Online Reporter
Gibson Nyikadzino
Zimpapers Politics Hub
Zimbabwe’s 2000 land reform programme, meant to correct colonial iniquities, was the greatest miracle to ever happen to an African country and its indigenous population. Land ownership means control of means of production; hence the word “production” has to be an underlying key term that initiates and leads economic vibrancy.
The over 350 000 families and households that have benefited from the land reclamation exercise are expected by the State and its interrelated institutions at social and structural levels to be productive.
The Government did the greater part for the people by legitimising the exercise through the Land Acquisition Act of 2002; it has availed farming implements and inputs; encouraged agricultural mechanisation and now delivered title deeds to 1000 farmers, thus giving them security of tenure and ability to secure agriculture loans.
The beneficiaries of these programmes should reward the nation, by at least being productive on the land they have. The land Zimbabwe has, against what statistics show means as a people we need to work hard.
At the moment, statistical data appear to be not in our favour as a country as agricultural production is low.
Firstly, we need to understand that Zimbabwe imports goods worth US$4,5 billion which can be domesticated. These are manufactured commodities with almost half of the US$4,5 billion being agricultural related goods.
For instance, the major drivers of this import bill are tissue and paper which cost almost US$200 million annually, yet these are commodities Zimbabwe has capacity to produce in Chimanimani, in the eastern highlands. As a nation, we cannot be importing tissue and paper since the nation has the technology and raw materials to make that industry viable.
Secondly, Zimbabwe is annually importing 1,2 million tonnes of tomatoes against its local capacity of 26 000 tonnes, where the bulk of the produce ends up in post-harvest losses. It is unimaginable to lose produce yet as a nation we can create market linkages and markets for farmers.
Additionally, Zimbabwe is importing fruits and vegetables from South Africa annually at a cost of at least US$300 million, and a surprising import of maize for the country, making our trade data surprising. Every year, the nation spends about half a billion dollars importing cereals.
While it can be understood that as a country we are not yet self-sufficient in some areas, it however, paints a worrying picture for Zimbabweans to be associated with the importation of cereals when from our land we can produce enough. Agriculture is a key priority area that we need to deal with.
This means there may be something that as a society we are missing in terms of how we are organising, strengthening and coordinating our value chains.
There is an issue about fertilisers, where almost US$250 million is used to import such, annually. This is understandable because as a nation we will not be able to substitute it entirely in terms of imports because we still want the raw material like ammonia gas. Therefore, there is quite a strong industry which needs to be supported, especially when it comes to fertilisers.
As what the Government has always done, in this sector it should continue helping and capacitating the industry by placing orders with fertiliser companies in advance for its programmes like Command Agriculture, Village Business Units and the Presidential Inputs Scheme so that they are able to give them the impetus and the capacity to produce and be able to raise their production capacity.
Because Government is focused on massive rural industrialisation and the Rural Development 8.0 initiative, which focuses on supporting agricultural programmes across the country, it is taxing to import fertilisers from all over the world when we have such major programmes. For example, importing fertilisers from bigger economies means Zimbabwe will be promoting jobs in those countries.
The Government should place orders in advance and give the fertiliser producing companies enough money, thus capitalising the companies, creating jobs and ultimately cutting on the import bill.
By doing so, it means the Government is dealing with the challenge of industrial capacitation and job creation by giving priority to local content and local production.
When the companies have the money and raise capacity in terms of production, the cost goes down because of economies of scale. So, we need to deal with these things. The same applies to agricultural produce.
Companies must be compelled to go into contract farming at fair terms for them and they should also be prohibited from importing maize when as a country we have a strong agro-processor. Those companies that insist on importing what can be produced locally must be taxed, to promote local production.
To do so, there is need to strengthen the law to favour both parties, and also ensuring there is no side marketing of the contracted produce and these things are not far-fetched.
If Zimbabwe manages to reduce the import bill from US$4,5 billion to about US$3 billion, that means as a country we are preserving forex and we are creating the best for our local currency to further strengthen.
As long as we are not strong on production, that will have an effect on our currency. Therefore, those who have benefited from the land reform, large and small-scale farmers, should contribute positively by working the land to high production
Online Reporter