Africa Has Normalized Hunger, Says LSE Scholar
•42 of 54 nations now net food importers
•Says weak policies, poor funding, insecurity undermining agricultural growth
Folalumi Alaran in Abuja
A leading scholar at the London School of Economics (LSE), Prof. David Luke, has warned that Africa has “normalised hunger,” despite being home to 60 per cent of the world’s arable land and enough resources to feed itself.
Speaking at the presentation of his new book, “How Africa Eats: Trade, Food Security and Climate Risks”, held yesterday in Abuja, he said over 300 million Africans still face food insecurity because the continent has failed to align its agricultural, trade, and climate policies.
He said, “We have taken it for granted that millions of Africans go to bed hungry, that situation has become normalised, and that is deeply abnormal. Africa is the only continent with such alarming numbers of hungry people, yet we do not see the urgency that this crisis deserves.”
Luke explained that 42 of 54 African countries — including Nigeria — are net food importers, spending billions annually to import staples such as rice, wheat, poultry, and fish, even as many possess vast arable land and labour resources.
He attributed the crisis to three interconnected factors — weak agricultural funding, unbalanced trade structures, and growing climate pressures — noting that these have prevented African countries from reaching their production potential.
“Our economies are not growing fast enough because we continue to export raw commodities without adding value, we earn foreign exchange from crude exports and spend it importing food — a pattern that has persisted for decades,” he added.
Luke further noted that while developed nations such as the United States, China, and the European Union collectively spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually subsidising agriculture, African countries have failed to take advantage of the flexibilities provided under World Trade Organisation (WTO) rules.
“The U.S. spends about $190 billion annually on agricultural subsidies; the EU spends around $150 billion, and China about $90 billion. Meanwhile, the median GDP of an African country is only $16 billion. Our farmers simply cannot compete,” he said.
According to him, only two or three African countries have met the Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP) commitment to allocate at least 10 per cent of their national budgets to agriculture. Most spend far less, leaving farmers without irrigation, extension services, or modern storage facilities.
He also criticised Africa’s banking system for failing to channel private investment into the sector.
“Only about eight per cent of foreign direct investment into Africa goes to agriculture,” he noted, describing the sector as “choked by lack of financing.”
On regional trade, he said the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) could boost agricultural trade if governments remove non-tariff barriers such as poor infrastructure, border delays, and customs bottlenecks.
He explained that because agricultural tariffs within existing regional blocs such as ECOWAS and SADC are already low, the AfCFTA’s most meaningful impact would come from reducing cross-border bureaucracy and improving logistics.
“You don’t want customs delays when dealing with perishable products, adding that agricultural goods like fish, fruits, and vegetables need to move quickly. Improving cross-border systems would make the AfCFTA more impactful for African farmers.”
Responding to the presentation, conflict transformation strategist and former Director at the Institute for Peace and Conflict Resolution (IPCR), Dr. Dayo Kusa, said insecurity remains the single biggest obstacle to food production in West Africa.
“There is hardly a country in West Africa that is not bedevilled by insecurity, warning that without addressing that, we cannot move forward with any serious discussion on agricultural subsidies or production. Farmers cannot farm in fear.”
She also identified corruption and weak institutional coordination as long-standing challenges that must be addressed before any reform can take root.
Also speaking, an economics professor at the University of Ibadan, Prof. Emmanuel Olawale Ogunkola, stressed that government intervention in agriculture should not be seen as an option but a necessity.
“Agriculture has too many social and economic linkages to be left to market forces. Government must coordinate from production to consumption — from clearing land to providing chemicals, storage, and market access. We cannot keep importing what we can produce,” he added.
He recalled that Nigeria once pursued policies such as the cassava flour substitution initiative, aimed at reducing wheat imports, but lamented that “such projects often lose continuity and coordination among multiple agencies.”
President of the Organisation of Women in International Trade (OWIT) Nigeria, Dr. Blessing Irabor-Oza, commended the book’s focus on connecting trade, climate, and food security but urged stronger gender inclusion in agricultural policy and trade frameworks.
“Women are at the heart of African agriculture — as producers, processors, and traders, yet they remain at the margins of policy decisions. We must integrate gender into every aspect of food systems, trade, and climate action,” she added.
She highlighted the persistent logistical and trade connectivity challenges that make it difficult for African women entrepreneurs to export agricultural goods across the continent. “If I want to export food from Nigeria to Kenya, it must first go through Europe before coming back to Africa, that’s a problem AfCFTA must fix. We need our own shipping and logistics networks that keep African trade within Africa.”
