Online Reporter
ZIMBABWE needs to take greater advantage of the duty-free access all its exports have in the European Union (EU) by not just more active marketing, but also ensuring that our products meet standards set by the EU and offer value for money.
The EU standards are not non-tariff barriers designed to prevent imports into the trading bloc; they are the standards that producers within the EU have to meet, are very clear and transparent and are rarely unreasonable.
Since the EU is the world’s largest trading bloc, bigger than even the massive US and Chinese national economies, many EU standards have become global standards.
You see this on many products sourced from outside the EU on Zimbabwean shop shelves where the manufacturer is making it very clear that they meet the EU standards, an additional guarantee that they meet certain quality standards.
So if we can get our products up to those standards, they are likely to meet or exceed standards in many other parts of the world, so there are good incentives to making sure we offer the quality required.
This is not new. Horticulture exporters already have the EU as their largest single market, taking advantage not just of being in a tropical country exporting to a temperate region but also from our southern hemisphere position, having seasons six months earlier and later than the EU so being able to supply fresh products when European producers are in their off season.
Being able to meet the EU standards has been very useful as we build up exports to the Middle East and Asia, and even when we have to ensure that we meet a specific standard.
Chinese importers of oranges, for example, wanted certain guarantees of safety that were easy to give since our export growers were already making sure their products were clean, and so just needed to present the appropriate laboratory report.
Others should also be looking harder at European markets. It is likely that the best results will be the products made from our own raw materials where the advantages of having raw material suppliers down the road are highest.
Some of our more innovative agro-industrial food products should be tried out in European markets, where there are consumers looking for something new and healthy.
These would have the advantage that we are not in direct competition with European factories, since they do not make those products.
There is a modest Zimbabwean market now for some traditional foods from producers who have created a standard quality and whose packaging meets the export standards. This is where agricultural exports need to concentrate.
On the industrial side, a small country at the bottom end of Africa is not really in a position to do much toll manufacturing from imported raw materials as there are other African and Asian countries much closer to the EU that can do that more easily and more profitably.
But that still gives a lot of scope to manufacturers in Zimbabwe prepared to offer good value to European businesses and consumers, from high-quality natural textiles and good-quality craftsmanship to goods coming from factories downstream of our new steelworks and other heavy industrial suppliers.
The European market is sufficiently large, with 440 million people almost all with standards of living that would be considered good by African standards, that even a small percentage of that market is good money. But it does entail having the right products of the desired quality at the right price, and that is where local producers must do their homework and make sure they can hit all three criteria.
The same sort of action is needed for us to really benefit from the African Continental Free Trade Area.
Again local production from local raw materials means we meet the rules of African origin, and having decent quality at affordable prices means that those products will be competitive.
More generally trade is far more secure than aid in the development of Africa and so the efforts of the EU, China and many Middle East countries to allow access with zero or low tariffs can do a lot to develop countries like Zimbabwe by creating permanent business ties and markets for mutual benefit. This is more secure than fluctuating aid development, important as that can be in emergencies.
But it does place responsibility on the shoulders of Zimbabwean producers, that they can supply what is wanted and needed by these other markets, and does mean that business organisations and the Government trade advisors need to help the local producers with both contacts and with the sort of detailed requirements that so many specialised markets require.
Better trade will not just happen because doors have been opened. It needs hard work and innovation to make sure that what we send through those open doors is wanted and is desirable.
