Abuja FileAgricultureAll The NewsBusinessCover StoryEconomyNews

The Untold Story of The Rotten Yams

3 Mins read

 

Time Nigeria’s investigation revealed how a desperate move to strengthen a weak economy get knocks. SAMUEL OYEJOLA writes

When the Minister of Agriculture, Chief Audu Ogbeh told the world that Africa has no excuse for not being able to feed herself, most Nigerians waved it as rhetoric of an eloquent politician.

 

The minister appears to walk the talk. On June 29, Nigeria reached a milestone by exporting 72 metric tons of yams to China, Britain and the United States.

 

Nigeria, according to the Food and Agricultural Organisation is the largest producer of Yam in the world, amounting to close to 60% of the world production. Yet this potential was untapped until few months ago.

 

Had Nigeria exported half of its yam production in 2008 alone, the country would have realized over $2billons. That the country slides into recession most Nigerians lay the blame on previous administrations’ negligence.

 

An electronic media organization (Africa Independent Television) had reported that yams exported to Britain and the United States were rejected due to its poor state upon arrival to the countries. The medium concluded that poor inter-agency collaboration resulted in the rejection.

 

While the television station had reported rotten yams, other platforms also had a field day based on the report.

 

To Audu Ogbeh, the launch of yam exportation to the world is far from mere political jamboree but a celebration of the country‘s claim to explore its potential in yam production.

 

Investigation by Time Nigeria reveled that yams exported to the United States were delivered, inspected by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the off taker claimed the products.

 

FDA exclusively revealed to Time Nigeria that within July and September 2017 Nigeria’s exports to the US had 24 rejections.

 

Further analysis revealed that four products were rejected in July. Yam was not one of the rejected products.

 

In August ten products were rejected by the FDA. Food rejected  in August were smoked fish, custard, mix, soda water carbonated, soft drinks other fruit flavoured carbonated, mint candy, hard, without nuts and fruit (without chocolate) , pharmaceutical products, miscellaneous patent medicines, snails terrestrial and other aquatic species. It must be noted that all products rejected in August were within 4th and the 31st.

 

In September the FDA rejected only pharmaceutical products and some cash crops within 1st of September and20th of same month.

 

“There have never been any report of yam rejection we exported anywhere,” Wan- Nyyikwagh Farms Nig. Ltd had told Time Nigeria in a telephone chat.

 

According to a Press release from the ministry signed by the Special Adviser to the Minister on Media and Communication, Olukayode Oyeleye, made available to Time Nigeria, the minister said that his ministry would restore the value chain in yam exportation.

“Nigeria must export” as the “country’s economy is increasing, and in ten years’ time, oil and gas is going to drop. Then we may have nothing to earn foreign exchange except we begin to diversify our export base now,” Audu Ogbeh said.

 

He vowed to push for more agricultural export to the outside world. “We’re not going to stop because this is not enough to demoralize us. We have food to export. Never mind what so-called critics are doing.”

 

That yams from Nigeria are making it to the international market is one big step in the actualization of the Ministry’s vision for the country. With resourceful native knowledge combined with strong collaboration with international organization, global best practices would be achieved in yam production.

 

Having learned from the three year ban on Nigerian beans by the European Food Safety Authority, Audu Ogbeh promised to liaise with the port authority on the provision of cooling trucks to preserve all perishable exports.

 

“We’re going to talk to the port authority on cooling vans for vegetables and fresh produce so that exporters don’t lose money and we don’t lose face. We should begin to build cold trucks that are temperature-controlled to keep the yams till the time they have to go. We should invest in special containers for their storage.”

 

“If other countries are doing it, we too can do it. We’re trying to take over the market. We’ve come to nearly 70 per cent of raw output of yams. Why can’t Nigerians in Texas, Canada, London and Germany have access to the yams?” He wondered.

 

 

   

About author
Time Nigeria is a modern and general interest Magazine with its Headquarters in Abuja. The Magazine has a remarkable difference in editorial philosophy and goals, it adheres strictly to the ethics of Journalism by using the finest ethos of the profession to promote peace among citizens; identifying and harnessing the nation’s vast resources; celebrating achievements of government agencies, individuals, groups and corporate organizations and above all, repositioning Nigeria for the needed growth and development. Time Nigeria gives emphasis to places and issues that have not been given adequate attention by others. The Magazine is national in outlook and is currently being read and patronized both in print and on our vibrant and active online platform (www.timenigeria.com).
Articles
Related posts
Abuja FileDevelopmentEconomyEnergyFinanceInside LagosOpinionPerspective

The Missing Middle of Infrastructure Finance: Why Capital Still Fails to Become Infrastructure

6 Mins read
  By Chidi Nwafor  In October 2023, a Gulf sovereign wealth fund quietly closed a $2 billion allocation to global infrastructure, earmarked in part for emerging-market energy and transport assets. The announcement drew the usual applause: another sign, commentators said, that institutional capital was finally waking up to the infrastructure opportunity in the Global South. Eighteen months later, less than a tenth of that allocation had actually left the fund’s balance sheet. Not because the mandate had changed. Not because the fund had lost appetite. According to two people familiar with the portfolio, the constraint was simpler and more uncomfortable: there were not enough investable projects to put the money into. This is not a story about a reluctant investor. It is a story about capital that wants to move, cannot find enough places willing and able to receive it in a form it can underwrite, and quietly waits instead. Multiply that fund by the hundreds of pension schemes, sovereign wealth vehicles, commercial banks and infrastructure funds now carrying dedicated allocations for emerging-market infrastructure, and a pattern emerges that rarely makes it into a headline: the world is not short of capital for infrastructure. It has capital in historic abundance, sitting adjacent to a historic infrastructure gap, unable to cross the distance between the two. The Comfortable Explanation  The explanation on offer at every major infrastructure summit is a familiar one. Global infrastructure investment needs run into the tens of trillions of dollars over the coming decade; committed capital falls well short; therefore, the problem is one of insufficient funding, and the solution is more of it: more pledges, more blended-finance facilities, more climate funds, more multilateral capital increases. It is a comfortable explanation because it assigns responsibility clearly to governments who under-fund, institutions who under-commit, and it offers a clean remedy: raise more. It is also, on close inspection, not what the evidence shows. Pension funds globally hold trillions in assets under management with explicit infrastructure allocations that remain structurally underweight, not because trustees have rejected the asset class but because deal flow meeting their risk and governance thresholds has not materialised at the pace their mandates assume. Sovereign wealth funds report the same pattern. Commercial banks with dedicated project finance desks describe pipelines that look full at the term-sheet stage and thin dramatically by financial close. Development finance institutions, whose entire purpose is to absorb risk that commercial capital will not, routinely report that their binding constraint is not capital adequacy but the volume of bankable transactions their teams can originate and structure in a given year. None of this fits the scarcity narrative. All of it fits a different one. Availability Is Not Deployability  Capital availability and capital deployability are not the same condition, and the conflation of the two is doing real damage to how the world thinks about the infrastructure gap. Availability asks whether money exists somewhere with a mandate that could, in principle, be pointed at infrastructure. Deployability asks something much narrower and much harder: whether a specific project, at a specific moment, has been engineered, structured, documented and de-risked to the point where an investment committee can approve it without exception. The first condition is met, overwhelmingly, across nearly every category of capital that matters to infrastructure. The second is met by only a small fraction of the projects competing for it. The result is a market that looks, from the outside, like a financing gap, and functions, from the inside, like a conversion problem: an abundance of capital on one side, an abundance of infrastructure need on the other, and an underbuilt set of mechanisms in between capable of turning one into the other at any meaningful scale. Where the Conversion Breaks  The break does not happen at the ends of the process. It happens in the middle, in the unglamorous sequence of work that turns a plausible concept into an instrument a fiduciary can sign. A promising transmission project needs a feasibility study rigorous enough to survive institutional scrutiny rather than optimistic enough to attract early interest. It needs offtake arrangements that hold up under real counterparty and currency risk, not the counterparty risk assumed in a base case. It needs environmental and social documentation calibrated to the standards of the institutions being asked to fund it, not the standards of the jurisdiction hosting it. It needs a legal and commercial structure that allocates risk in ways a commercial lender, not only a development financier, will accept. It needs a sponsor capable of executing what has been proposed, not merely capable of proposing it. Each of these is ordinary project finance discipline. None of it is exotic, and in mature infrastructure markets it happens as a matter of course, absorbed into systems built over decades: specialist advisers, standard-form contracts, established procurement norms, deep pools of transaction expertise. What is missing in the markets where the infrastructure gap is largest is not the standard itself but the machinery that meets it. Projects arrive at investment committees with ambition intact and preparation incomplete, and that gap is treated, again and again, as an individual project’s failure rather than what it actually is: a structural absence in the systems responsible for producing investable transactions at scale. The Missing Middle  This is the Missing Middle of Infrastructure Finance: the institutional architecture that sits between capital that wants to move and infrastructure that needs building, and whose incompleteness explains far more of the global infrastructure gap than any shortfall in committed funds. It consists of project preparation facilities able to fund feasibility and structuring work before commercial viability has been proven. Transaction advisers capable of building deals that satisfy development mandates and commercial return thresholds at once, rather than treating the two as separate constituencies to be managed sequentially. Risk-sharing and guarantee instruments that convert political, regulatory and currency risk into something a commercial balance sheet can underwrite. Aggregation platforms that bundle smaller, individually sub-scale projects into portfolios large enough to justify institutional transaction costs. Standardised documentation that reduces the bespoke legal cost of every new deal. And coordination across ministries, regulators and financiers robust enough that a technically sound project does not die in bureaucratic sequencing after the money has already been found. None of these are new ideas in isolation. What is missing is their assembly into a coherent system, deliberately funded and institutionally accountable, rather than scattered across donor-funded pilots that end when the grant does. The African Dimension  Africa makes this dynamic unusually visible, and consequently offers an unusually clear opportunity to correct it. The continent’s infrastructure financing need, by any measure, is vast. Less understood is that the shortfall is disproportionately one of preparation rather than capital. Nigerian gas-to-power, off-grid solar and mini-grid developers have each demonstrated that individual projects can clear the bankability bar; what has not emerged is systemic pipeline scale, a steady stream of comparably prepared projects large enough to absorb the capital already circling the sector. The pattern repeats, with local variation, from grid infrastructure in East Africa to transport corridors in West Africa. Interested capital is rarely the scarce input. Investment-ready projects are. The Global Comparison  Mature markets solved this problem gradually and mostly invisibly, through decades of institution-building that predates the current infrastructure conversation: specialist project finance units inside banks, standardised PPP frameworks, established regulatory playbooks, deep benches of transaction lawyers and engineers who move between deals rather than between one-off assignments. Emerging and frontier markets are not being asked to meet a lower standard. They are being asked to meet the same standard without having built the same machinery, and then being told, when deals fail to close, that the problem is insufficient funding….
Cover StoryNewsSports

Union Bank, AIICO Multishield, Checkers Custard, Others Back 5th Cycling Lagos

2 Mins read
Union Bank of Nigeria Plc, AIICO Multishield, Checkers Custard and other corporate organisations have thrown their weight behind the 5th Cycling Lagos,…
Abuja FileAll The NewsCover StoryEducationEntrepreneurshipFeaturesNews

2026/2027 Admission Begins @ AAT University: Where Modern Facilities, Academic Excellence and Global Citizenship Meet

7 Mins read
Why Abdulrasaq Abubakar Toyin University is emerging as a compelling destination for the next generation of Nigerian undergraduates By Abdulrahman Aliagan For…
Stay on the loop!

Subscribe to our latest news.

Leave a Reply

WP2Social Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com