Conflict, Famine, Agricultural Resilience and the Future of Humanitarian Strategy in Sudan (2 – 2)

Amgad Fareid Eltayeb

Beyond Relief: Rethinking Humanitarian Strategy in Sudan
Despite modest gains in agricultural and livestock production, the ongoing conflict remains the most significant threat to food security in Sudan. The war has displaced 11.6 million people—8.84 million internally since April 2023, in addition to 2.73 million already displaced before the conflict—and forced another 3.5 million to flee across borders, primarily to Chad, South Sudan, and Egypt.
Currently, an estimated 24.6 million people—half of Sudan’s population—are experiencing acute food insecurity. This includes 8.1 million individuals in the emergency phase and 637,000 in the catastrophic phase, with famine risks looming in multiple regions, including North Darfur, West Kordofan, South Kordofan, Al-Jazirah, and Khartoum.

Structural Strains and the Urgency of a New Humanitarian Paradigm
The disruption of commercial routes due to ongoing insecurity has driven fuel prices up by an estimated 150% to 250%. This surge in fuel costs has, in turn, inflated the expenses associated with both agricultural production and transportation, exerting additional upward pressure on food prices. Although the prices of sorghum and millet declined by 20% and 10% respectively between October and December 2024, they remain five times higher than their pre-war levels.
Further compounding the crisis is the acute shortage of certified and high-quality seeds—only 5,297 metric tons were distributed by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) ahead of the last planting season. Additionally, the degradation of irrigation infrastructure, particularly in major agricultural schemes such as the Gezira Project, has severely undermined productivity. The deliberate destruction of this vital scheme by the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) during their occupation of Gezira State exemplifies the strategic targeting of national food systems. These challenges are exacerbated by a broader economic collapse, with GDP contracting by 29.6% in 2024 and inflation soaring to 240%—both of which intensify the fragility of Sudan’s food security landscape.
The experience of Sudan during the ongoing war, which erupted in April 2023, underscores the urgent need to reassess the prevailing paradigms of humanitarian response—particularly with regard to food security. International aid systems have largely prioritized the importation of externally sourced food assistance. Yet, Sudan’s agricultural sector—despite the ravages of war, institutional collapse, and severe resource scarcity—has demonstrated a remarkable capacity for resilience and recovery.

Regaining Food Sovereignty in a War-Torn Nation
This extraordinary performance, as documented in the UN’s Crop and Food Supply Assessment Mission (CFSAM) report, affirms that reliance on local food production is not a theoretical ideal but a practical, proven, and effective pathway. It calls for a fundamental shift in how the international community supports crisis-affected countries—prioritizing the reinforcement of endogenous food systems over dependency on imported aid.
This evolving dynamic necessitates a strategic shift in the operational approach of international and regional humanitarian organizations—away from emergency-based import models toward a more sustainable and effective paradigm. Central to this transformation is the localization of aid efforts through the strengthening of local agricultural capacities. This includes the timely provision of essential inputs such as seeds, fertilizers, machinery, and fuel, along with targeted support for small and medium-sized food industries, which form a critical link in the food value chain.
Such a paradigm shift does not merely enable the localization of humanitarian assistance—it also substantially reduces costs. In a context marked by declining global humanitarian funding and shrinking resources allocated to Sudan, localization emerges not as an aspirational slogan, but as a demonstrably more efficient and cost-effective alternative. By reinforcing local food production chains, this approach increases resilience to shocks, reduces dependency on external aid, and generates significant multiplier effects across the economy.
This is particularly critical in Sudan, where agriculture remains the primary economic activity for over 65% of the population and accounted for nearly 25% of GDP in the pre-war years (2020–2022). Investing in this sector is not only a means of addressing immediate food needs—it is an investment in social stability, community resilience, and the structural recovery of Sudan’s macroeconomic foundation.
Therefore, any realistic strategy to confront Sudan’s food crisis must be grounded in the local context. Supporting domestic agricultural and food production should be regarded not merely as a food security intervention, but as the cornerstone of broader economic and social recovery—both in the near term and over the long arc of national reconstruction.

Conclusion of Main Recommendations

In light of Sudan’s escalating food security crisis, there is a critical need for a paradigm shift among all stakeholders—national actors, international donors, and humanitarian agencies—toward strategies rooted in evidence-based, locally anchored resilience. Externally driven food aid models, while necessary in acute emergencies, often undermine long-term agricultural self-sufficiency and economic sovereignty. The following recommendations draw on both Sudan’s internal capacities and global best practices, advocating for a scientifically grounded, system-oriented approach that prioritizes endogenous food systems, localized production, and structural recovery as the foundation for sustainable peace and development.
Prioritize local agricultural production over food import-based humanitarian aid to enhance food security and resilience.
Support farmers with essential inputs (seeds, fertilizers, machinery, fuel) to sustain and expand domestic food production.
Invest in the livestock sector, including vaccination programs and disease control, especially in secure areas.
Rehabilitate critical infrastructure, such as irrigation systems (e.g., Gezira Project), to restore productivity.
Shift international humanitarian strategy from emergency food distribution to localized, sustainable support models.
Strengthen small and medium-sized food industries as vital links in the food value chain and rural economies.
Localize aid efforts to reduce costs, improve effectiveness, and build long-term self-reliance.
Recognize agriculture as a foundation for macroeconomic recovery, social stability, and national reconstruction.