Import bans on certain types of vegetables is a long-standing government policy but in 2022 it assumed new stringency. During the period of the ban, three things always happen without fail: prices go up, the quality of available vegetables declines precipitously and some farmers harvest their produce way too early in order to meet demand. That has happened every cycle and happened in 2022. Officially, the purpose of this policy is to stimulate domestic production and bolster food security. Ordinarily, the cycles of these restrictions are episodic and don’t last for too long. This year was different.
On January 1, the Ministry of Agriculture imposed an import ban on 16 types of vegetables. Following the ban and as was acknowledged by the Ministry itself in the winter session of parliament, prices of most of the affected vegetables skyrocketed. In response to a question from the Maun West MP, Dumelang Saleshando, the Assistant Minister of Agriculture, Molebatsi Molebatsi, quoted figures that showed that while the production of potatoes and onions had increased, that of tomatoes and ginger had decreased. Prices have also increased, with those of ginger doubling and those of onions tripling.
In turn, wholesalers and retailers passed on this price increase to end-consumers. A manager at a high-end Gaborone restaurant told Sunday Standard that in the business that he is in, prices that were already deemed too high have risen even higher, driving some customers away.
Most of the vegetables being barred are from South Africa where mostly white farmers use highly sophisticated methods of farming and harvest-processing. The result is that the quality of produce is very high even by the most stringent international standards. Following the ban, there were widespread complaints that the brownish potatoes grown locally take long to cook and are dirty compared to the khaki-coloured ones that were imported from South Africa. Related to this issue is that of variety. The restaurant manager says that high-end restaurants use cherry (baby) tomatoes to make salads. Not being able to get this type of tomatoes locally, these restaurants find themselves having to make do with traditional red beefsteak tomatoes that are not ideal for salads.
As used by Molebatsi, “increase” in production was misleading because it included under-developed produce that has flooded the market to convey an impression of self-sufficiency when the reality is otherwise. There has begun to appear on supermarket shelves, microscopic produce (like potatoes, tomatoes and beetroots) that is harvested too early. Supermarkets require farmers who supply them with produce to meet a set quota and when some farmers can’t meet such quota with fully-grown produce, they ransack their fields for crops that are not yet market-ready.
During the week that the winter session of parliament ended, demand continued to outstrip supply and in the case of some vegetable, effort to close that gap was literally, starkly disastrous. A Gaborone supermarket was selling green tomatoes and under-developed onions the size of morula fruits. An elderly female shopper at that supermarket was heard to remark that she had passed by the tomatoes shelf earlier and assumed that they were not in stock because she couldn’t see any red – the colour of ripe, pot-ready tomatoes.
In fairness to farmers and the Ministry of Agriculture, the supply situation for some vegetables has improved significantly. The baby tomatoes that high-end restaurants use to make salads are no longer in short supply. However, in no way has the market stabilised in terms of production and pricing. Ginger is a good example of a vegetable that local farmers are still struggling to supply the market with. The plant takes seven months or more before it is ready to pull from the soil and deliver to the market. Not only is there shortage of ginger, one that consumers chance upon is mostly prematurely harvested.
The latter highlights a broader point/prediction that was made by Professor Patrick Malope, in March this year. Malope made a presentation titled The Fourth Industrial Revolution and the Quest for Productivity in Botswana’s Agriculture at the Engineering Forum that was hosted by the Engineers’ Registration Board. During the Q&A session, he was asked whether this ban would achieve the desired results.
His response was that it was still too early to make a definite pronouncement. However, he hastened to add that agricultural production is a biological process that can’t be altered by anybody’s wishes. He explained that most vegetables typically take three months to grow to maturity. In addition to the length of time that it takes crops to mature, there was also the question of whether farmers had enough land to produce enough to meet national demand. Nature aside, Malope expressed conviction that despite the ban and effort to stimulate domestic production, demand would continue to outstrip supply.
Malope is the Head of the Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics at the Botswana University of Agriculture and Natural Resources and one wonders whether in its desire to achieve political goals, the government sought scientific input from relevant parties.
During the discussion in parliament, Saleshando said that far from improving food security as has been officially stated, the alleged (and real) purpose of the ban was to surreptitiously bolster the commercial success of horticultural projects owned by the ruling elite. An almost similar allegation was made seven years ago by European consultants who had been engaged by the Ministry of Trade and Industry. These consultants also raised red flags about what they refer to as the “border closure policy” in their report. This policy is implemented by the Department of Agricultural Business Promotion in the Ministry of Agriculture through the National Horticultural Producers and Traders Committee (NHPTC).
After reviewing this policy, the EU consultants stated the following in their report: “Whilst seen to be benefiting the domestic horticulture sector as a whole, the border closures policy is seen to benefit and disadvantage different segments of the industry. Larger producers are seen to be advantaged at the expense of many smaller producers whose interests are not fully considered. Retailers face higher prices and are forced to purchase inferior quality produce, leading to wastage. Moreover, the process of arriving at decisions on border closures is not widely publicised and is perceived as biased by many sector stakeholders. [The Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security] should review the current border closures process to ensure equity between all sector participants, publish the criteria and process for border closures, and consider disseminating the minutes of the NHPTC meetings arriving at each border closure decision.”
Sunday Standard sought clarification about this policy, including details about who members of the NHPTC are but the response never came.
It appears likely that the ban is here to stay – as a matter of fact, both political leaders and government officials have said as much. However, there is a critical issue that has yet to enter the national conversation – the food hygiene standards of local produce that the government and farmers want in the market. Where do farmers get the water they use to water their crops and is that water safe? Are all farmers in compliance with WHO and FAO’s Code of Hygienic Practice for Fresh Fruits and Vegetables that addresses both agricultural hygienic practices “that help control microbial, chemical and physical hazards associated with all stages of the production of fresh fruits and vegetables, from primary production to consumption.” It is all very well for the government to empower local farmers but there is evidently no emphasis on the responsibilities that those being empowered should shoulder.
