For far too long, Africa has been paying a heavy price for its heavy reliance on imported fertilizers. The recent closure of the Strait of Hormuz, which sent fertilizer prices skyrocketing, serves as a stark reminder that it is time to shuffle the cards and find a durable solution to protect African farmers from the ups and downs of the world’s geopolitical tensions. The upcoming Africa Forward Summit, which aims to reboot relations between France and Africa on equal footing, could be an opportunity to change the game.  

A glimpse of these price shocks is a starting point to a forward-looking Africa. In 2022 when the Russia-Ukraine war broke out, the Black sea — a vital artery for the global fertilizer trade — was affected, impacting 28% of the world’s nitrogen, potassium and phosphate fertilizers originating from those two countries. The impact in Africa was swift. There was nearly a 25% dip in fertilizer application, even though Africa’s goal — as part of its ambitious agricultural plans for 2024 — was precisely to increase  fertilizer use from 18 kg/ha to 50 kg/ha by 2034.  

Barely two years after this situation began, a major crisis in the Strait of Hormuz — through which 30% of global fertilizer exports pass — has driven up fertilizer prices, with urea now trading between $800 and $900 per ton, up from $493 earlier this year. While efforts such as government subsidies on fuel and fertilizer are introduced to manage this surge, they are merely reactive measures. Price spikes which have reached as high as 30 to –45 percent in many parts of Africa, remain a driving factor and continue to have long-term impacts on agricultural production and, ultimately, on yields. In its March 2026 analysis, AGRA forecasts a decline in yields of up to 12 to 20 percent in some of the continent’s major economies in East and West Africa.  

These two developments, which are external to Africa’s agriculture sector, raise a fundamental question regarding its ability to thrive: can the continent avoid these undesirable effects with proactive measures?  It is not a simple question and certainly does not elicit a simple answer.  

I propose a few options: 

Coming at just the right time, the “Africa Forward” summit highlights partnerships as a key driver of economic growth. At a time when relations  with many African countries, particularly in the Sahel, are strained, France, as co-organizer, must demonstrate to Africa that it is committed to a new form of partnership, serving as a catalyst for development — above all for agriculture, the bedrock of the continent’s development.  

To achieve this, the Official Development Assistance (ODA) provided by France to Africa must increase and remain largely concessional, in the form of grants and debt relief, rather than new debt. French Official Development Assistance (ODA) to Africa has remained stagnant for more than twenty years. In constant dollars, it has actually decreased. Meanwhile, African countries’ debt to France has risen sharply since 2019, reaching 19 billion euros after hovering around 13 billion euros in the 2010’s. This sharp rise is the result of policy decisions which allowed France to receive $3.8 billion in 2025 in debt repayments from African countries. This amount is equivalent to more than 80% of what France spends on international cooperation on the African continent.  

Asking to correct these imbalances is not a matter of charity, but a requirement of justice. According to Oxfam’s report, “Takers not Makers”, between 1825 and 1947, France extracted the equivalent of 313 trillion euros from its African colonies (in 2023 value). If the organizers of the Africa Forward summit claim to want to “forge a new partnership built on equal ground” they must first acknowledge the mistakes of the past and correct them. 

Africa must also play a big role in this equation, which means that its leaders must re-evaluate their countries’ dependence on imports in order to prepare to source essential agricultural inputs, such as fertilizers, locally by leveraging existing production capacity in the subregion. Production value of fertilizer is projected to grow by 53% to about $83 billion across Africa by 2031. With this scale and an effective trade policy, Africa has the potential to reduce its imports of essential fertilizers such as nitrogen, phosphates and potassium. A key driver would be to rollout and implement the African Continental Free Trade Area, which would ensure the smooth flow of fertilizer across borders, with little to no trade barriers. 

Moreover, the continent cannot make progress in reducing fertilizer imports through industrialisation without stable electricity. Given that the cost of electricity is so low in most of industrial regions of Africa — averaging $0.09 per kWh, compared with $0.71 and $0.15 kWh in Asia and Latin America respectively, one would logically expect African industries to develop in promising economic sectors such as agriculture. But market fragmentation remains. Africa must therefore fast-track the implementation of the single Africa electricity market to address the regional electricity deficit; tackle obstacles related to cross-border infrastructure to reduce transaction costs; and redouble efforts to enable the manufacturing sector to benefit from cheaper electricity. The cross-border trade in electricity in Africa averages 5% only and fails to meet residential and industrial demand. If energy systems fail to achieve the ultimate goal of the energy pooling strategy, the current political rhetoric in favor of industrialization will remain confined to the corridors of the African Union, while production will be undermined by crude oil shocks.  

Agroecology does offer strong potential against this fertilizer import dependency syndrome. At present, many African countries are developing and revising their national agri-food system investment plans to align with the new ten-year strategy and action plan on agri-food systems in Africa. These investments must prioritize agroecology, a call I have made to EU-Africa Agriculture Ministers in my previous thoughts, both as an instrument of climate adaptation but also primary tool against heavy dependence on fertilizer imports.   

Ultimately, siloed and reactive solutions would not stand the test of time. They are merely short-term fixes, whereas returning to the fundamentals of our industrial base holds great potential for addressing the volatility of raw material prices, such as those of fertilizers. Now is the time to act.