Looking at African agritech, it’s easy to see a multibillion-dollar sector. In 2023 alone, African agritech startups raised an estimated $1 billion in venture funding, according to reports. Investors are betting big on the promise of transforming African agriculture through technology. With a continent that relies on agriculture for over 23% of its GDP, the stakes are high.
But as I observe the sector’s growth, particularly its reliance on foreign capital, I find myself asking difficult questions: Is this surge in agritech truly benefitting Africa? More importantly, does agritech in Africa genuinely promote sustainability, or is it pushing the continent toward an industrial farming model that could have long-term consequences?
Source: Pexel
These are not comfortable questions to raise, especially when many of the major players in African agritech are backed by “well-meaning” Western investors. However, it’s necessary to—beyond just a glance— take a closer look at the direction this sector is heading and whether it aligns with the needs of Africa’s farmers, particularly smallholders, who make up the majority of the agricultural workforce
Foreign Dominance in African Agritech: Help or Hindrance?
Let’s start by acknowledging the obvious: Africa’s agritech sector has attracted significant interest from foreign investors. Companies like Thrive Agric, FarmCrowdy, and Hello Tractor have secured substantial funding from venture capitalists based in the U.S and Europe. TechCabal reported that African agrifood tech alone raised $1.1 billion alone in 5 years, highlighting a significant influx of capital into the sector.
While I can’t argue that this capital hasn’t helped jumpstart the sector—it absolutely has—what concerns me is the influence this money brings with it.
Download the Ebook now
Who decides what African agritech should focus on? More often than not, the priorities of foreign investors may take precedence over the actual needs of African farmers. These investors expect quick returns and push for technologies that may increase yields or streamline logistics, but do they solve the most pressing problems of smallholder farmers, like soil degradation, access to inputs, and climate resilience?
For example, an innovation that links farmers to retailers is impressive but mostly benefits farmers who already have access to mobile technology and infrastructure. The majority of farmers in rural areas may find it out of reach.
This raises a bigger question. If foreign investors are shaping the future of African agritech, how much control do African farmers and local stakeholders really have over their agricultural future? Is this yet another case of Africa becoming dependent on external forces to “save” its agriculture?
Source: Pexel
Sustainability or Industrial Farming?
The second question I’ve been grappling with is whether agritech’s focus on sustainability is genuine–or simply another buzzword. It’s common to hear agritech startups tout the benefits of precision farming, smart irrigation, and drones to optimise inputs and reduce waste. However, in my view, many of these technologies seem to be geared toward large-scale industrial agriculture rather than the agroecological practices that would truly benefit smallholder farmers and promote long-term environmental sustainability.
For example, precision farming, which relies on high-tech sensors and data analytics, promises to reduce the need for fertilisers and pesticides. But in practice, these systems are often only accessible to large commercial farms. Smallholder farmers, who are already struggling with limited resources, can’t afford the upfront cost of such technology. In fact, only a fraction of African farmers use precision farming technology. This indicates a significant gap in accessibility, which should not be surprising when you consider the average income of rural farmers as against the upfront cost of agritech systems (including maintenance costs if you like).
This disconnect between agritech’s promises and the reality on ground raises further questions. While these technologies might work in Europe or the U.S., they don’t necessarily align with Africa’s need for sustainable, climate-resilient farming practices. Africa’s agricultural challenges—such as soil erosion, deforestation, and declining biodiversity—require solutions that go beyond technology for technology’s sake. Agroecology, crop diversification, and organic farming are some of the low-tech solutions that may be more sustainable in the long run.
The Impact on Smallholder Farmers
Now here comes the real dilemma: the majority of African farmers are smallholders, yet many agritech solutions seem designed for commercial farmers. I’ve seen this firsthand, where startups create platforms and tools that, while innovative, don’t address the needs of farmers who grow the bulk of Africa’s food. Many smallholders are left out of the agritech revolution simply because they don’t have the capital, education, or infrastructure to participate.
Take, for instance, a platform that connects farmers to market price via SMS, a simple yet effective solution for those without smartphones. But despite being relatively low-tech, it requires farmers to have access to a mobile phone and network courage, which isn’t guaranteed in many rural areas. This leaves me wondering: Is agritech really empowering Africa’s farmers, or is it creating a new digital divide that excludes those who need the most help?
Source: Pexel
There’s also the risk that Africa’s agritech future could be shaped by the same industrial farming practices that have caused environmental degradation in the West. If the focus is on maximising yields through chemical inputs and monoculture, rather than promoting diverse, sustainable farming practices, the long-term impact on Africa’s environment could be disastrous. Agritech shouldn’t just be about increasing productivity; it should also be about building resilience and sustainability in Africa’s agricultural systems.
A Path Forward
So where does that leave us? I’m not saying that agritech has no role to play in Africa’s agricultural future—far from it. The innovations we’re seeing in the sector are exciting and full of potential. But if Africa’s agritech sector is going to be truly transformative, it needs to be led by local innovation, not just imported technology. We need more African-owned agritech startups that understand the local context and are committed to building solutions that work for smallholder farmers.
But I guess, we have enough African-owned innovation, right? There are promising examples already emerging. Take Hello Tractor, often called the “Uber for tractors.” It provides tractor-sharing services to smallholder farmers, making mechanisation accessible to those who would never be able to afford their own tractors. With this, there’s no cause for alarm regarding neocolonialism – an agenda some may already harbour. There’s no over-reliance on foreign-based agritech solutions, so there’s little risk of losing local control.
But what if foreign investors pull out? Can Africa sustain its startups with local investment? Can they depend on grants—most of which are foreign, still? These are questions we ought to address moving forward.
On the Flip Side
I hesitate to use the term “neocolonialism” because it carries heavy historical and political connotations. But even if we entertain the idea that foreign players are seeking to gain a foothold in Africa’s agriculture through investment, who should bare the blame? Foreign investors are not necessarily driven by selflessness. They are, first and foremost, motivated by profit—and that isn’t inherently a bad thing. After all, the purpose of investment is to generate returns. Africa’s agricultural sector, with its massive potential, remains underserved, making it an attractive target.
Perhaps this points to where Africa has fallen short as a continent. The lack of preparation and support for their smallholder farmers has left them vulnerable. It has made them unable to capitalise on opportunities within the agritech space. Had Africa recognised their importance earlier, they might have been able to improve their livelihoods. They could have integrated them more effectively into the innovation ecosystem. Now that outsiders have identified the goldmine within Africa’s agricultural landscape, finger-pointing isn’t productive. Instead, it forces us to reflect on our missed opportunities and the consequences of our inaction.
Conclusion
At the end of the day, the future of agritech in Africa will depend on who controls the narrative and sets the priorities. If it’s dominated by foreign investors with a focus on profit and industrial farming, we risk losing sight of the real goal: building a sustainable, resilient agricultural sector that empowers smallholder farmers. But if African entrepreneurs and local stakeholders can take the lead, there’s an opportunity to create a future where agritech truly benefits the continent.
And so, I leave you with this question: Is agritech in Africa a tool for empowerment, or are we witnessing a new form of exploitation, wrapped in the language of innovation and sustainability? The answer, I believe, is still up for debate.
