Where are the aqua funds?
THE decision by Government to ban the importation of table potatoes and onions is most welcome but..
From all practical considerations, the decision was impulsive and without direct study of the market and indeed this is the area our technocrats fail ambitious visions of politicians.
The failure to create forward and backward linkages in policy formulation often results in serious market disruption that tend to hurt rather than benefit the economy.
What quantities and quality of potatoes are imported and who now has the capacity to replace the imports? What are table potatoes as compared to other potatoes? Are there people empowered to bridge the gap?
For example: The Government has embarked on an ambitious aqua culture programme that is financed from external sources. It is a very well publicized exercise but in rally is opaque and ill-defined on the ground.
Neither the Citizenship Empowerment Commission nor indeed the Ministry responsible will answer authoritatively on how a promoter can access the funds to initiate or indeed expand an existing project.
Nobody provides straight answer. How funds are accessed is a guarded mystery. This is not correct. There must be transparency in the disbursement of public funds. There should be clear guidelines and criteria on how to access the funds and indeed and indication of the market potential.
Who has accessed aquaculture funds from the CEEC and how did they achieve this, is our question. Can there be some transparency?
Like all other producers in agriculture issues of the market remain paramount, frustrating, and annoying. Almost every day the Government announces production deficits in various fields and yet the wastage seen at Soweto market where fresh produce goes to waste speaks to a different reality.
A poultry farmer in Lusaka, the capital city, must fight to sell his few chickens on credit or not at all because no aggregator will venture into wholesale purchase. This is the role that should be played by Government supported institutions which should in turn encourage production.
It is all very well for the Government to ban the importation of potatoes and onions; this will be meaningless to the farmer if no ready market is availed.
Agriculture market intelligence should be developed for use by farmers who venture into the various crops and agriculture ventures. The cyclical prices of such products as Tomato make it wholly un-attractive for the small farmer who cannot sustain a loss when prices drop.
A few years ago the cotton growing fraternity was devastated by a sudden drop in prices. This was in the absence of a price stabilization scheme, which is vital if production is to be sustained or indeed increased.
The individual farmer or indeed single producer does not have the capacity to fully assess market potential and therefore plan for optimum production.
What is required is a planned import substitution programme that is based on market study and informed policy decision making. Value addition will only come about by a planned process of import substitution.
The hallmark of underdevelopment is the presence of a majority human capital that is under employed, through backbreaking manual agriculture, compared to the developed world where a very tiny produce for the majority using technology.