By: Dr James Bwala
Vice President Kashim Shettima’s visit to a wheat farm in Ethiopia’s Oromia Region represents more than a diplomatic engagement or a symbolic agricultural tour. It offers an important opportunity for Nigeria to examine how agricultural production, food systems and value-chain development can be deliberately connected to the urgent challenge of improving nutrition. The first field engagement of Day Two of the Ethiopia–Nigeria Leadership Exchange, themed “Moving the Needle on Nutrition”, reflects a timely recognition: food security cannot be measured only by the quantity of food produced but also by the quality, accessibility and nutritional value of that food.
Hosted by the President of Oromia National Regional State, H.E. Shimelis Abdissa, the Vice President and the Nigerian delegation are being exposed to an agricultural model with lessons that could support Nigeria’s own development priorities. Therefore, we should view the visit as a call for practical action. Nigeria must move beyond a narrow focus on increasing agricultural output and build an integrated food system that delivers affordable, nutritious and safe food to every citizen. A transformed agricultural value chain is one of the most effective ways to achieve this objective.
Nigeria possesses enormous agricultural potential. Its diverse climate, extensive arable land, large population and significant pool of young people provide the foundation for a productive agricultural economy. Yet this potential has not translated into adequate nutrition for all Nigerians. Many households face rising food prices, limited access to diverse diets and inadequate intake of essential nutrients. The country continues to confront multiple forms of malnutrition, including undernutrition, micronutrient deficiencies and obesity. These challenges are often most severe among children, pregnant women, low-income households and communities affected by conflict or climate-related shocks.
The problem is not simply that Nigeria produces too little food. Often, the deeper challenge lies in what the agricultural system produces, how food is processed, where it is distributed and who can afford it. A food system that prioritises calories without sufficient attention to nutrition may increase food availability while leaving millions vulnerable to poor health. This is why the focus of the Ethiopia–Nigeria Leadership Exchange is significant. “Moving the Needle on Nutrition” demands a shift from isolated interventions to coordinated strategies that link farming, processing, markets, health and social protection.
The wheat farm visit in Oromia provides a useful entry point for this discussion. Wheat is an important staple in Nigeria, widely consumed in bread, pasta, noodles and other products. However, Nigeria has historically depended heavily on wheat imports, exposing consumers and businesses to fluctuations in global prices, foreign exchange pressures and disruptions in international supply. Strengthening domestic wheat production can improve national resilience and create jobs. More importantly, it can become part of a broader nutrition strategy if production and processing are designed to support healthier food choices.
Domestic wheat production, for example, can reduce import dependence while supporting local farmers, millers, processors and transporters. It can also encourage investment in improved seeds, irrigation, storage and research. But increasing wheat production alone will not automatically improve nutrition. The value chain must be organised in a way that promotes food quality, affordability and dietary diversity. Wheat should complement, rather than displace, other nutritious crops such as legumes, vegetables, fruits, grains and animal-source foods.
This distinction is essential. Agricultural policy can unintentionally encourage excessive concentration on a few staple crops. When farmers are rewarded primarily for producing commodities with the strongest commercial demand, nutritious but less commercially organised foods may receive insufficient attention. Nigeria’s agricultural transformation must therefore pursue two objectives at the same time: raising productivity and expanding the availability of diverse, nutrient-rich foods.
Oromia’s experience may provide valuable insights into linking regional agricultural production with broader economic and social goals. A successful value chain does not end at the farm gate. It includes access to quality inputs, extension services, irrigation, mechanisation, storage, processing, transportation, finance, markets and reliable information. Weakness in any one of these areas can reduce farmers’ incomes, increase post-harvest losses and raise the price of food for consumers.
Nigeria loses a substantial amount of agricultural produce after harvest because of inadequate storage, poor roads, limited cold-chain facilities and inefficient market systems. These losses are not only economic; they are nutritional. Fruits and vegetables that spoil before reaching consumers represent lost opportunities to improve diets. Grain losses reduce supplies and increase prices. Poor handling and contamination can compromise food safety. By investing in modern storage and processing infrastructure, Nigeria can preserve food, stabilise prices and make nutritious products available for longer periods.
Processing also has a central role in nutrition. Local processing can improve shelf life, reduce waste and create more convenient food products. However, it must be guided by appropriate nutritional standards. Highly processed foods that contain excessive salt, sugar or unhealthy fats may be affordable and convenient without contributing positively to public health. Nigeria should encourage processing that retains or enhances nutritional value, including fortification where appropriate, while ensuring clear labelling and effective regulation.
The wheat value chain illustrates both the opportunities and the risks involved. Wheat flour can be fortified with essential micronutrients to help address deficiencies, particularly when fortified products are widely consumed. Yet fortification should not become a substitute for dietary diversity. Nigerians need access to balanced diets that include vegetables, legumes, whole grains, eggs, fish, meat and other nutritious foods. Public policies should support all these sectors rather than allowing one commodity to dominate the national food strategy.
A major lesson from agricultural value-chain transformation is that farmers must be treated as participants in a business system, not merely as recipients of government assistance. Smallholder farmers require predictable markets, fair prices, affordable credit, insurance and access to quality inputs. They also need stronger producer organisations that can improve bargaining power and facilitate links with processors and large buyers. When farmers earn better incomes, they are more able to invest in their farms and provide nutritious food for their own households.
The role of women must receive particular attention. Women are central to food production, processing, household nutrition and child care, yet they often face limited access to land, finance, technology and decision-making structures. Supporting women farmers and entrepreneurs can produce wide-ranging nutritional benefits. Evidence from many development settings shows that when women control more resources, household spending is more likely to support children’s food, health and education. Nigeria’s agricultural policies should therefore include targeted financing, training, land access and market opportunities for women.
Young people must also be included in the transformation. Nigeria’s large youth population is often described as a challenge, but it can become a major asset if agriculture is presented as a modern and profitable sector. Opportunities exist not only in farming but also in logistics, agricultural technology, equipment maintenance, food processing, quality control, digital marketing and data services. A modern value chain can attract young Nigerians by offering careers that combine technology, entrepreneurship and social impact.
The government has an important role in creating the conditions for this transformation. It must provide consistent policies, invest in rural infrastructure and strengthen agricultural research and extension. Farmers cannot plan effectively when policies change unpredictably or when support programmes are poorly coordinated. National and subnational institutions must work together to align production targets with nutrition priorities. Ministries responsible for agriculture, health, education, water resources, trade and finance should not operate in isolation. Nutrition is a shared responsibility that requires an integrated policy framework.
Schools and public institutions can also support agricultural and nutrition goals through strategic procurement. School feeding programmes, hospitals and other public institutions represent significant markets for farmers and food processors. If these programmes prioritise locally produced, safe and nutritious foods, they can create stable demand while improving the diets of vulnerable populations. Such an approach would connect agricultural development with human capital development.
Nutrition education is equally important. Consumers need information about balanced diets, food preparation, hygiene and the value of locally available nutritious foods. However, education alone is insufficient when healthy food is unaffordable or unavailable. It must be combined with policies that lower the cost of nutritious products, improve household incomes and protect vulnerable families during periods of inflation or crisis.
The Ethiopia–Nigeria exchange is valuable because it creates space for both countries to learn from one another. Agricultural systems cannot be copied mechanically from one country to another; they must be adapted to local conditions. Nevertheless, exchanges of this kind can reveal practical solutions, strengthen institutional cooperation and encourage leaders to view agriculture as a central part of national development. The visit to Oromia should lead to sustained partnerships in research, irrigation, seed development, extension, processing and market organisation.
For Nigeria, the most important outcome should be a clear commitment to implementation. Field visits and policy dialogues are useful only when they result in measurable action. The country needs specific targets for reducing post-harvest losses, increasing the production of nutritious foods, improving food affordability, expanding irrigation and strengthening local processing. Progress should be monitored through indicators that measure not only agricultural output but also dietary diversity, child nutrition, household food security and farmers’ incomes.
Vice President Shettima’s engagement in Oromia therefore carries a message that extends beyond wheat. It highlights the need to build a food system capable of feeding Nigerians well, not merely feeding them adequately. It demonstrates that agricultural production, economic opportunity and public health are interconnected. It also reinforces the argument that Nigeria’s agricultural future should be based on value addition, cooperation, technology and nutrition-sensitive planning.
Nigeria should seize this opportunity to move decisively from fragmented agricultural programmes to a coordinated national food-system strategy. Such a strategy must support farmers, empower women and young people, modernise infrastructure, promote diverse production, improve processing and ensure that nutritious food reaches consumers at affordable prices. The goal should not be agricultural growth for its own sake, but agricultural growth that improves the quality of life of the Nigerian people.
The wheat farm visit in Oromia can become a starting point for that ambition. By learning from Ethiopia’s regional agricultural experience and adapting relevant lessons to Nigerian realities, the country can strengthen its food systems.
James Bwala, PhD, writes from Abuja.
About The Author
