[ACCI-CAVIE] The IMF forecasts 4.5% growth for sub-Saharan Africa in 2026, but El Niño could reduce this by 0.5 percentage points and increase inflation by 2.6 points in 2027, according to Reuters. Beyond the alert, the question is whether agricultural investments are genuinely designed to absorb this kind of shock.
A distant shock, very real effects
El Niño is born in the Pacific, but its consequences spread all the way to Africa. When rain is scarce or arrives at the wrong time, harvests decline. Less local production means less supply on markets, and therefore higher food prices. Agrifood companies see their costs rise. Households devote a larger share of their income to food and cut back on other purchases.
The disruption then becomes commercial, social, and then budgetary. And the timing complicates everything: interest payments on debt already absorb a significant share of the region’s public revenues. An unexpected rise in food or social spending would therefore occur when budgets have little room for manoeuvre. Net food-importing countries are the most exposed. Commodity exporters are not necessarily protected: strong export performance does not automatically offset agricultural losses.
Agricultural investment must be conditioned on resilience
To reduce this vulnerability, agricultural investment is essential. But not all investment is equal. A project that increases production without strengthening the capacity to cope with climate shocks can create a false sense of security. Irrigation, storage, crop and supplier diversification, improved logistics: these choices determine whether a country absorbs a shock or suffers it. Timing also matters. An investment that takes ten years to produce its effects does not protect against an El Niño episode expected in 2027. The question is therefore not only how much capital will be mobilized. It is whether projects genuinely integrate a logic of climate resilience and reduction of critical dependencies.
For public and private decision-makers alike, the first difficulty is not the absence of information, but its dispersion. Climate, agricultural, commercial and financial data exist, but they are scattered across meteorological agencies, ministries, statistical institutes, logistics operators and financial institutions. A drought forecast has operational value only if it is cross-referenced with harvest calendars, stock levels, wholesale prices, import volumes and the cash position of the actors concerned. This is precisely where strategic monitoring and economic intelligence add value. CAVIE supports decision-makers in the verified collection, cross-checking and interpretation of these signals, in order to turn them into actionable recommendations on sensitive products, critical suppliers and thresholds that trigger a decision to stockpile, diversify or hedge financially.
Acting before the break
El Niño reminds us that a risk can form far from decision-making centres while directly affecting costs, markets and public finances. For businesses and African states alike, the challenge is therefore not only to know whether the phenomenon will occur with the feared intensity. It is to determine now which activities would be most exposed, which agricultural investments would genuinely strengthen resilience, and which information would make it possible to act in time. In an uncertain environment, anticipation does not eliminate risk. It can prevent a foreseeable disruption from becoming a crisis that is simply endured.
The Editorial Staff