Hunger Map Mirrors Seed Sector Weakness, 2026 Index Comparison Shows

Somalia records a Global Hunger Index score of 47.0 and a seed sector performance score of 3.01 out of 10. South Africa, by contrast, scores 8.64 on the African Seed Sector Performance Index while keeping hunger comparatively at bay. Seed World Europe Editorial Director Marcel Bruins has placed these two datasets side by side, and the pattern he finds thirteen years after first noticing it has not softened: the countries with the most severe hunger are frequently the countries with the weakest connections to international seed sector frameworks.

Bruins first made the comparison in March 2013, in a presentation to the African Seed Trade Association (AFSTA). He lined up world maps showing participation in four bodies: the OECD Seed Schemes, the International Seed Testing Association (ISTA), the International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV) and the International Seed Federation (ISF). He then set them against the Global Hunger Index. Countries with severe hunger often sat outside all four frameworks. He revisited the exercise in 2026 with the latest available data.

What Do the Hunger Figures Tell Us?

The 2026 Global Hunger Index, a peer-reviewed annual report tracking hunger worldwide, shows the sharpest deprivation in Somalia at 47.0, the Democratic Republic of the Congo at 39.5, Chad at 38.0 and Madagascar at 36.5. Tunisia scores 6.0, Morocco 9.0 and Egypt 10.5 — roughly one-fifth or less of Somalia's figure.

Bruins is careful about what the comparison proves. He writes that hunger depends on many factors, including conflict, poverty, political instability and climate shocks, and that correlation is not causation. His example is Nigeria. The country participates in several international seed frameworks yet still carries a serious hunger score of 34.3.

Nigeria also illustrates his central argument. OECD Seed Schemes participation needs competent certification authorities, ISTA accreditation requires properly equipped laboratories with trained staff, and UPOV membership needs an effective national variety protection system. Nigeria only joined UPOV in March 2025, so expecting immediate results would be premature, Bruins notes.

Does Membership Alone Deliver?

His answer is blunt. Membership in an international organisation, he writes, does not test a seed lot, register a variety or deliver a single bag of seed to a farmer. The real measure of success is whether memberships translate into tangible improvements for breeders, seed companies and ultimately farmers.

A new data point supports that distinction. The African Seed Sector Performance Index (ASSPI), in its 2025 assessment, evaluates seed sector performance across 50 African countries. South Africa scores 8.64 out of 10 and Egypt 8.13, while Somalia manages only 3.01. The index looks beyond the existence of regulations and examines how effectively national seed systems actually function.

Why Are Rules on Paper Not Enough?

Bruins poses the practical question directly: what does it change for a farmer if seed legislation looks respectable but variety registration takes years, testing facilities are inadequate, phytosanitary requirements are unnecessarily restrictive, or intellectual property rights cannot be enforced? A breeder with a promising drought-tolerant variety can watch registration delays push availability back for years. The droughts, he observes, will not wait for the paperwork.

These are not administrative inconveniences, he argues. They directly influence whether seed companies invest, whether improved varieties become available and whether farmers benefit from innovation. He is not calling for more regulation. He would rather see fewer, better and more effectively implemented rules than a mountain of legislation that looks impressive in a filing cabinet but achieves little in farmers' fields.

What Role Do Seed Associations Play?

Bruins also credits national and regional seed associations as an under-recognised part of the enabling environment. A functioning national association brings together breeders, seed producers and distributors, identifies practical obstacles and gives governments an informed partner. Regional bodies — AFSTA, the Asia and Pacific Seed Association (APSA) and the Seed Association of the Americas (SAA) — amplify that voice across borders. But having an association is not the same as having an effective one, he cautions; associations need expertise, committed members and regular access to policymakers.

An Enabling Environment Is Not Optional

For governments and development organisations, the prescription Bruins draws is specific: deliberate policy choices, predictable science-based regulations, effective seed quality assurance, appropriate plant variety protection, efficient registration procedures and greater regional harmonisation, plus conditions that encourage both public and private investment. The seed sector carries its own obligations — breeders must develop locally adapted varieties, and companies must deliver quality seed through reliable, affordable channels.

His closing frame is economic as much as agronomic. Seed companies cannot be expected to invest and thrive amid uncertainty, unnecessary barriers and weak institutions. A flourishing seed sector, he concludes, is not a luxury reserved for wealthy countries; for countries struggling with hunger, it is indispensable.