In January 2024, Nigeria quietly joined the league of countries that have officially commercialised genetically modified (GM) crops, approving four varieties of “TELA” maize genetically engineered to withstand drought and resist insect pests.
Proponents hailed it as a breakthrough for food security in Africa’s most populous nation, but beneath the applause lies a storm of mistrust and uncomfortable questions: will GMOs save Nigerians from hunger, or entrench new forms of dependency that echo colonial extraction?
In context, genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are organisms whose DNA has been altered by genetic engineering to introduce traits that do not naturally occur in that species; for example, pest resistance, herbicide tolerance, drought tolerance, or improved nutrient profiles.
Globally, GM crops (including maize, soybeans, cotton, canola, among others) have been adopted by large commercial producers and are marketed as productivity and input-cost solutions for modern agriculture. Many point to higher yields, reduced pesticide use (depending on the trait), and faster breeding for climate resilience. However, critics highlight unknown long-term ecological and health impacts, the concentration of seed ownership, and the loss of farmer seed sovereignty.
Although some countries, including Algeria, Madagascar, and Zimbabwe, have banned the cultivation and imports of GMOs, many view it as an innovative measure that can help address the problem of food insecurity in any nation.
Nigeria’s approval of the TELA biotech maize varieties in 2024 placed the country second in Africa, after South Africa, which had earlier authorised the commercialisation of biotech maize.
According to a report by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and Global Agricultural Information Network (GAIN), also in 2024, the National Biotechnology Research and Development Agency (NBRDA) authorised trials for many other crops, including rice, cassava, sorghum, and potato. However, the rollout has been contested; In May, 2024, the House of Representatives urged suspension and investigations into GMO commercialisation, and some civil society groups have repeatedly called for bans or temporary suspension, citing health, environmental and sovereignty concerns.
Hunger situation in Nigeria
Despite concerns about GM food, real hunger persists in Nigeria, facing food security challenges on the continent, particularly at the community level. Despite its vast arable land and a predominantly youthful population, the country struggles to produce enough food to meet the needs of its citizens. In terms of numbers, Nigeria is not simply food insecure; it is teetering on the edge of catastrophe. The United Nations World Food Program projected that over 30.6 million Nigerians will face acute food insecurity in 2025. The FAO’s latest Cadre Harmonisé assessment paints an equally grim picture; from June to August 2025, nearly one in six Nigerians is estimated to struggle to secure enough food, with 33.1 million projected to be in emergency-level hunger.
Apart from the known problems of insecurity, climate change, and post-harvest loss, among others, Nigeria faces a rapidly growing population projected to surpass the current 200 million by 2050, which places even greater pressure on the food system.
In 2024, Nigeria scored 28.8 in the Global Hunger Index. According to the GHI, the score reflects a “Serious” level of hunger in the country.
Rising food prices, driven by inflation and supply chain disruptions, have further limited household purchasing power, making it difficult for millions of families to afford nutritious meals.
However, against this backdrop, GMOs appear seductive. Advocates argue that pest-resistant and drought-tolerant maize could turn the tide, boosting yields, cutting pesticide costs, and stabilising food prices. For example, the African Agricultural Technology Foundation (AATF) projects that TELA maize could deliver up to 10 tons per hectare under good conditions; a quantum leap from Nigeria’s average yield of 2.2 tons. If true, such gains could be a lifeline.
But the debate is not simply about yields. It is about trust, ownership, and the future of African farming.
Nigeria’s GMO Gamble
Nigeria is not the first African country to take the leap. South Africa leads the continent in GM adoption, with Kenya, Ghana, and Malawi also running field trials on certain crops.
On the other side of the divide, Algeria, Madagascar, and Zimbabwe are saying no to GMO cultivation, at least for now, in their countries, citing concerns over biodiversity and sovereignty.
Nigeria now sits at the crossroads. With maize and cowpea already approved and over 30 other crops in trial phases, it seems the country is moving faster than most of its neighbours.
For the federal government, this push is framed as an urgent response to the hunger and food security crisis currently gripping the nation. Climate change continues to shrink arable land, and smallholder farmers, who are the backbone of Nigeria’s agriculture, struggle with pests, diseases, and post-harvest losses.
Yet, the speed of adoption has raised questions. Civil society groups, food activists, and some scientists caution that Nigeria’s embrace of GMOs is as much a political gamble as it is a scientific advancement. People are worried about seed dependency on multinational companies, the adequacy of local biosafety oversight, and the potential sidelining of indigenous farming systems.
The government insists it is acting responsibly, urging for regulatory oversight rather than outright bans.“The government will not deliberately bring what is poisonous to the people. There are seed councils and regulatory bodies in charge of checking seedlings used by farmers, hence the need for a collaborative effort,” Mohammed Kyari, the Agriculture and Food Security Minister, said.
Potential benefits of GMOs and areas of concern regarding GMO use in Nigeria
There is no denying the potential benefits of GMOs for Nigeria. For instance, armyworm infestations have significantly impacted Nigerian maize farmers since the pest appeared in 2016. With the technology, Biotech maize is specially engineered to resist such pests, meaning it can survive attacks that typically wipe out fields.
Also, experts confirmed that GMOs can reduce pesticide use, lower production costs, and deliver crops with improved nutritional profiles.
For instance, South Africa’s experience is often cited as a success story: within two decades of adopting insect-resistant maize, the country doubled its corn yields. According to the report, South Africa now falls amongst the top-10 largest producers of Genetic Engineered (GE) crops in the world and has approved 27 GE plant events for commercial production contained in three commodities, namely corn, soybeans, and cotton. Its corn yields doubled over the past 20 years, while soybean production improved 10-fold, the report confirmed.
Despite all these overwhelming testimonies, Nigerians are still concerned about the underlying implications. Concerns range from potential allergenicity and toxicity in GMO-derived foods to risks of horizontal gene transfer (including antibiotic resistance) and unintended effects on non-target organisms like pollinators.
While many of these risks remain theoretical or unproven, many are concerned with Nigeria’s weak regulatory and monitoring systems, and this further amplifies the danger of accepting GMOs. Do the National Biosafety Management Agency and allied institutions truly have the capacity to monitor GM crops post-release rigorously?
Recently, a video shared by medical influencer Chinonso Egemba, in which he highlighted the benefits of GMOs and advocated for their acceptance in Nigeria, sparked a storm of reactions on social media.
The backlash intensified when old photos resurfaced from Egemba’s 2023 meeting with U.S. billionaire Bill Gates, a prominent supporter of GMO technology who has invested approximately US$2.8 billion in Nigeria’s health and agricultural sectors. The development renewed public unease about the influence of foreign players in driving GMO adoption in the country.
However, the risks and concerns extend far beyond health or environmental questions. The deeper problem is who controls the seeds and, by extension, Nigeria’s food future.
In context, genetically modified seeds are typically patent-protected. According to experts, farmers are prohibited from saving and replanting seeds; instead, they are required to purchase new seeds each season from licensed companies. Now, the implication is that this could lock smallholder farmers into a cycle of dependency while eroding Nigeria’s indigenous seed banks.
Perhaps the most striking feature of Nigeria’s GMO debate is not the science, but the politics of perception.
The Trust Deficit
Many Nigerians know too little about GM crops to make informed choices. Rumours and conspiracy theories thrive in this vacuum. While government agencies struggle to communicate nuanced information, a significant amount of fake or misinformation circulates on social media platforms.
Without sustained investment in consumer education and media literacy, the gap between expert assurances and public fears will only widen, especially in a democracy already marred by mistrust in institutions, which is a dangerous gamble.
Recomendations
For Nigeria to make GMOs a tool of progress rather than exploitation, a set of non-negotiable conditions must be pursued:
- Laws must enshrine farmers’ ability to save, share, and replant seeds without fear of criminalisation or corporate monopoly. The country’s food sovereignty depends on this.
- Nigerian institutions should establish a robust system for assessing environmental and health effects, accompanied by strong oversight mechanisms. This will build public confidence and prevent capture by corporate interests.
- Nigerians deserve the right to know what they are eating. Clear labelling of GMO products is not only ethical but also a democratic obligation, empowering citizens to make informed choices.
- Instead of relying on foreign-developed technologies, Nigeria should channel resources into its universities, research institutes, and young innovators for seed development.
