By Witness Radio Team.
An investigative report commissioned by the Alliance for Food Sovereignty in Africa (AFSA) has revealed the concerning extent to which the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA) is leveraging its significant influence to shape local, national, and continental agricultural policies across Africa raising serious questions about the future of the continent’s agriculture.
The briefing paper, “Pulling Back the Veil: AGRA’s Influence on Africa’s Agricultural Policies,” exposes how AGRA strategically uses its financial power to embed consultants within government institutions to entrench industrial agricultural models. Though marketed as advancements, these models often harm smallholder farmers and sustainable farming practices.
Initially aiming for its grassroots efforts to double farmer productivity and halve food insecurity, AGRA has recently shifted its focus. Following a donor-commissioned 2022 evaluation highlighting AGRA’s failure to meet its ambitious goals, the Gates Foundation-funded organization pivoted from direct interventions with farmers to influencing government policies.
According to the briefing paper, this new strategy involves placing external consultants within African government offices to steer policy development. AGRA’s efforts frequently promote the adoption of hybrid and genetically modified seeds, increased use of chemical fertilizers, and greater private sector involvement in agriculture.
While some African governments may welcome the support, there is growing concern that AGRA’s influence could undermine local policy initiatives, replacing homegrown solutions with external agendas.
AFSA’s investigation highlights AGRA’s policy interventions in countries like Kenya and Zambia, where its influence is pronounced. AGRA’s impact is evident at every level, local, national, and continental, shaping agricultural policies that often prioritize corporate interests over the needs of smallholder farmers.
The consequences of AGRA’s involvement are evident in its 13 focus countries, where its promotion of seeds and fertilizers still needs to deliver the promised productivity revolution, leading to increased deprivation. A recent report by the African Centre for Biodiversity (ACB) highlights the collapse of Zambia’s food system as a direct result of AGRA’s harmful interference.
At the continental level, AGRA’s involvement in critical African Union (AU) initiatives, such as the Fertilizer and Soil Health Summit, has significantly influenced African agricultural policy, particularly in shaping the direction of fertilizer policy for the next decade. However, AFSA, which also participated in the summit, advocated for funding and support for biofertilizers made from local materials, starkly contrasting AGRA’s approach.
AGRA’s role in the Post-Malabo process, which aims to define Africa’s agricultural policy for the next ten years, is particularly troubling. Critics argue that AGRA’s focus on synthetic fertilizers and corporate-led agendas threatens to marginalize indigenous knowledge and sustainable agricultural practices.
AFSA’s Million Belay aptly says, “They represent an attack on African food sovereignty.” Despite resistance from African farmers and civil society organizations, AGRA’s fingerprints are all over Africa’s agricultural policies. The inclusion of biotechnology in the draft Kampala Declaration, set for approval in January 2025, has sparked fears of increased dependence on multinational corporations for seeds and farming inputs. AGRA’s influence in regional policymaking, especially in harmonizing seed trade regulations, further illustrates its strategic positioning within African institutions.
AGRA’s involvement in developing Zambia’s National Agriculture Investment Plan (NAIP II) exemplifies its undue influence. Initially seen as a democratic and inclusive process involving a broad range of stakeholders, NAIP II was later reshaped by AGRA and the FAO. The introduction of the Comprehensive Agriculture Transformation Support Programme (CATSP) shifted the focus toward commercial value chains aligned with the Green Revolution model.
This new framework has faced significant opposition from farmer groups and NGOs, who argue that it promotes industrial agriculture at the expense of smallholder farmers, biodiversity, and sustainable practices. AGRA’s role in dismantling Zambia’s biosafety framework has also sparked fears of forced evictions, land grabbing, and the commercialization of water resources, further marginalizing local communities.
In Kenya, AGRA’s sudden involvement in a community-led effort to develop agroecological practices has raised alarms among locals. Stakeholders fear that AGRA’s entry into the process, which included funding and capacity-building initiatives, might derail their efforts to promote sustainable farming systems. AGRA’s use of terms like “climate-smart agriculture” to describe its support for chemical fertilizers and GMOs has led to skepticism about its true intentions.
Local farmers and agroecology supporters worry that AGRA’s involvement could dilute or undermine the original goals of the agroecology policy.
AFSA’s investigation calls for greater scrutiny of AGRA’s role in policymaking and re-evaluating external entities’ influence in shaping Africa’s agricultural future.
