Agric Budget Slash, Biggest Threat To Food Security In 2025

…Why 36% Cuts Are Like Kicking Dying Horse — Research Expert

…Nigeria Relies On $10bn Worth Of Imports To Meet Food Production Shortfalls — Agric Investor  

 The proposed 36.19% reduction in Nigeria’s 2025 agricultural budget, from N996.901 billion to N633 billion, is a deeply concerning development with potentially devastating consequences. The situation requires examining the potential causes, likely impacts, and alternative policy options. Report by ROLAND OGBONNAYA and SEYI TAIWO-OGUNTUASE

The drastic cut in the agricultural budget, some experts say, is un­likely to be a result of a single factor but rather a confluence of issues. Nigeria faces significant eco­nomic challenges, including dwindling oil revenues, high debt servicing costs, and inflationary pressures.

Budget cuts may stem from a lack of comprehensive data illustrating the eco­nomic and social returns of agricultural investment. Without robust evidence of the positive impacts on poverty reduc­tion and economic growth, the agricul­tural sector may appear less attractive compared to others.

Mr. Joshua Aondongu Biem, Policy and Research Analyst at Nextier, ex­plained to Saturday INDEPENDENT that budget cuts are nothing new. Howev­er, where these cuts occur, the timing of such actions and the adjoining repercus­sions of such cuts remain key towards an economy’s survival.

While others argue that a higher agricultural budget is insufficient to boost food production, the possibility of effectively utilising resources in oth­er sectors remains to be seen. Also, the agricultural sector is the lifeblood of an economy, nourishing its people, sustain­ing livelihoods, and fuelling growth.

“Even though it has not been priori­tised over the years, budgetary cuts are like kicking a dying horse, adding unnec­essary pain to an already dire situation. Whether these cuts were made in good faith remains arguable, as it can be seen as a strategic decision to optimise limit­ed resources.

“On the flip side, it shows a lack of commitment to food security and pover­ty alleviation, which would only exacer­bate a dire situation and have far-reach­ing impacts, especially on insecurity.”

It’s difficult to definitively say wheth­er the reduction was made in good faith. While fiscal constraints are a legitimate concern, the drastic nature of the cut suggests a lack of sufficient consider­ation for the potential ramifications on food security and poverty. Transparency is key as the government needs to justi­fy the decision with clear data on how funds were allocated in previous years, an assessment of the likely consequenc­es of the reduction, and plans for miti­gating negative impacts. Without this transparency, it’s reasonable to be skep­tical about the decision-making process.

Hon. Ebube Ebisike-George, an investment expert, told the Saturday INDEPENDENT that the 36.19% cut in the 2025 budget from N996.901b in 2024 to N633b is definitely disturbing. The issue of the reduction in budgetary allocation in 2025 being done in good faith is a tes­tament to the All Progressive Congress (APC) government not being proactive and critically sensitive to the dire reali­ties of Nigeria’s population tittering on the brink of steadily growing massive hunger, deepening food insufficiency, depression, malnutrition and poverty.

“As it stands Nigeria relies on about $10 billion worth of imports to meet its food and agricultural production short­falls (mostly wheat, rice, poultry, fish, food services, and consumer-oriented foods). Europe, Asia, the United States, South America, and South Africa are major sources of agricultural imports.

Tunde Banjoko, the Chairman, Lagos Chambers of Commerce and Industry (LCCI), Agric and Agro-Allied Group, said that the initial proposed budget was N862bn which was about 1.1 percent of the entire budget.

“I am one of those that have always advocated that agriculture should get 10 per cent based on the Maputo/Malabo declaration which Nigeria also signed, that if we are investing 10 percent of our budget into agriculture; we would have been growing at least six per cent yearly. Further reducing the cost of the budget shows that we will probably still be struggling with high cost of produc­tion, we will still be struggling with prob­ably importing most of the produce we could have produced.

“Our farmers will still be struggling with bad roads and high cost of pro­duction. So the effect of the reduction of that budget is going to be significant; we can see the budget of the livestock ministry is N11bn and they were looking at allocating about N380m to setting up the RUGA system. How would that have any effect compared to the current issue of farmer/herders clashes that we are experiencing?”

“So, I think we should have priori­tised increasing the number. The only time Nigeria ever witnessed anything significant in that industry was five per cent during President Yar’Adua for two years, 2008 and 2009; for the past years, it has been 1%, 1.2% that is why we have been advocating increase. I think the reduction is not in our favour and we should have done more in that regard,” he added.

Sunday Ezeobiora, the National Pres­ident of the Poultry Association of Nige­ria (PAN) said reducing the agricultural budget at this point of food insecurity in Nigeria will have several consequences on the agricultural sector and the coun­try as a whole.

He said that there are several scenari­os of the likely outcome of any decrease in the agricultural budget and that a decreased budget could lead to reduced investment in agriculture, potentially affecting food production and supply.

According to him, this may impact food security in the country, leading to shortages and increased food prices, and with less funding available, farmers may struggle to access essential resources like modern farming equipment, seeds, fertilizers, and technology.

Ezeobiora pointed out that this could result in decreased agricultural produc­tivity and lower yields in the long run and that it could lead to fewer jobs in the sector which could have a wider economic implication for the country.

“Agriculture is a significant source of employment in Nigeria. A reduced bud­get may lead to fewer jobs in the sector, impacting livelihoods and contributing to unemployment rates. This could also have wider economic implications for the country.”

Ezeobiora, who is also Chairman of Sunchi Integrated Farms Limited, Enugu, said that a lower budget could mean reduced funding for research, in­novation, and sustainable agricultural practices, and this may hinder progress towards more efficient and environmen­tally friendly farming methods.

“In summary, reducing the agricul­tural budget for 2025 in Nigeria could have far-reaching consequences on food security, economic development, employment, rural communities, pov­erty levels, and the overall sustainability of the agricultural sector.”

The PAN President said that it is es­sential for the executive and legislators to carefully consider these implications and potentially explore ways to mitigate the effects of budget cuts on agriculture.

On what caused the agriculture budget reduction, Ezeobiora said that he believes the reduction in Nigeria’s agriculture budget could be attributed to various factors such as changes in government priorities, economic chal­lenges, budget constraints, political deci­sions, or that the government is simply shifting focus to other sectors.

While corroborating other stakehold­ers on the need for the government to commit at least 10 per cent of the coun­try’s total budget to agriculture, he said allocating 10 per cent of the Nigerian 2025 budget to agriculture could have significant positive impacts on the ag­ricultural sector and the economy as a whole.

He noted that a significant portion of the budget allocation could be used to improve rural infrastructure, such as roads, irrigation systems, and storage facilities, and that better infrastructure can boost productivity by enabling farm­ers to transport their goods more effi­ciently and reduce post-harvest losses.

“Allocating funds for research and development in agriculture can lead to the adoption of modern farming tech­niques, improved seed varieties, and in­novative tools that help increase yields and improve crop quality.

“Investing in training programmes for farmers on sustainable agricultural practices, modern farming methods, and efficient use of resources can en­hance their skills and knowledge, lead­ing to higher productivity and income.

“By allocating a portion of the bud­get to agricultural loans and financial support programmes for farmers, more farmers can have access to capital to ex­pand their operations, purchase inputs, and invest in their farms.”

Similarly, he said supporting the de­velopment of markets for agricultural products through budgetary allocations can help farmers find better prices for their produce, reduce wastage, and pro­mote agribusiness growth.

Maybe more funds should be spent on security rather than agriculture; the PAN President noted that both security and agriculture are very crucial for the well-being and development of Nigeria.

Fatimah Gumi, the President of Women from the Small-scale Women Farmers Organisation in Nigeria (SWO­FON) at a press conference in Abuja, lamented that the federal government’s commitment remains far below the 10% target set by the Malabo declaration.

She criticised the federal govern­ment’s failure to prioritise agriculture, warning that the sector’s underfunding could threaten Nigeria’s food and nutri­tion security amid rising hunger and economic hardship which has become the flight of Nigerians.

Chi Tola-Robert, the Chief Operating Officer of Capacious Farms and Foods, in her view, pointed out the key conse­quences of the budget cut, stating that lower investment will surely reduce food production, increase prices, and worsen hunger.

She said that it would also lead to job losses and rural poverty as millions de­pend on agriculture, noting that reduced funding leads to job losses and economic hardship and that there is no alternative to agriculture.

According to her, the reduction will also affect the progress in mechanisa­tion, irrigation, and research and will in­crease dependence on imports, stressing that weaker domestic production will heighten reliance on costly food imports.

On the reason for the reduction, To­la-Roberts said that the government may justify it due to economic constraints, debt servicing, or competing priorities such as security or infrastructure

“However, if it harms food security, it could be seen as a short-sighted move or a misallocation of funds.”

Speaking further, she said that the Ni­gerian government should honour the Maputo declaration that recommends African nations allocate at least 10 per cent of their budgets to agriculture.

Femi Oke, Chairman of All Farmers Association of Nigeria (AFAN), Lagos state chapter, said that the amount bud­geted for the sector will not be enough to cater for the sector, as there is a need to in­crease what was allocated for the sector.

 He said it is just like a drop in the ocean, that the amount is grossly inad­equate for developing agriculture in the country.

However, Henry Olatujoye, a former national President of the National Palm Produce Association of Nigeria (NPPAN) said that the reduction in the agriculture budget could be seen from different per­spectives, “looking at it from last year’s budget, it is easy to believe that it will not be good for agricultural development and further putting pressure on agric practic­es, commodity development, and other value chains.

According to him, reducing the budget this year by 36 per cent is a reflection of the total investment and commitment achieved in the year 2024.

He noted that the Federal Government did a lot in the area of insecurity, inputs, supplies, access to land, and commodity trading across known value chains.

“NIMET has predicted early rains this year, which means farmers will have the opportunity to plant crops such as maize and other grains twice this year.”

Past Nigeria Government agricultural programs and initiatives such as the An­chor Borrowers Program (ABP) geared at diversifying the economy away from oil have been truncated and left a serious food shortfall. In October 2021, the gov­ernment at the Council on Agriculture and Rural Development Regular meeting, approved the implementation of a new agricultural policy named “National Ag­ricultural Technology and Innovation Plan” (NATIP) in 2022.

“It is no longer news that Nigeria’s agricultural sector has been hurt by sev­eral shocks which in the last 10 years of APC rule have a toll on the wellbeing of its citizens and economy. These are regu­lar flooding, desertification of crop and grazing land, armed extremist insurgen­cies which have been linked to USAID funding now deactivated by President Trump, as well as conflicts between herdsmen and local farmers which has seriously destroyed food production and Herdsmen Militia actions been linked to land grabbing.

“The onslaught of foreign Agribusi­ness behemoths like Dupont, Monsanto and co. who continue to push GMO seeds can further hurt the fragile state of Afri­ca’s organic agricultural process which needs urgent mechanisation. “Adding to the above, food processing continues to suffer from a lack of financing and infra­structure. These challenges have exacer­bated food inflation. Food inflation rose to 23.75% in December 2022 and bloated further in Q1, 2025. There have been wide-rangingpriceincreasesacrossitems such as cereals, yam, meat, fish, fruits and all consumable raw and processed.”

He explains that reducing the 2025 agriculture budget means “reduced food productivity and availability in the farm­ing/Agribusiness sector which is already plagued by corruption and other hurdles. In effect malnourishment and hunger will increase.

“The reduced budget situation will definitely not tackle existing develop­ment challenges confronting the country – especially addressing farmers’ needs, like funding needs, new training in modern farming methods (Greenhouse, aeroponics etc.), subsidizing fertilizers and addressing gaps in infrastructure/ mechanisation, macroeconomic stabili­ty, social investment associated with the sector, and adaptation to climate change which is key.

“The consequences of this significant budget cut are likely to be severe. Lower funding translates to decreased invest­ment in research, extension services, improved seeds, fertilizers, irrigation, and farm mechanisation. This directly impacts agricultural productivity, leading to lower yields and reduced food availabil­ity.”

Reduced supply coupled with poten­tially increasing demand will inevitably drive up food prices, making food inac­cessible to many vulnerable Nigerians. This will exacerbate existing poverty and malnutrition. The combination of reduced food availability and increased food prices will push millions more Ni­gerians into poverty and acute hunger, potentially triggering social unrest and instability.

This will impact rural-urban migra­tion as farmers facing economic hardship may be forced to abandon their farms and migrate to urban areas in search of better opportunities, putting further strain on already overburdened cities, while lack of investment in sustainable agricultural practices could lead to further environ­mental degradation, impacting long-term agricultural productivity.

Allocating 10% of the 2025 budget to agriculture is a plausible target, although the specific amount should be based on a thorough cost-benefit analysis.

Nextier’s Biem agreed, stating that allocating 10% of Nigeria’s 2025 budget is undoubtedly important. This is be­cause agricultural productivity would be boosted through modern farming tools and high-quality seeds, improving crop yield. More importantly, increased bud­get allocations could provide an avenue to expand credit facilities.

“This has been a major constraint for smallholder farmers in Nigeria. With an increased budget, farmers, including women farmers under organisations like SWOFON, can be opportune to scale up their production. Over the years, Nigeria has faced serious security concerns that jeopardise agricultural output and eco­nomic stability, necessitating additional security expenditures to restore peace and promote safe farming. However, agri­culture is critical for food security, poverty reduction, and economic diversification, particularly as Nigeria seeks to reduce its reliance on oil.

“Poverty and hunger are also core causes of insecurity, stressing the need for agricultural investment to solve un­employment and social discontent. As a result, a balanced strategy is best. Prior­itising security to stabilise conflict-prone areas while strategically investing in agriculture to improve food security and generate jobs.

The question of prioritising security over agriculture is a false dichotomy. Food insecurity can be a significant driver of conflict and instability, creating a national security risk. Investing in agriculture is, therefore, a crucial component of nation­al security. Both sectors require adequate funding, but neglecting agriculture in fa­vour of security alone is a short-sighted approach that undermines long-term sta­bility and prosperity. A balanced and in­tegrated approach is needed, recognising the interconnectedness of food security and national security.

The proposed reduction in Nigeria’s agricultural budget is a dangerous gam­ble with potentially devastating conse­quences for food security, poverty, and national stability. While fiscal constraints are real, the drastic nature of the cut re­quires immediate reassessment.

A significant increase in funding, cou­pled with improved governance, transpar­ency, and strategic investment, is essential to ensure Nigeria can feed its population and achieve its development goals. Ignor­ing this crisis will have far-reaching and irreversible repercussions.