Maravi

Maize marketing problems

Maize marketing problems
By Mweelwa Muleya
Tuesday June 12, 2007 [04:00]

Since the re-introduction of multi-party democracy in 1991, the phrase “brief case businessmen” has continued to characterise each crop marketing season. As the 2006/2007 crop marketing season is underway, there are already complaints of so-called brief case businessmen and women buying maize at exploitatively low prices from the vulnerable small scale farmers.

Of course such cases have over the past years been reducing due to some corrective measures such as the re-establishment of primary co-operative societies by the Mwanawasa administration. However, the point is that the exploitation of farmers is not by accident.

The exploitation of small scale farmers is the remnant of the Chiluba-led MMD legacy which brought agriculture to its knees. Through overzealousness over the liberalised market economy and the desire to wipe out the Kaunda legacy, the MMD abandoned institutions such as co-operative societies that promoted and protected small scale farmers.

The Food Reserve Agency (FRA) was then formed as a replacement. Most people may still remember how unscrupulous individuals and politicians pounced on the loans from FRA during its formative years, literally looting in the name of trying to help farmers.

This was an era when the desire for obscene profits replaced social responsibility of the government which unleashed so-called market forces on the vulnerable and inexperienced citizens. Indeed, like many sectors of the economy that collapsed with the advent of the liberalised market economy, small scale farmers were not used to business skills of negotiating prices of their crops. Farmers were used to a guaranteed market.
Hence, there was need for preparing them to meet the new challenges instead of just abandoning them to the “vultures”.

The Mwanawasa administration has over the years been making notable positive impact in re-establishing the agricultural sector as one of the pillars of economic development and poverty alleviation, especially among the rural populous. The FRA and the Department of Agribusiness and Marketing under the Ministry of Agriculture and Co-operatives have been progressively improving their operations.

However, the continuous complaints of “brief case buyers” exploiting farmers are an indication of a vacuum and/or limitations in the area of maize marketing. It is a reflection of ineffective and insufficient efforts by the FRA in buying crops, especially in the countryside. When FRA is unable to reach out to some areas to buy crops, for various reasons, it means that those who can afford to do so will do so. It also means that vulnerable farmers will have no choice but to grudgingly sell their crops to enable them take their children to school, buy clothes and afford to drink tea or mazoe to celebrate their hard earned money.

Indeed, due to logistical constraints and other considerations, it is a fact that FRA does not reach the remotest parts of the country to buy maize. FRA buys from designated points called satellite depots at the fixed price of K38, 000. Therefore, it does not make economic sense that someone could buy maize from some far flung area and deliver it to the FRA depots at the same price. There are mobilisation and transportation costs to be taken into account, hence anyone in business would not like to make a loss.

Therefore, continued efforts towards increasing the capacity of FRA through establishing depots up to village level could be the best solution to ending the exploitation of small scale farmers. That requires adequate funding and logistical support. That way, small scale farmers will have a choice between selling to FRA or to any other agencies or individuals.

Where there is no choice and/or competition, business men and women, will continue exploiting farmers. The government has been increasingly intervening in the pricing of crops because of the sensitivity of food to political stability. However, agriculture being a sensitive sector to social, economic and political development, there is need for increased capacity building of relevant government institutions through timely and adequate funding to avoid political interference in the sector.

Another area deserving attention is capacity building of small scale farmers in agribusiness and marketing skills. Small scale farmers should understand and appreciate that, apart from growing crops especially maize for their consumption, they are in business for profit. It is highly unlikely that at the moment most small-scale farmers are able to know whether they are selling at a loss or a profit.

This means that they are vulnerable to exploitation by skilled businessmen and women who can persuade them to barter their 50kg bag of maize with a second hand cloth costing less than K10, 000.
Beyond that, it is the responsibility of the government to link farmers, both small and commercial, to viable markets for their produce. Crop marketing is a potential source of revenue for the government and a catalyst for sustainable poverty reduction at household level.

Therefore, with progressive achievements in the provision of farming inputs such as seeds and fertiliser to small scale farmers, support towards building marketing skills and market linkages should be enhanced. The decision taken by the Mwanawasa administration to re-establish co-operatives and a co-operative bank is in the right direction and may turn around the fortunes of this country.

What is important though is to guard against partisan politics because it is a source of discrimination, irrational decision-making and action, and the best way to social, economic and political failures.

Therefore, instead of losing breath on the so called brief case business men and women, the government must accelerate its efforts towards reducing opportunities for exploitation of farmers by among other measures, creating timely, accessible and adequate markets.

The destruction of the agriculture sector during the first 10 years of the MMD should be a lesson that it is unwise for a government to withdraw its social responsibility from any sector before creating alternative institutions and capacities to fill up the vacuum. It is also a lesson that good institutions and systems should not be destroyed for the sake of erasing the legacy of an outgoing government, only to re-establish them later. It is far much easier to destroy than to build.

Labels: MAIZE

posted by MrK @ 3:51 AM