Food sovereignty is increasingly invoked as a response to external shocks, whether health crises, geopolitical tensions, or the volatility of global markets. The idea of producing the majority of what is consumed locally is reassuring from a strategic and political standpoint. However, this ambition quickly encounters economic constraints related to production costs, productivity, and natural conditions.

In many African countries, the unit cost of certain staple foods remains higher than that of imported products. According to FAO data, the average rice yield in sub-Saharan Africa is around 2 tons per hectare, compared to over 4 tons in Asia. This productivity gap, based on FAO regional statistics, translates into higher local prices once the costs of irrigation, inputs, storage, and transportation are factored in. Under these conditions, completely replacing imports with domestic production can increase food costs for urban households.

Budgetary choices are also crucial. Supporting local production often involves input subsidies, guaranteed prices, or substantial public investment in hydro-agricultural infrastructure (irrigation, dams, distribution networks). However, these policies come at a significant cost. In several West African countries, public agricultural spending represents less than 5% of the total budget, well below the 10% target set by the Maputo Declaration and adopted by the Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP). Increasing this effort requires either reducing other expenditures or accepting larger deficits.

The question of long-term competitiveness remains crucial. A food sovereignty strategy that excessively protects producers can stifle innovation and delay productivity gains. Conversely, complete openness to imports exposes economies to international price shocks, as demonstrated by the surge in grain prices in 2022, linked to geopolitical tensions and global logistical disruptions, with increases exceeding 30% in some markets. External dependence then becomes a source of macroeconomic and social instability.

Food sovereignty thus appears less as an absolute objective than as a balance to be achieved. It implies targeting sectors where comparative advantages can be strengthened, investing in productivity, and securing strategic reserves without seeking complete self-sufficiency. From this perspective, food sovereignty is not merely a political stance but a complex economic choice that combines efficiency, costs, fiscal sustainability, and resilience to shocks.