Not enough time to read the full article? Listen to the summary in 2 minutes.

Agribusiness projects rarely fail because of a lack of funding or good intentions.
They fail because execution breaks down between the farm gate and the market.

Across regions and crops, the pattern is strikingly consistent. Projects launch with strong momentum, technical expertise, and stakeholder support. Yet a few seasons later, yields disappoint, buyers disengage, infrastructure sits underused, or the entire initiative quietly winds down.

The root causes are rarely agricultural. They are commercial, operational, and governance-related.

1. Projects optimise production but ignore the market

One of the most common reasons agribusiness projects fail is an imbalance between production and market design.

Many initiatives focus heavily on:

• increasing yields
• improving farming techniques
• distributing inputs or technology

What they underestimate is who will buy the output, at what quality, at what price, and with what reliability.

When production rises without secured offtake:

• local prices collapse
• intermediaries capture most of the value
• farmers lose trust
• processors face inconsistent supply

Agribusiness is not just agriculture. It is a value chain. Projects that treat markets as an afterthought struggle to convert productivity into sustainable income.

2. Infrastructure and logistics are weaker than the model assumes

On paper, aggregation centres, storage facilities, and cold chains look sufficient. In practice, small gaps derail entire projects.

Common weaknesses include:

• storage that cannot handle peak harvest volumes
• cold chain interruptions due to power or maintenance issues
• roads that become impassable during rainy seasons
• lack of grading and traceability standards

When logistics fail, quality degrades, losses rise, and buyers disengage. Even well-run farms cannot compensate for weak post-harvest systems.

In many failed projects, infrastructure was built, but operational readiness was never tested under real volume and timing pressure.

3. Post-harvest losses quietly destroy the business case

Post-harvest losses remain one of the most underestimated risks in agribusiness projects.

Losses occur due to:

• delayed aggregation
• poor storage conditions
• lack of cooling
• improper handling
• quality downgrades

A project can technically “produce” enough volume and still fail commercially if 20 to 30 percent of output is lost or sold at distress prices.

When margins are thin, these losses erase profitability quickly.

4. Implementation capacity is insufficient for project complexity

Agribusiness projects are operationally demanding. They require coordination across:

• farmers and cooperatives
• contractors and suppliers
• processors and buyers
• logistics providers
• regulators and financiers

Yet many projects are run by teams designed for administration, not execution.

Typical issues include:

• weak project management structures
• slow procurement and contracting
• limited contractor oversight
• delayed decision-making
• poor financial and performance reporting

The project concept may be sound, but without strong execution leadership, timelines slip, costs rise, and credibility erodes.

5. Procurement delays break agricultural timelines

Agriculture is unforgiving when it comes to timing. Planting, harvesting, and processing windows do not move.

Procurement delays lead to:

• equipment arriving after the season
• contractors mobilising too late
• missed planting cycles
• inflated costs due to rushed alternatives

Once a season is missed, recovery often takes years, not months. Projects rarely fully recover from early procurement and mobilisation failures.

6. Climate and weather risk are treated as side notes

Many agribusiness projects plan for “average” conditions.

But climate variability is no longer exceptional. Droughts, floods, heat stress, and unpredictable rainfall increasingly define the operating environment.

Projects fail when:

• crop choices are not climate-resilient
• water governance is weak
• irrigation systems are underdesigned
• insurance or risk-sharing mechanisms are absent
• contingency plans exist only on paper

Climate risk must be embedded into design and operations, not added as a paragraph in the proposal.

7. Producer organisations are weaker than expected

Cooperatives and producer groups are often assumed to function as stable commercial partners.

In reality, many lack:

• professional management
• financial controls
• internal enforcement mechanisms
• governance maturity
• working capital discipline

Projects that rely on these organisations without strengthening their governance face:

• inconsistent supply
• repayment issues
• side-selling
• internal conflict

Without strong producer governance, trust with buyers collapses quickly.

8. Technology adoption fails without incentive alignment

Digital tools, traceability systems, and advisory platforms are frequently introduced as solutions.

They fail when:

• adoption adds work without clear benefit
• data does not drive decisions
• incentives remain unchanged
• workflows stay informal

Technology does not create discipline. Leadership and incentives do.

Projects that treat training as adoption often discover too late that behaviour never changed.

9. Sustainability collapses at handover

Many agribusiness projects perform reasonably while the project team is present.

They fail after exit because:

• operating costs were not covered by commercial margins
• ownership of assets was unclear
• governance structures were weak
• local leaders were not accountable for outcomes

Sustainability is not about continuation of activities. It is about who owns decisions and risks after the project ends.

10. The common thread: execution ownership is missing

Across all these failure modes, one issue appears repeatedly.

No single leader owns end-to-end execution.

Responsibilities are spread across ministries, donors, consultants, cooperatives, and service providers. When problems arise, accountability fragments and action slows.

Agribusiness projects do not fail from lack of strategy.
They fail from lack of operational ownership under pressure.

Where interim leadership can make the difference

In complex agribusiness initiatives, organisations sometimes bring in interim program directors, COOs, or supply chain leaders to stabilise delivery, enforce decision cadence, and align stakeholders quickly.

Firms like CE Interim support such situations by deploying experienced interim executives who take hands-on responsibility for execution, governance, and commercial alignment during critical phases, without the delays of permanent hiring.

The value lies not in advice, but in ownership and delivery.

Final thought

Agribusiness projects fail when complexity is underestimated and execution is assumed to take care of itself.

Successful projects recognise that agriculture is not just about growing crops. It is about markets, logistics, governance, incentives, and leadership discipline.

When those elements are owned, projects scale.
When they are fragmented, even the best ideas struggle to survive.