Online Reporter
AS this year’s summer harvests are being reaped and brought in, the whole agro-industrial sector in Zimbabwe is now bound by the requirement set shortly before the beginning of the season in September last year to procure at least 40 percent of their required grains and oilseeds from what the Zimbabwean farmers grow.
To make sure that those food processors and stockfeed manufacturers who have been leading the changeover, and some have shown a marked preference for local content, importers of any grains or oilseeds who bring in cheaper products will have to pay the difference between the imported and the local cost into a special fund to be used to finance local production.
So all agro-industrialists have been put on a level playing field.
The 40 percent is just a starting point mind you, a gentle introduction to the policy that by 2028, just two years away, all grain and oil seed used in local processing must be grown by Zimbabwean farmers.
While presumably in times of national emergency, such as a very serious drought, some leeway can be given, generally our agro-industrialists need to take a far greater interest in what our farmers are doing.
Tobacco offers some good templates for properly regulated contracts that are fair for all and stop cheating.
Contract farming and a close relationship between farmer and industrialist would be especially useful.
We also need to start moving into growing rice using new Japanese-led research to grow dryland, but irrigated rice, a cross between Asian and African species that is starting to take hold in West Africa.
Some of grain and oilseeds can still be imported at less than Zimbabwean farm costs, especially if irrigation is needed locally for a product that can grown dryland in some other country.
Even maize, small grains and soft wheats, where we usually manage surpluses, would probably benefit by a more integrated value chain.
There are several reasons for the changes already made.
The Second Republic has been keen to build up the farming sector as the most obvious way of lifting a very large slice of Zimbabweans out of dire poverty.
There have been many successes, but the farmers who produce more need markets and the obvious market is local industry processing food for both the fast rising urban population and even for farmers who would rather buy processed cooking oil than using a semi-processed product made on the farm.
Industrialists need to stop assuming the Government will do all the work, and become interested in getting farmers to grow new products they need such as the hard wheats and a wider variety of oilseeds.
It is not just getting volumes up, but also making sure that farmers are widening their output and between farmers and industrialists are growing and processing new varieties and even totally new species.
The new requirements and what we hope will be a closer relationship between farmers and industrialists mean that farmers also need to pay more attention to what industrialists want, so the markets work. It will be a two-way process.
We have had for many years one major user of grains, Delta, contracting with farmers to grow the particular varieties of barley for their clear beers and that particular variety of sorghum they want for their best-selling opaque beers, having seen off the competition that would use almost anything a farmer grew.
Land reform simply saw a changeover in how the contract system worked, more small and medium farmers rather than giant plantations.
The Delta model had both strands: farmers grow just what Delta wants at the required quality, and Delta makes sure there is a profitable market for these desired products.
A new reason for pushing up local food production and widening the ranges of what we grow can be seen in the modern world, with war and conflict growing, and the subsequent need for Zimbabwe to make sure that its supply lines are not disrupted since they will all start on a local farm and end in a local factory.
If we add a bit and have surpluses our neighbours want to buy, preferably the final processed foods, then everyone will win, farmers and industrialists.
We would tend to agree, to a very limited extent, with the industrialists who are concerned that some farmers are not really competitive in a global context.
Well the solution needs to be more active involvement in the farmer supply chains, lowering input costs, but still keeping profits reasonable for the efficient growers and processors of foods.
Often the waste products from food manufacturing are just dumped, when many have a residual value as the raw material for organic fertilisers and other useful products. Circular value chains are often a good idea and need to be explored to keep costs under control.
Even putting some of the high-end financial talent in industry to working on farm economics could reap some interesting dividends for those wanting to cut costs, but still maximise profits.
There are other ways a smart industrialist could act when they become involved with those who grow what they want.
The result should be an ending of the divide between farmers and processors and far more putting heads together, with the vast research capacity and extension services the Government has, to get what we all need.
