The National Agricultural Development Fund (NADF) has advocated the development of a new financial architecture to accelerate the transformation of Africa’s food systems and advance the implementation of the Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP).
NADF’s Executive Secretary, Mohammed Ibrahim, made the call during a Policy and State Capability Thematic Plenary at the Africa Food Systems Forum (AFSF) in Kigali, Rwanda.
In a statement, Ibrahim said the proposed financing architecture should bring together public, private and concessional funding, ensure investments reflect national development priorities and reduce risks associated with agricultural projects.
He stressed the need for African countries to move beyond traditional funding approaches and adopt structured financing mechanisms capable of attracting greater private-sector investment.
“Africa’s agricultural financing challenge is not only about the availability of capital, but also the fragmentation of existing resources and the absence of effective structures to coordinate investments,” he said.
Ibrahim said NADF was working to identify national priorities, develop investment opportunities that could attract financing and deploy public and concessional funds in ways that would leverage additional capital.
“We want to see that we are coordinating financial capital because there is sometimes a problem of capital availability, but also fragmentation of capital; that lack of a structure,” he said.
He argued that public funding should be deployed to “crowd in, not crowd out” private investment, noting that the limited availability of commercially viable agricultural projects remained a significant obstacle to attracting private capital.
The NADF executive secretary also called for improved data and accountability mechanisms to guide investment decisions and demonstrate the tangible benefits of agricultural financing, particularly for smallholder farmers.
“First of all, we are strengthening data for investment decisions. No investment decision is made without looking at the data and what it shows,” he said.
Ibrahim said the effectiveness of agricultural interventions should be determined by the changes they deliver rather than the volume of funds committed to them.
“We are pushing for a transition towards accountability for outcomes. So, what has that money changed on the ground?” he said.
He identified increased agricultural yields, improved farmer profitability, stronger participation in value chains, greater resilience and enhanced livelihoods as some of the indicators that should be used to measure success.
He further advocated independent monitoring, evaluation and learning mechanisms to determine which interventions deliver results, identify shortcomings and generate evidence to support the expansion of successful programmes.
Also speaking at the forum, Ana Loboguerrero, Director of Adaptive and Equitable Food Systems at the Gates Foundation, said philanthropic funding could serve as patient and higher-risk capital for innovative agricultural initiatives before they become attractive to commercial investors.
She explained that such funding could help generate evidence, build the capacity of public institutions and lower investment risks, thereby creating conditions for greater participation by commercial financiers.
