Inside Africa’s Big Bet on Youth to Feed the Continent and Who’s Actually Getting Funded

Posted on by admin

Africa, Conferences, Development & Aid, Economy & Trade, Editors’ Choice, Environment, Featured, Food and Agriculture, Food Systems, Gender, Headlines, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations, Trade & Investment, Women & Economy

Food Systems

Winnie Wambui, co-founder of Harcourt Agri-Eco Farm in Kenya, speaks to IPS outside the Dealroom at the Africa Food Systems Forum 2025, held at the Centre International de Conférences Abdou Diouf (CICAD) in Dakar, Senegal, September 4, 2025. Credit: Chemtai Kirui/IPS

Winnie Wambui, co-founder of Harcourt Agri-Eco Farm in Kenya, speaks to IPS outside the Dealroom at the Africa Food Systems Forum 2025, held at the Centre International de Conférences Abdou Diouf (CICAD) in Dakar, Senegal, September 4, 2025. Credit: Chemtai Kirui/IPS

DAKAR, Sep 15 2025 (IPS) – Winnie Wambui leans forward on the panel stage, microphone in hand, scanning the room until she spots a raised hand.

Everyone in the room wears headphones, each voice isolated so that discussions don’t clash with sessions in adjacent halls. A question cuts through: how did a student science project become a commercial business?

At 24, Wambui, a Kenyan agripreneur, runs Harcourt Agri-Eco Farm, which recycles organic waste into animal feed using black soldier flies.

“Back then, I didn’t know it would become a farm or a business,” she said to a room of agripreneurs, researchers, and investors, describing her first experiments in 2022 as an energy engineering student at Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology (JKUAT).

Today, her eight-person team processes around 30 tonnes of waste each month and monitors the carbon emissions avoided.

The enterprise now generates at least USD 1,000 in monthly revenue, a modest but steady profit by Kenyan standards.

Inside the calm Knowledge Hub, on a panel organized by the International Centre of Insect Physiology and Ecology (icipe), Wambui tells her story to a dozen listeners in an intimate, almost subdued setting. But just outside, at the leafy Centre International de Conference’s Abdou Diouf (CICAD) in Dakar, Senegal, the atmosphere is charged.

Presidents, cabinet ministers, development banks, and agribusiness executives pace the halls at the annual Africa Food Systems Forum (AFSF) 2025, the continent’s flagship platform for agricultural policy and investment.

This year, the forum positioned youth at the center of Africa’s food security agenda.

Wambui is part of a new generation of innovative agripreneurs that governments and financiers promise to support.

For the first time, youth agripreneurs joined heads of state on the Forum’s opening stage, a symbolic gesture of recognition in a region where nearly 400 million people are under 35.

“Our median age is just 19. And by 2050, one in three young people in the world will be African,” said Claver Gatete, Executive Secretary of the UN Economic Commission for Africa (UNECA).

He said that if given land, finance, technology and markets, the youths can feed not only Africa but also the world.

However, turning such vision into reality is where the continent struggles.

The African Development Bank (AfDB) often says that Africa holds roughly 60 percent of the world’s uncultivated arable land, yet poor infrastructure, limited financing, and climate shocks keep much of it idle.

With the continent collectively importing approximately USD50 billion worth of food annually, according to the African Export–Import Bank (Afreximbank), the stakes are high.

At the national level, countries like Kenya continue to face hunger crises at emergency levels.

At the start of the year, the World Food Programme estimated that around two million people were experiencing acute hunger—a recurring crisis in a country with relatively better infrastructure and higher investment flows than many of its East African neighbors.

Experts say that despite localized crises, structural issues in African agriculture worsen food insecurity across the continent.

“We have relied on grants and aid to keep agriculture afloat, and this has made the agriculture sector stuck in a risk perception trap,” said Adesuwa Ifedi, Vice President of Africa Programs at Heifer International.

Ifedi said that commercial banks and investors avoid the sector, leaving grants to fill the gap. But grant dependence can undermine ventures in the eyes of private financiers.

“Grants should leverage commercial capital so the ecosystem can thrive,” Ifedi said.

This year’s Forum coincided with the recent African Union’s rollout of its Kampala Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP) Strategy & Action Plan (2026–2035), or CAADP 3.0.

The new 10-year plan aims to mobilize USD 100 billion in investment, raise farm output by 45 percent, cut post-harvest losses in half, triple intra-African agrifood trade by 2035, and place youth inclusion at the core of Africa’s food future under the AU’s Agenda 2063.

In Dakar, over 30 agriculture ministers gathered under the chairmanship of former Ethiopian Prime Minister Hailemariam Desalegn Boshem, pledging to move beyond policy drafting toward delivering tangible results for agribusiness investment.

Their top priority, they said, was to shrink Africa’s food import bill by strengthening regional value chains.

Dr. Janet Edeme, head of the Rural Economy Division at the African Union Commission, told IPS that the Forum provides mechanisms to operationalize CAADP 3.0, aiming to empower at least 30 percent of youth in the agri-food sector while closing a USD 65–70 billion annual financing gap for agricultural small and medium-sized enterprises (agri-SMEs).

She said AFSF offers a rare opportunity for youthful agripreneurs to showcase bankable projects, access mentorship, and meet investors who would otherwise be out of reach.

“There are dedicated spaces—deal rooms, youth innovation competitions, investment roundtables—where these innovators can connect with governments, development finance institutions, and private investors,” said Edeme.

Organizers pointed to new spaces for youth to meet investors, but agripreneurs like Wambui said those opportunities felt distant.

She had never heard of the AU’s new flagship plan.

“I’m only hearing about that from you. If it’s meant to guide Africa’s food future, why aren’t there clear materials or programs I can see and use?” Wambui said. “Otherwise, we leave without knowing what strategies exist to support our work.”

By day two of the six-day forum, she had found her way into the deal room, the flagship space to connect entrepreneurs with investors, but instead of streamlined matchmaking, she found confusion.

“We are looking for the investors, and they’re looking for us—yet we don’t meet. Deals still depend on connections. That’s why I came to Dakar.”

Wambui, who co-founded Harcourt Agri-Eco Farm with two other partners, said the business has grown enough to cover wages, taxes, and debt repayments. Banks now extend her loans.

But that access to financing remains an exception in a system stacked against most, said Dr. Eklou Attiogbevi-Somado, the African Development Bank’s Regional Manager for Agriculture and Agro-Industry in West Africa.

He said that AfDB data shows commercial banks in Africa channel just 3–4 percent of their lending into agriculture.

Dr. David Amudavi, CEO of Biovision Africa Trust, said this capital drought is a huge concern in a sector that drives most livelihoods on the continent.

Amudavi, whose non-profit organization promotes ecological agriculture, said that the squeeze leaves farmers, and especially young agripreneurs, struggling to access credit for starting or scaling their agribusinesses, even though nearly 60 percent of Africa’s unemployed are under 25.

“Without finance, many youth-led ventures stay stuck at micro-scale or collapse,” Amudavi said.

Not far from the Youth Dome, at the deal room, Tanzanian agripreneur Nelson Joseph Kisanga, the co-founder of Get Aroma Spices, is also navigating the same maze.

Seven years ago, he left a banking career to try poultry farming, losing almost everything in his first three years.

Kisanga regrouped, merged his venture with that of his wife, Deborah, also a young agripreneur, and built Get Aroma Spices, now working with more than 50,000 farmers across southern Tanzania.

“Agriculture back home is seen as not for young people,” he said. “Even now, scaling means loans at high interest rates. There’s no other way.”

The family-run company exports turmeric, ginger, cardamom, and avocado oil while operating a youth- and women-led agro-processing hub through a public-private partnership.

His presence at the AFSF forum has already borne fruit.

“My intention coming here was to break into the West African market, and I’m happy to say I have clinched a supply deal in Ghana. All that’s left is for the lawyers to finalize the contract.” Kisanga said, before moving to the Youth Dome, a separate pavilion for young participants.

Inside, some groups chatted, others played basketball and table tennis, while others listened as young agri-food innovators pitched their ideas to a panel of investors.

Despite the fanfare, the forum ended without revealing how much capital reached youth-led ventures.

The most visible funding for youth at the summit came via the GoGettaz Agripreneur Prize, a pan-African initiative under the Generation Africa movement. The prize awarded USD 50,000 each to Egypt’s Naglaa Mohammad, who turns agricultural waste into natural products, and Uganda’s Samuel Muyita, who uses nanotechnology to reduce post-harvest fruit and vegetable losses.

An additional USD 60,000 impact award brought total prizes to roughly USD 160,000.

Other announcements included a USD 6.7 million trade programme from the United Kingdom (UK), the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA), and the African Union (AU).

Senegal also launched a USD 22.5 million pilot for Community Agricultural Cooperatives, with financing linked to the African Food Systems Resilience Fund.

Yet there was no breakdown showing how much, if any, flowed to youth-led ventures.

The opacity mirrors past patterns.

Public summaries from the 2023 deal room reported only USD 3.5 million in closed investments, with no traceable flows to youth-led enterprises.

With AFSF positioned as Africa’s premier delivery platform, observers measured the announcements against CAADP 3.0’s USD 100 billion mobilization target, saying the gap is stark.

“We have seen this pattern before: big pledges at the summit, but little clarity or follow-up on how much actually reaches youth and smallholder farmers—the backbone of African food production,” said Famara Diédhiou, a Senegal-based food systems program manager with a regional civil society network.

“Without such accountability and inclusion of all stakeholders, these forums risk becoming mere showcases rather than platforms that deliver,” he said.

For now, even with the youth-first theme, AFSF still leaves young founders stuck in the same cycle of chasing visibility, hustling for contacts, and stitching together their own contracts.

As Wambui found, Kisanga, who has attended three previous Forums, said that in AFSF access is everything: you need to know in advance who to meet and be in the right room at the right moment.

“All visibility is currency,” said Kisanga. “That’s how you survive.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

IPS UN Bureau, IPS UN Bureau Report, Senegal,

 

Bending the Curve: Overhaul Global Food Systems to Avert Worsening Land Crisis

Posted on by admin

Biodiversity, Civil Society, Climate Action, Climate Change, Combating Desertification and Drought, Conferences, Conservation, COP30, Development & Aid, Editors’ Choice, Environment, Featured, Food and Agriculture, Food Systems, Global, Headlines, Human Rights, Humanitarian Emergencies, Natural Resources, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations

Food Systems

Scientists say replacing just 10 percent of global vegetable intake with seaweed-derived products could free up large portions of land. Credit: Joyce Chimbi/IPS

Scientists say replacing just 10 percent of global vegetable intake with seaweed-derived products could free up large portions of land. Credit: Joyce Chimbi/IPS

Current rates of land degradation pose a major environmental and socioeconomic threat, driving climate change, biodiversity loss, and social crises. Food production to feed more than 8 billion people is the dominant land use on Earth. Yet, this industrial-scale enterprise comes with a heavy environmental toll.

Preventing and reversing land degradation are key objectives of the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) and are also fundamental for the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD).

These three conventions emerged from the 1992 Rio Earth Summit to address the interconnected crises of biodiversity loss, climate change and land degradation. A paper published today in Nature by 21 leading scientists argues that the targets of “these conventions can only be met by ‘bending the curve’ of land degradation and that transforming food systems is fundamental for doing so.”

Lead author Fernando T. Maestre of the King Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST), Saudi Arabia, says the paper presents “a bold, integrated set of actions to tackle land degradation, biodiversity loss, and climate change together, as well as a clear pathway for implementing them by 2050.”

“By transforming food systems, restoring degraded land, harnessing the potential of sustainable seafood, and fostering cooperation across nations and sectors, we can ‘bend the curve’ and reverse land degradation while advancing towards goals of the UN Convention to Combat Desertification and other global agreements.”

Co-author Barron J. Orr, UNCCD’s Chief Scientist, says, “Once soils lose fertility, water tables deplete, and biodiversity is lost, restoring the land becomes exponentially more expensive. Ongoing rates of land degradation contribute to a cascade of mounting global challenges, including food and water insecurity, forced relocation and population migration, social unrest, and economic inequality.”

“Land degradation isn’t just a rural issue; it affects the food on all our plates, the air we breathe, and the stability of the world we live in. This isn’t about saving the environment; it’s about securing our shared future.”

The authors suggest an ambitious but achievable target of 50 percent land restoration for 2050—currently, 30 percent by 2030—with enormous co-benefits for climate, biodiversity and global health. Titled ‘Bending the curve of land degradation to achieve global environmental goals,’ the paper argues that it is imperative to ‘bend the curve’ of land degradation by halting land conversion while restoring half of degraded lands by 2050.

“Food systems have not yet been fully incorporated into intergovernmental agreements, nor do they receive sufficient focus in current strategies to address land degradation. Rapid, integrated reforms focused on global food systems, however, can move land health from crisis to recovery and secure a healthier, more stable planet for all,” reads parts of the paper.

Against this backdrop, the authors break new ground by quantifying the impact of reducing food waste by 75 percent by 2050 and maximizing sustainable ocean-based food production—measures that alone could spare an area larger than Africa. They say restoring 50 percent of degraded land through sustainable land management practices would correspond to the restoration of 3 Mkm² of cropland and 10 Mkm² of non-cropland, a total of 13 Mkm².

Stressing that land restoration must involve the people who live on and manage the land—especially Indigenous Peoples, smallholder farmers, women, and other vulnerable people and communities. Co-author Dolors Armenteras, Professor of Landscape Ecology at Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogotá, says land degradation is “a key factor in forced migration and conflict over resources.”

“Regions that rely heavily on agriculture for livelihoods, especially smallholder farmers, who feed much of the world, are particularly vulnerable. These pressures could destabilize entire regions and amplify global risks.”

To support these vulnerable segments of the population, the paper calls for interventions such as shifting agricultural subsidies from large-scale industrial farms toward sustainable smallholders, incentivizing good land stewardship among the world’s 608 million farms, and fostering their access to technology, secure land rights, and fair markets.

“Land is more than soil and space. It harbors biodiversity, cycles water, stores carbon, and regulates climate. It gives us food, sustains life, and holds deep roots of ancestry and knowledge. Today, over one-third of Earth’s land is used to grow food – feeding a global population of more than 8 billion people,” says Co-author Elisabeth Huber-Sannwald, Professor, the Instituto Potosino de Investigación Científica y Tecnológica, San Luis Potosí, Mexico.

“Yet today,” she continues, “Modern farming practices, deforestation, and overuse are degrading soil, polluting water, and destroying vital ecosystems. Food production alone drives nearly 20 percent of global emissions of greenhouse gases. We need to act. To secure a thriving future – and protect land – we must reimagine how we farm, how we live, and how we relate to nature – and to each other.”

With an estimated 56.5 Mkm² of agricultural land, cropland, and rangelands being used to produce food, and roughly 33 percent of all food produced being wasted, of which 14 percent is lost post-harvest at farms and 19 percent at the retail, food service and household stages, reducing food waste by 75 percent, therefore, could spare roughly 13.4 Mkm² of land.

The authors’ proposed remedies include policies to prevent overproduction and spoilage, banning food industry rules that reject “ugly” produce, encouraging food donations and discounted sales of near-expiry products, education campaigns to reduce household waste and supporting small farmers in developing countries to improve storage and transport.

Other proposed solutions include integrating land and marine food systems, as red meat produced in unsustainable ways consumes large amounts of land, water, and feed and emits significant greenhouse gases. Seafood and seaweed are sustainable, nutritious alternatives. Seaweed, for example, needs no freshwater and absorbs atmospheric carbon.

The authors recommend measures such as replacing 70 percent of unsustainably produced red meat with seafood, such as wild or farmed fish and mollusks. Replacing just 10 percent of global vegetable intake with seaweed-derived products could free up over 0.4 Mkm² of cropland.

They nonetheless note that these changes are especially relevant for wealthier countries with high meat consumption. In some poorer regions, animal products remain crucial for nutrition. The combination of food waste reduction, land restoration, and dietary shifts, therefore, would spare or restore roughly 43.8 Mkm² in 30 years (2020-2050).

The proposed measures combined would also contribute to emission reduction efforts by mitigating roughly 13.24 Gt of CO₂-equivalent per year through 2050 and help the world community achieve its commitments in several international agreements, including the three Rio Conventions and UN SDGs.

Overall, the authors call for the UN’s three Rio conventions—CBD, UNCCD and UNFCCC—to unite around shared land and food system goals and encourage the exchange of state-of-the-art knowledge, track progress and streamline science into more effective policies, all to accelerate action on the ground.

A step in the right direction, UNCCD’s 197 Parties, at their most recent Conference of Parties (COP16) in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, have already adopted a decision on avoiding, reducing and reversing land and soil degradation of agricultural lands.

The Findings By Numbers

  • 56%: Projected increase in food production needed by 2050 if we stay on our current path
  • 34%: Portion of Earth’s ice-free land already used for food production, headed to 42% by 2050
  • 21%: Share of global greenhouse gas emissions produced by food systems
  • 80%: Proportion of deforestation driven by food production
  • 70%: Amount of freshwater consumption that goes to agriculture
  • 33%: Fraction of global food that currently goes to waste
  • USD 1 trillion: Estimated annual value of food lost or wasted globally
  • 75%: Ambitious target for global food waste reduction by 2050
  • 50%: Proposed portion of degraded land to be restored by 2050 using sustainable land management
  • USD 278 billion: Annual funding gap to achieve UNCCD land restoration goals
  • 608 million: Number of farms on the planet
  • 90%: Percentage of all farms under 2 hectares
  • 35%: Share of the world’s food produced by small farms
  • 6.5 billion tons: Potential biomass yield using 650 million hectares of ocean for seaweed farming
  • 17.5 million km²: Estimated cropland area saved if humanity adopts the proposed Rio+ diet (less unsustainably produced red meat and more sustainably sourced seafood and seaweed-derived food products)
  • 166 million: Number of people who could avoid micronutrient deficiencies with more aquatic foods in their diet

IPS UN Bureau Report

  Source

Mexico Bans GM Corn Cultivation in Constitutional Reform: Action Follows Trade Ruling That Ignored Evidence of Genetic Contamination

Posted on by admin

Biodiversity, Civil Society, Economy & Trade, Food and Agriculture, Food Systems, Headlines, Health, Indigenous Rights, Latin America & the Caribbean, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

Credit: Michael Farrelly, AFSA

CAMBRIDGE, MA., Apr 30 2025 (IPS) – On March 17, Mexican President Claudia Scheinbaum signed into law a constitutional reform banning the cultivation of genetically modified (GM) corn. The action followed a December ruling by a trade tribunal, under the U.S.-Mexico-Canada (USMCA) trade agreement, in favor of a U.S. complaint that Mexico’s 2023 presidential decree, with broader restrictions on the consumption of GM corn, constituted an unfair trade practice by prohibiting the use of GM corn in tortillas.

The Mexican government publicly disagreed with the ruling, claiming that the three arbitrators had failed to consider the scientific evidence Mexico presented in the yearlong case. But the government chose to comply, rescinding the three specific parts of the decree deemed to limit future GM corn imports. Still, the government left intact the decree’s measures phasing out the use of the herbicide glyphosate, establishing a protocol for tracking GM corn imports into the country, and banning the cultivation of GM corn in the country.

The constitutional amendment enshrines that last measure in a more permanent manner. While GM corn has faced planting restrictions for more than a decade, the constitutional ban represents an important act of resistance and sovereignty, particularly in light of the flawed decision by the tribunal.

Trade panel fails to consider evidence

Corn is central to Mexico’s agriculture, cuisine, nutrition, and culture. Mexico is the center of origin for corn, where the crop was domesticated thousands of years ago. It remains at the core of the country’s farming, diet, and culture. As President Sheinbaum acknowledged in approving the constitutional ban on GM corn cultivation, “Sin maiz no hay pais” – without corn there is no country.

In defense of Mexico’s 2023 decree, the panel acknowledged that the government presented scientific evidence from qualified and reputable sources of “risks to human health arising from the direct consumption of GM corn grain in Mexico, and risks to native corn of transgenic contamination arising from the unintentional, unauthorized, and uncontrolled spread of GM corn in Mexico.” (That evidence is summarized in an extensive publication from Mexico’s national science agency.)

The trade tribunal dismissed concerns about such risks in its ruling, essentially giving itself a pass on reviewing the scientific evidence of human-health risks by arguing that Mexico had not conducted an approved risk assessment “based on relevant scientific principles,” a reference to prevailing international codes for such processes.

The panel also failed to evaluate the risks to native corn. Mexico presented strong evidence that GM corn has cross-pollinated native corn varieties, gene flow that threatens to undermine the genetic integrity of the country’s 64 “landraces” and more than 22,000 varieties adapted by farmers over millennia to different soils, altitudes, climates, foods, and customs.

The tribunal argued that no special protection from GM corn was needed because gene flow already takes place from non-GM hybrid varieties of corn, and GM contamination is no different from non-GM gene flow. “Mexico has not demonstrated how the threat to the traditions and livelihoods of indigenous and farming communities from GM corn is greater than the threat posed by non-native, non-GM corn,” the panel wrote. Cross-pollination from hybrid corn “could equally threaten the genetic integrity of native corn.”

Equating contamination from GM corn with that of hybrid corn is a serious misreading of the science and of Mexico’s culture. GMOs by definition – and by explicit definitions in the constitutional amendment – involve crossing species boundaries, introducing, for example, a gene from a bacterium into a corn plant to repel insects. In contrast, hybrid corn is produced by cross-breeding different corn varieties, the resulting offspring remaining pure corn, with no non-corn genes in its DNA.

Mexican farmers have a long history of developing some of their own cross-pollinated varieties, intentionally combining a native variety with a hybrid that has properties the farmer desires. Such cross-pollination has nothing in common with unwanted contamination from GM corn, imposed on farmers without their informed consent. They call it “genetic pollution.”

It can pose a long-term risk to native varieties. Transgenic traits do not always reveal themselves after contamination. That means farmers can unknowingly spread such contamination from their pollen year after year to other corn plants. Mexican researchers discovered such contamination in their 2013 survey of native corn varieties. Biotechnologist Antonio Serratos reported that some of the native varieties he found even within Mexico City had transgenic traits in their DNA.

“In Mexican fields, transgenic native maize is being created,” he told me at the time. ”If [GM] maize seeds are sold or exchanged, the contamination will grow exponentially. That is the point of no return.”

Seed-sharing under threat

The tribunal’s alternative recommendation for controlling unwanted gene flow suggested that “the informal seed exchange practices of indigenous and farming communities” was one of the “underlying issues” Mexico should address to prevent contamination instead of restricting imports.

Limiting seed-sharing is entirely at odds with the science of seed diversity and evolution, says researcher Erica Hagman, who helped prepare Mexico’s defense in the USMCA dispute. Mexico’s rich corn diversity is the direct result of millennia of adaptive practices by farmers in their fields. The tribunal’s suggestion that Mexico should limit such seed-sharing to prevent GM corn contamination runs counter to the practices of in situ conservation of agricultural biodiversity.

Mexico’s constitutional ban on GM corn cultivation ensures that such misguided reasoning will not guide public policy. The amendment was strengthened by proposals from civil society that extended the ban to new genetically engineered seeds by banning any crops “produced with techniques that overcome the natural barriers of reproduction or recombination, such as transgenics.” This limits some of the new generations of genetically engineered crops.

While the constitutional reform does not include some of the original language restricting GM corn consumption, no doubt in deference to the trade ruling, the final version shows a clear preference for non-GM crops, leaving the door open to tighter regulation.

Tania Monserrat Téllez from the Sin Maíz No Hay País coalition called the reform “a major step forward for the defense of native corn varieties, the health of the Mexican population, and the protection of Mexico’s biocultural heritage associated with corn.”

Timothy A. Wise is the author of Eating Tomorrow: Agribusiness, Family Farmers, and the Battle for the Future of Food (New Press 2019) and a researcher at Tufts University’s Global Development and Environment Institute.

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

How to Put the ‘Sexy’ Back into Agriculture – Thoughts From CGIAR Science Week

Posted on by admin

Africa, Biodiversity, Climate Change, Conferences, Cooperatives, Development & Aid, Economy & Trade, Editors’ Choice, Environment, Featured, Food and Agriculture, Food Security and Nutrition, Food Sustainability, Food Systems, Global, Headlines, Population, Poverty & SDGs, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations, Trade & Investment

Food Systems

Dr Ismahane Elouafi, Executive Managing Director of CGIAR. Credit: Busani Bafana

Dr Ismahane Elouafi, Executive Managing Director of CGIAR. Credit: Busani Bafana

NAIROBI, Apr 11 2025 (IPS) – This week presented a beacon of hope for young people so that the “girl from the South and the boy, of course” could stay in the developing world, Dr Ismahane Elouafi, Executive Managing Director of CGIAR, said during a press conference on the final day of the CGIAR Science Week.

Science and innovation could whet their appetites, especially as research and innovation can change the perception that it is a drudgery-filled occupation to one where there is room for ambition – and it made business sense.

“In the face of slow productivity and rising risks, the case is clear. Investing in agricultural research is one of the smartest and most future-proof decisions that anyone can make,” she said.

Elouafi, along with the other panellists Dr Eliud Kiplimo Kireger, the Director General of KALRO and Eluid Rugut, a youth agri-champion at the Ban Ki-moon Centre, alluded to the broad value chain of agriculture, which will make it attractive to young people.

Dr Eliud Kiplimo Kireger, the Director General of KALRO. Credit: Busani Bafana/IPS

Dr Eliud Kiplimo Kireger, the Director General of KALRO. Credit: Busani Bafana/IPS

Kireger commented that people say, “Agriculture is not sexy, and so we need to make it sexy,” and encourage young people into science. Apart from encouraging young kids into science, there was a space in it for young people who don’t want to see returns on their investments in years but in months.

Rugut’s personal experience backs the claim up; he told the press conference that he first had to convince his father to give him a little land – and this wasn’t an easy task. Rugut, who represents both the youth and a smallholder, said it was only once his father saw the benefits of the new technologies that he was prepared to give his son the benefit of the doubt.

“It was very hard to convince my dad to give us land, but over time, these technologies that I was trying to bring to the farm – like drip irrigation, water pumps and drought-tolerant seeds,” Rugut said, but in the end, “I was able to convince him. Also, my mom was able to convince him.”

Kireger said the week-long conference had shown the power of collaboration, especially because research was expensive and the need was great. However, digitisation had meant that a lot of the research was no longer stuck in the labs and was now in the hands of farmers.

and Eluid Rugut, a youth agri-champion at the Ban Ki-Moon Centre. Credit: Busani Bafana/IPS

Eluid Rugut, a youth agri-champion at the Ban Ki-Moon Centre. Credit: Busani Bafana/IPS

He encouraged farmers (and the journalists at the conference) to take a look at the Google Play store, where there are KALRO apps.

“So, if you go to Google Play Store, you will find many KALRO apps which you can download onto your phone. So, if you’re a coffee farmer, for example, you can download a guide on your phone.”

This digitisation is key to scaling research and making it accessible.

Elouafi, too, said investment in agribusiness was crucial to transforming the sector There was a need for public-private partnerships so farmers were no longer only involved in production but down the value chain too.

“So strategic investment in agricultural research isn’t just necessary; it is economically smart. We have seen a USD 10 return on every dollar spent on research and development in the agriculture sector.”

She provided several examples. Participating in the value chain could transform USD 300 of wheat into USD 3000 through pasta production. Likewise with quinoa, millet and sorghum, which cost USD 4 in the market, with production, can fetch USD 50 to USD 100 per kilogram in the market.

This opportunity is where policies and subsidies come in, to put this potential into the hands of the farmers. “This is a gap we need to bridge,” Elouafi said.

Elouafi reported significant progress this week, particularly in addressing food insecurity. The achievements included the launch of the CGIAR research portfolio, the International Potato Centre (CIP) and KALRO biotech agreement, the IWMI water security strategy for East Africa, and the publication of CGIAR’s flagship report, Insight to Impact: A decision-maker’s guide to navigating food system science.

“Science week  has demonstrated the strength of partnerships. How together we can generate powerful tools, innovation, technologies, knowledge, institutions, policies – all of it – to deliver real-world impact for the communities that we serve.

“In the era of fake news and misinformation, our work, our impact, our partnership, and our commitment to the communities we serve are real, and our impact is real, and we need to have a much louder voice. We cannot let it up because the gap will be filled by misinformation.”

IPS UN Bureau Report,