NAIROBI, KENYA – A rapidly growing floriculture sector in East Africa, responsible for exporting billions of rose stems to Europe each year, is drawing criticism from experts who argue the industry mirrors economic exploitation dating back to the colonial era. While generating substantial foreign revenue and employment, large-scale flower farms occupy vast tracts of the region’s most fertile land, intensifying existing debates over food security and the long-term economic sovereignty of nations like Kenya and Ethiopia.
The central tension revolves around the prioritization of non-food luxury commodities—roses destined for European events like Valentine’s Day—over staple crops for local populations struggling with chronic malnutrition. This paradox is especially stark as the African continent possesses 60% of the globe’s uncultivated arable land yet consistently relies on imported cereals.
Export Dollars vs. Arable Land
Kenya and Ethiopia anchor the continent’s flower economy, collectively producing a dominant share of cut flowers destined for European auctions in cities like Amsterdam. Kenya’s floriculture sector generates over $1 billion annually, contributing nearly 1.5% to the nation’s GDP and supplying up to 35% of flowers sold in European markets. Ethiopia’s exports also yield hundreds of millions of dollars each year, positioning it as Africa’s second-largest exporter.
This industry expansion, catalyzed by government policies in the 1990s and 2000s that offered tax breaks and favorable loan terms to foreign investors, has attracted major international players. Farms are typically owned or managed by Dutch, Israeli, and other European companies, a structure critics say ensures foreign control over prime agricultural assets.
The dispute focuses on the high opportunity cost of the land used. While Ethiopia dedicates only a fraction of its farmland (1,600–3,400 hectares) to flowers, the sector outpaces the revenue generated by coffee farming, which uses more than 871,000 hectares. Critics argue that diverting prime arable land and water resources toward export flowers significantly restricts smallholder farmers—who are the primary producers of food crops—from ensuring national food security.
Around Kenya’s Lake Naivasha, extensive greenhouse operations consume critical water supplies, leading to resource conflicts with communities dependent on the same sources for drinking and irrigation.
Echoes of Neo-Colonialism
Critics invoke the concept of neo-colonialism—where politically independent nations remain economically controlled by external forces—to frame the flower trade. They highlight how the industry’s structure closely parallels colonial-era cash cropping, where European powers mandated the cultivation of crops like cotton and cocoa for metropolitan benefit, displacing local food production.
Today’s floriculture sector reproduces this pattern:
- Foreign Ownership: The best land is controlled by non-African firms, who often repatriate profits overseas.
- Export Dependency: The entire value chain relies on European market demand and logistics, creating economic vulnerability.
- Resource Prioritization: Prime agricultural sites near vital water sources are dedicated to non-food luxury goods.
African governments, including Ethiopia and Kenya, have facilitated this structure by providing subsidies and preferential policies, effectively locking in an export-dependent agricultural model that scholars argue guarantees political continuity for ruling elites.
The Employment Paradox
Defenders of the industry point to job creation as a major benefit. Kenya’s sector supports over 500,000 livelihoods, including more than 100,000 direct farm employees. In Ethiopia, approximately 180,000 jobs have been created, with a high proportion of women employees.
However, the quality of these jobs remains contentious. Reports indicate widespread exposure to hazardous chemicals, poor ventilation, extreme heat, and pervasive issues concerning sexual harassment and job insecurity, with casual contracts prevalent. Furthermore, the economic benefits are limited as African workers receive minimal wages to produce high-value luxury goods, and value-added processes (like bouquet assembly) often occur in Europe rather than at the source.
The infrastructure developed by the sector—roads and cold storage facilities—primarily serves export needs, facilitating the transport of roses to airports rather than connecting local food markets.
A Crucial Trade-Off
The ultimate cost of this export focus is measured in persistent food insecurity. Africa spends a staggering $78 billion annually on food imports and faces the highest hunger rate globally, despite holding massive agricultural potential. Importing nearly a third of its consumed cereals, the continent struggles as thousands of hectares of its most productive land are used for flowers instead of staples like maize or wheat.
While the flower industry provides vital income and integration into the global economy, the pressing question remains whether the trade-off—foreign revenue for essential land—aligns with Africa’s long-term interests. As global food systems face strain from climate change and population growth, experts suggest African governments must exercise political will to redirect agricultural policy toward food sovereignty, resisting export-focused models and reducing the economic dependency that critics argue embodies neo-colonialism.