practical assistance with management, record-keeping and market development, rather than focusing only on registration or membership numbers.
Strong farmer organisations can also help public authorities understand local needs and assess whether agricultural programmes are reaching their intended beneficiaries.
For a country with a large population of smallholder producers, these organisations could be important partners in implementing national agricultural priorities.
Measuring progress beyond announcements
A major test for the Kampala agenda will be whether governments establish clear ways to measure implementation and its effects.
Agricultural programmes can report the number of farmers trained, inputs distributed, facilities constructed or funds committed. Those indicators can be useful, but they do not necessarily show whether agricultural conditions have improved.
A more complete assessment should examine whether farm productivity increases, production costs become more manageable, farmers’ incomes improve and food reaches markets more reliably.
Other relevant measures include post-harvest losses, access to extension services, irrigation performance, the availability of quality inputs and the resilience of farming communities to climate shocks.
Food-security monitoring should also consider whether households can afford nutritious food and whether improvements are reaching vulnerable communities.
Reliable data is essential for identifying programmes that work and those that require adjustment.
Governments need to collect information consistently and make it possible to compare progress across states and over time.
Public reporting can also help citizens and farmers understand how funds are being used and what results have been achieved.
The Federal Government’s call for stronger coordination will have greater impact if it is accompanied by clear targets, realistic budgets and regular assessments.
What the agenda could mean for farmers and consumers
If implemented effectively, the 2026–2035 agenda could help strengthen the links between agricultural production, processing, distribution and consumption.
For farmers, improved access to inputs, extension services, finance and markets could help raise productivity and reduce some of the risks associated with production.
For processors and traders, better infrastructure and more dependable supplies could create opportunities to expand operations and invest in new products.
For consumers, more efficient supply chains and reduced post-harvest losses could improve the availability of food in markets.
However, these outcomes are not automatic. Agricultural reforms take time, and results will vary depending on implementation, local conditions and the resources available.
The cost of production remains an important factor in food prices. Even when harvests improve, transport expenses, processing costs, storage limitations and other market conditions can influence what consumers pay.
Government policies must therefore avoid treating agricultural output as the only measure of success.
A food system should be assessed by whether it supports productive farmers, sustainable businesses, accessible markets and households that can obtain safe and nutritious food.
What happens next?
The Federal Government’s immediate challenge is to turn the continental framework and Nigeria’s national strategy into practical implementation arrangements.
State governments will need to identify priorities that reflect their agricultural strengths and constraints. They will also need to align plans with budgets, assign responsibilities and coordinate with relevant federal institutions.
Agricultural stakeholders, including farmer organisations, researchers, processors and development partners, will need opportunities to contribute expertise and monitor progress.
The effectiveness of the programme will depend on whether these discussions lead to funded projects, stronger services and improvements that farmers can experience directly.
Particular attention will be required in areas where insecurity, climate pressures, weak infrastructure or limited access to finance make agricultural production more difficult.
Monitoring will also be essential. Regular assessments can help authorities identify delays, redirect resources where necessary and learn from successful programmes.
The Kampala agenda covers a decade, so sustained implementation will matter more than short-term announcements. Agricultural transformation requires continuity, maintenance and the ability to adapt programmes as conditions change.
A long-term test for Nigeria’s food security
Nigeria’s participation in the Kampala Declaration offers an opportunity to connect its agricultural policies with a wider continental effort to strengthen food systems.
The Federal Government has called on states and other stakeholders to work together, while the national 10-year strategy provides a framework for translating the continental objectives into domestic priorities.
The scale of the challenge is significant. Farmers need reliable access to inputs, finance, technology and markets. Rural infrastructure must support production and distribution. Security and climate resilience remain important to agricultural investment, while processing and storage can help reduce waste and retain more value within the economy.
The programme’s ultimate significance will be determined by implementation rather than the declaration itself.
If federal and state authorities coordinate effectively, establish clear priorities and deliver support that responds to real farming conditions, the agenda could contribute to a stronger and more resilient agricultural sector.
If implementation remains fragmented or underfunded, the potential benefits may not reach the farmers and households that need them most.
For Nigeria, the task ahead is to turn a decade-long commitment into practical improvements in food production, rural livelihoods and access to affordable, nutritious food.
Comments
Post a Comment