It is a clear fact that while the number and volume of interventions by the federal and state governments in the agricultural sector have been quite significant, the results of such efforts have not been correspondingly encouraging.
The details of these interventions provide clear evidence of considerable support for farmers, much of which, however, has not translated into increased agricultural production or lower food prices.
Several findings have shown that a combination of low loan recovery rates, the misapplication of funds by recipients and the collection of loans by people who are not genuine farmers account for the limited impact of such interventions.
The recent revelation by a Deputy Director of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), Dr Michael Ononugbo, who is also a Special Assistant in the office of the bank's Deputy Governor in charge of Economic Policy, that N4.7 trillion out of the N10 trillion disbursed by the bank as loans in 2025 remains unrecovered indicates a high level of default. This reflects the experience with almost all other similar loans granted by the government through financial institutions and relevant agencies.
Follow us on WhatsApp | LinkedIn for the latest headlines
Many of the government's special interventions, such as the Agricultural Transformation Agenda (ATA), introduced in 2011; the Anchor Borrowers' Programme (ABP); and the Nigeria Incentive-Based Risk-Sharing System for Agricultural Lending (NIRSAL), both unveiled by the administration of the late President Muhammadu Buhari, were subjected to various forms of abuse. The prevailing food crisis in the country is sufficient evidence of the failure of these programmes.
The ABP, in particular, was conceived as a strategy for establishing a strong linkage between smallholder farmers, local processors and financial institutions to increase agricultural production in the country. It was designed to boost the capacity of farmers, banks and agricultural entrepreneurs as a step towards reducing commodity imports and conserving foreign exchange reserves.
NIRSAL was another initiative that initially held considerable promise for farmers but eventually suffered setbacks because of the malpractices that characterised its implementation. The integrity of the programme was substantially compromised by some of its officials, who favoured people other than genuine farmers in the distribution of seeds, fertilisers and other essential inputs.
The launch, at the beginning of this year, of an interest-free and collateral-free loan scheme by the present administration under its Renewed Hope Government Enterprise and Empowerment Programme (GEEP 3.0) was another significant move to support agriculture. More than 20,000 vulnerable and grassroots farmers across the country's 774 local government areas were targeted to receive N300,000 each under the FarmerMoni and Dry Season Programme, components of GEEP.
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
However, it appears that, like the initiatives that preceded it, this programme has been more of a failure than a success. There is no evidence that GEEP or any of its components has made a visible impact on the agricultural sector or, more specifically, food production.
Daily Trust agrees with those who believe that the failure of these initiatives stems largely from the government's poor approach to addressing the challenges of food production. The usual procedures adopted by the government in assessing applicants' eligibility and disbursing loans leave room for the diversion of funds and other support items, as well as their misapplication by both programme officials and intended beneficiaries.
The emergence of so-called 'briefcase farmers', such as Kano-based Habu Danzaria, who revealed in an interview with this newspaper that his connections with politicians enabled him to obtain huge quantities of fertilisers and other agricultural inputs, clearly demonstrates the weaknesses in the government's approach. Inconsistent monitoring and poor evaluation are undoubtedly among the factors that undermine the effectiveness of these interventions.
We therefore recommend the adoption of a system that guarantees the proper design and implementation of agricultural support programmes aimed at achieving self-sufficiency in food production. As many agricultural experts have explained, this is possible only if priority is given to cluster farming arrangements, which typically involve land preparation, plot demarcation and the provision of crop-specific inputs.
