Online Reporter
Boaz Keizir
ONCE again, Africa’s leaders, policymakers, scientists, financiers and development partners are gathering in Kigali, Rwanda, for the Africa Food Systems Forum, running from August 31 to September 4.
But this year’s meeting is about far more than speeches, declarations and panel discussions. It is a moment of reflection. A moment to ask a difficult but necessary question: after two decades of ambitious promises and massive investment in agriculture, has Africa delivered meaningful change for its farmers?
Twenty years ago, in Addis Ababa, former United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan stood before African leaders and challenged the continent to rethink its approach to agriculture. He did not simply speak about hunger and food insecurity. He called for action.
“Let us generate a uniquely African green revolution,” he said, “a revolution that is long overdue, a revolution that will help the continent in its quest for dignity and peace.”
From that vision emerged three important institutions that continue to influence Africa’s agricultural future today.
The first was the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA), established in 2006 with Annan as its founding chairman. The organisation was created to drive agricultural transformation across the continent.
The second was born from Annan’s belief that scientists, policymakers, farmers and financiers should work together rather than in isolation. He wanted a platform where stakeholders could regularly meet, share experiences, acknowledge setbacks and find solutions together.
That idea first took shape through a series of conferences in Oslo, Norway, between 2006 and 2008.
It later moved to Accra, Ghana, in 2010 as the African Green Revolution Forum and has since evolved into the Africa Food Systems Forum that is taking place in Kigali this week.
The third was Annan’s conviction that Africa should celebrate success as much as it critiques failure. He believed the continent needed examples of excellence that could inspire others to do better.
That vision gave birth to the Africa Food Prize, whose secretariat is led by the author of this article.
Three institutions. One vision.
Today, all three converge in Kigali for what could be one of the most important gatherings in the Forum’s history. Not because the continent has achieved everything it set out to do, but because there is now enough evidence to honestly assess both the successes and the failures of the past 20 years.
The author’s verdict is straightforward. Africa has built institutions, achieved important gains and kept agricultural transformation high on the policy agenda. However, it has not yet built delivery systems strong enough to consistently translate higher productivity into sustainable incomes, jobs and resilience for ordinary farmers.
Evidence supporting that conclusion is contained in AGRA’s recently published AGRA@20 Impact, Learning and Foresight Report.
According to the author, the report differs from the typical anniversary publication designed to celebrate achievements. Instead, it attempts to provide an honest assessment based on independent evaluations rather than self-congratulation.
“It does not flatter us. It is, by design, an honest account drawing on independent evaluations – not just our own telling of our own story, of what a continent-wide effort to reignite African agriculture actually achieved, and what it did not.”
The author goes further, urging delegates attending the Kigali forum to study the report carefully.
“I urge every Minister, civil servant, farmer leader and every partner gathered in Kigali this week to read it – not the press release, but the report itself.”
The findings reveal a mixed picture.
On one hand, there have been significant gains in agricultural productivity through investments in seed systems, farmer support services, policy reforms and partnerships.
On the other hand, many of the farmers these interventions were intended to help have not experienced the expected improvement in their incomes.
The report argues that increased production alone does not automatically create prosperity.
Markets did not develop as quickly as anticipated, while access to affordable finance remained limited.
“But income gains for the farmers who mattered most have been partial. Markets did not follow seeds into the ground the way we assumed they would. Inclusive finance, the capital that turns a good harvest into a durable livelihood, did not arrive at the scale or speed the moment demanded.”
The central lesson, the author argues, is that boosting production is only one piece of the puzzle.
“The report’s central lesson is therefore not that Africa lacked effort; it is that production gains without market access, finance, accountable institutions and last-mile delivery do not automatically become prosperity.”
The author’s understanding of these challenges was shaped during his years in Uganda’s public service.
As a young economist in the Ministry of Agriculture, he helped draft policies and quickly realised that designing a good policy was only the first step.
He later worked in the Ministry of Finance, where agriculture funding had to compete with demands from sectors such as health, education, infrastructure and national security.
At the National Planning Authority, he helped lead the drafting of Uganda’s National Development Plan.
Those experiences convinced him that real transformation cannot be achieved from outside government alone.
“Transformation is not achieved by working for government from the outside; it is built by working in and within government, understanding its constraints, its rhythms, its incentives and its weaknesses.”
He argues that many development projects fail not because of poor intentions, but because of weaknesses in implementation.
Lengthy procurement processes, delayed fund disbursements, cumbersome bureaucracy and project structures designed more for donor compliance than farmer needs often slow progress.
The result is that large agricultural loans can be approved and added to national debt long before farmers see any real benefits.
“By the time the headline announces a half-billion-dollar agricultural transformation project, the taxpayer has already inherited the obligation, while the actual delivery may still be trapped in approvals, no-objections, procurement disputes and implementation bottlenecks.”
The author believes governments, citizens, the media and lawmakers must ask tougher questions about accountability.
When agricultural loans are approved, who is responsible for delivering results? When implementation is delayed, who answers for the missed opportunities? And when projects spend heavily on administration while delivering little on the ground, can they genuinely be regarded as successful?
He argues that governments must take ownership of development programmes rather than leaving implementation largely in the hands of consultants and externally funded project units.
“Governments must stop outsourcing the idea of delivery while retaining only the ceremony of ownership.”
While acknowledging the role played by consultants and development partners, he insists that they should support government leadership rather than replace it.
“A ministry that cannot explain its own delivery numbers without a consultant’s slide deck has not been strengthened; it has been made dependent.”
The author also calls for stronger accountability mechanisms across the continent.
He argues that African countries should publish scorecards measuring progress against commitments made under key agricultural agreements, including the target of allocating 10 percent of national budgets to agriculture.
“A scorecard is not a punishment. It is a mirror.”
He adds that accountability must extend to issues such as corruption and resource abuse.
“It is not enough to speak of ‘leakages’ in soft, technocratic language at conferences like this one.
Every diverted bag of subsidised fertiliser is a farmer’s child who does not eat, a harvest that does not happen, a young person who concludes, correctly, that agriculture is a sector for the connected, not the industrious.”
Despite the shortcomings highlighted in the AGRA@20 report, the author remains optimistic.
He believes there are examples across Africa where strong political leadership, timely funding, transparent procurement and effective implementation have produced tangible results.
Those successes, he argues, prove that meaningful transformation remains within reach.
As leaders gather in Kigali, the challenge is no longer about crafting new declarations. It is about delivering on old promises.
“Kigali this week is not a celebration for celebration’s sake. It is Africa’s institutions, the one Kofi Annan built, the platform he willed into being, and the prize he inspired, converging to ask the only question that matters after 20 years: has Africa delivered?”
The answer, according to the evidence, is clear.
“The evidence says: partially, unevenly, and not nearly enough.”
The next chapter of Africa’s agricultural transformation, he concludes, will not be determined by the ambition of its promises, but by the effectiveness of its delivery.
“Governments must publish the scorecards, fund the delivery units, protect procurement from capture, and hold themselves publicly accountable for results. That responsibility does not belong to donors. It never did. It belongs to us.”
l Boaz Keizire is Director, Policy and State Capability, AGRA, based in Nairobi; he is also the Head of the Africa Food Prize Secretariat.
