The IMF Model and Nigeria’s Agricultural Decline, by Abubakar Tahir, mni
Nigeria’s economy has long been influenced by external prescriptions
from international financial institutions, especially the International
Monetary Fund (IMF). While these policies are often promoted as solutions for modernisation and fiscal stability, they have had damaging effects on Nigeria’s agricultural sector. This essay argues that the IMF’s economic model reversed agricultural progress and contributed to the closure of agro-allied industries that had thrived under protectionist
policies (Shafiu & Salleh, 2025).
Agricultural Progress Before IMF Prescriptions
Under President Muhammadu Buhari, Nigeria pursued protectionist
measures to stimulate local production. The Anchor Borrowers Programme (ABP), launched in 2015, provided loans and support to smallholder farmers, boosting productivity and food security (Central Bank of Nigeria, 2015). Studies show that the ABP significantly increased
agricultural output and created jobs for millions of Nigerians (Makinde,
Abosede, Omankhanlen, & Isibor, 2024). Restrictions on foreign exchange for food imports also encouraged demand for locally produced goods, strengthening agro-allied industries (Attamah, Bosompem, & Abubakari, 2023).1
IMF’s Economic Model and Its Prescriptions
The IMF’s model emphasises liberalisation, subsidy removal, and
currency devaluation. While these measures aim to align economies with
global markets, they undermined Nigeria’s agricultural resilience:
a. Subsidy Removal: Fuel subsidy removal increased production costs, making local goods less competitive (International Monetary Fund, 2023).
b. Currency Liberalisation: Exchange rate unification led to sharp depreciation of the naira, raising the cost of imported inputs like fertilizers and machinery (World Bank, 2024).
c. Trade Liberalization: Reduced restrictions on imports flooded the
market with foreign agricultural products, undercutting local producers (Shafiu & Salleh, 2025).
Consequences for Agro-Allied Industries
The immediate effect of IMF-inspired reforms was the reversal of gains
made in agriculture. Agro-allied industries that had begun to flourish under
Buhari’s policies faced severe challenges:
a. Rising production costs forced many factories to shut down.
b. Farmers abandoned cultivation due to unaffordable inputs.
c. Nigeria’s food security weakened as reliance on imports grew (Thomas & Turk, 2023).
The Broader Impact on Citizens
Beyond agriculture, these policies worsened poverty and inequality. Food
inflation rose sharply, with Nigeria ranked as the fifth country most
affected globally (World Bank, 2024). Millions slipped into food insecurity, 2
wages stagnated, and ordinary Nigerians bore the brunt of reforms that
prioritised fiscal savings and external approval over welfare (International
Monetary Fund, 2023).
Ways Farmers Could Develop Resilience and Rebound
1. Urban and Household Farming
Households can practice urban farming, using backyards, rooftops, or
small plots to grow vegetables and staples. This reduces dependence on
expensive market food and provides a buffer during shortages.
2. Crop Diversification and Cash Crops
Farmers relying on staples like sorghum often suffer when consumers
shift to subsidised rice, causing sorghum prices to collapse. Diversifying into cash crops such as sesame, ginger, cocoa, or hibiscus can provide export opportunities and better margins (Makinde et al., 2024).
3. Local Value Addition
Processing crops into products like garri, flour, or dried ginger increases shelf life and profitability. Value addition helps farmers earn more even when staple prices are suppressed.
4. Cooperative Input Sharing
Input-sharing cooperatives can reduce costs for fertilizers, seeds, and machinery, helping smallholder farmers remain active despite shocks.
5. Advocacy and Policy Engagement
Farmers and citizens should continue to push for supportive policies.
Protectionist measures under Buhari helped Nigeria withstand the 3 COVID-19 pandemic when global markets shut down (Attamah et al., 2023). Similar policies could revive farmer confidence and protect food security.
Conclusion
Farming apathy in Nigeria is rooted in poor incentives, high production costs, and unfair competition from subsidised imports. While large-scale farmers struggle, resilience can be rebuilt through diversification into cash crops, local value addition, and cooperative input sharing. Households can mitigate food scarcity through urban farming, while advocacy remains essential to push government toward policies that protect local agriculture.
The lesson from the COVID-19 era is clear: protectionist policies and
farmer resilience are vital for food security in times of global crisis.
