AFRICA’S EVIDENCE SHOWS A DIFFERENT FUTURE FOR FOOD AND FARMING
| This major new briefing paper and accompanying evidence compendium challenge one of the most entrenched assumptions in global agriculture: that synthetic pesticides are essential to food security. Grounded in African farming realities, this database of publications decisively demonstrates that this assumption no longer holds. Drawing on more than 80 peer-reviewed, field-based studies conducted across Africa over the past 15 years, these publications constitute the most comprehensive synthesis to date of real-world evidence on pest management beyond synthetic pesticides. Rather than relying on theory or isolated pilot projects, they document outcomes achieved under genuine farming conditions across diverse agroecological contexts. The evidence shows that biological and agroecological approaches are already delivering effective pest control, stable yields, and significant ecological and livelihood benefits—often matching or outperforming chemical-based regimes. Published by the African Centre for Biodiversity (ACB), Beyond pesticides: Why system-level alternatives work in Africa – and why they are not scaling and the Compendium of sustainable pest management alternatives for Africa demonstrate that Africa is not facing a shortage of viable solutions. Instead, the central finding is a systemic failure to recognise, support, and scale approaches that are already proven to work. The strongest and most consistent evidence comes from system-level strategies—such as classical biological control, diversified cropping systems, and integrated pest management—that restore ecological function, reduce production risks, and deliver multiple co-benefits for farmers and landscapes. Yet despite this robust and growing body of evidence, pesticide use continues to expand, driven by policies, research priorities, and regulatory frameworks that entrench and privilege chemical inputs while marginalising ecological solutions. Crucially, the publications move the debate beyond the familiar question of whether alternatives to pesticides are effective. Instead, they confront a more difficult and consequential issue: why proven approaches remain marginal despite working. The analysis shows that continued pesticide dependence is not a technical inevitability, nor a failure of farmers to adopt better practices. It is the result of institutional lock-in, whereby input-driven extension models, misaligned research incentives, and regulatory systems undervalue ecological public goods while externalising social and environmental costs. Across Africa, farmers are demonstrating that agroecological systems can equal or outperform chemical-dependent farming while delivering wider social and ecological benefits. In Kenya, push-pull systems have increased maize yields while sharply reducing striga, stem borer and fall armyworm damage; in Ethiopia and Uganda, composting, crop rotation, mixed cropping, and biological pest control have strengthened soils, reduced pest pressure, and lowered input costs; and in Malawi, Tanzania, and Zambia, diversification through intercropping, mulching, and local seed use has improved resilience to drought and pests while reducing reliance on commercial agrochemicals. In South Africa, the evidence shows that ecological pest management and diversified farming can sustain production while protecting biodiversity, water, soil life, and farmworker health. At a moment of accelerating biodiversity loss, pollinator decline, climate instability, and rising pressure on farmer livelihoods, the implications are profound. Africa’s food systems depend on healthy soils, functioning ecosystems, and biological diversity—conditions that pesticide-dependent agriculture steadily erodes. The evidence presented makes clear that transitioning away from pesticides is neither an abstract sustainability ambition nor a distant future goal. It is a present-day necessity for safeguarding food sovereignty, ecological resilience, and the well-being of current and future generations in Africa and globally. “The evidence from Africa exposes a fundamental misconception in global agriculture,” explains ACB director Mariam Mayet. “Productive and resilient food systems do not require escalating chemical use. They require ecological integrity, functional biodiversity, and policies that support farmers to work with nature rather than against it. Moving beyond pesticide-dependent farming is no longer optional. It is essential for protecting pollinators, ecosystems, and the future of food systems in Africa and worldwide.” The briefing and compendium call for a decisive shift in public policy, research investment, and regulatory frameworks—away from input substitution and toward system-based, agroecological approaches recognised and supported as public goods. The future of farming, the publication concludes, will be shaped not by more powerful chemicals, but by whether societies choose to act on the evidence already before them. |
Read how Roundup kills everything
Here is another organisation doing important work on Unpoisoning our environment
Follow this organisation for policy work on Agrotoxins
Leave a comment
