Three bets African leaders must make to deliver for farmers

________________

OPINION

By Aggie Asiimwe Konde

When elections end, expectations begin, and they begin fast. Life does not pause. School fees are still due, food prices still bite, and health bills still come knocking. So, the day after a winner takes charge, citizens begin asking a quiet but urgent question: What actually changes in our lives?

Across Africa, that question is hanging in the air after recent election cycles and political transitions in Tanzania, Malawi, and Ghana, with Uganda and others heading there soon. The timing is awkward in the way real life often is. Public finances are tightening just as global partnerships are shifting. And young people are watching closely, not because they love politics, but because politics keeps promising to fix what still feels broken.

At the same time, agriculture has never been more visible on the global stage. Climate summits, food systems dialogues, and continental declarations repeat the same message: agriculture is central to food security, jobs, and resilience. Yet for many farmers and young people, those words still feel distant.

To see the gap clearly, start with Atim.

Atim farms three acres with her husband and two teenage children. For her, agriculture is not a sector. It is breakfast, school fees, and whether the family can buy medicine without borrowing. It is dignity, plain and simple.

Atim has heard the speeches, but she is not farming communiqués. She is farming soil whose acidity crept in over the years. She is farming in seasons where rain falls too hard, or not at all. And she is farming in the era of the African Continental Free Trade Area yet markets still feel like a gamble when you lack storage, transport, information, and bargaining power.

So, Atim’s question is not whether agriculture matters, but what actually changes for her. That question is where agricultural transformation either happens or stalls.

Too often, the problem is not that farmers are not trying. It is that decisions shaping agriculture do not pull in the same direction, leaving farmers to absorb the cost of that disintegration.

If agriculture is truly the foundation of food, jobs, climate resilience, and political stability, then it must be governed as an integrated national function, where strategy informs structure and budget allocation.

For governments emerging from an election season, this is the moment to make three bold bets that voters can actually feel.

The first bet is integration. Agriculture cannot sit alone in a ministry while treasury, trade, environment, health, and infrastructure make decisions that determine outcomes. Atim feels this fragmentation every season. Inputs arrive late or do not match her soil. Subsidies land like political gifts rather than smart investments. Climate pledges are announced, but when the rains fail there is no risk cover, no real protection. Markets are said to be open, yet prices are set by whoever shows up first because she cannot afford to wait.

The second bet is productivity that pays. At global meetings, agriculture is framed as a solution to emissions and resilience. For Atim, those ambitions remain abstract unless effort shows up as income. Farmers know when soils no longer hold moisture and fertiliser stops working. They live the reality of rising yields and falling profits as post-harvest losses, transport costs, and weak bargaining power swallow the gains.

Soil health is the base of climate resilience, and with consistency and good science, farmers can see real improvement within a few seasons. Productivity improves when governments hedge the transition and incentivise the private sector to offer bundled solutions farmers trust. Farming becomes a business again, not a permanent emergency.

The third bet is markets that work for small-scale farmers. Too often we say “there is a market” without addressing 40 percent post-harvest losses or guaranteeing uptake. Governments must prioritise storage, traceability, and fair competition so quality and reliability earn a premium, and farmers see gains within a single season.

After elections, leaders should be judged more by farms transitioning into businesses and rising household incomes.

Agricultural reform is, at its core, a trust exercise between votes cast and governments that reward those votes with a better quality of life. That, more than anything, is the real post-election mandate.

The writer is a social ecologist who comments on Pan-African affairs.