According to the FAO, the 2013 rice season in West Africa yielded “an all-time high [harvest] of 13.7 million tonnes (8.7 million tonnes, milled basis)”. This was attributed to exceptional harvests in Chad, Mali and Nigeria and favourable output levels in Côte d’Ivoire, Gambia, Guinea, Guinea Bissau, Mauritania, Sierra Leone and Togo. However, as a result of “erratic weather conditions, output fell in Benin, Burkina Faso, Ghana, Liberia, Niger and Senegal”.

While initial projections can only be tentative given weather-related uncertainties, the FAO forecasts a 1.46% expansion of West African rice production in 2014 to 13.9 million tonnes of paddy (8.8 million tonnes, milled basis). This is attributed “to Government assistance and increased investment in the sector”, which has increased the area under rice. The picture varies, however, from country to country across the region.

At the policy level “in 2013, officials in the Gambia announced plans to impose a full ban on rice imports by 2016, when they expect the country to be fully self-sufficient in rice.” In recent years the government of Gambia has sought to boost rice production through the distribution of inputs including improved NERICA rice varieties. More recently, under its Vision 2016 Rice Self-sufficiency Agenda, the government is “looking to promote large-scale cultivation of rice, multi-cropping, as well infrastructural improvements”. On this basis, the FAO anticipates an expansion of rice production above the record level of 2013, to reach a harvest of 72,000 tonnes (47,000 tonnes milled rice).

However, in 2012/13 Gambia’s annual rice imports reached 137,000 tonnes, with a national rice consumption of 178,822 tonnes. The government is therefore reconsidering its decision to ban rice imports from 2016, with any such ban being contingent upon self-sufficiency targets being met. Local experts have convincingly argued that an import ban in the absence of the attainment of self-sufficiency objectives would simply “result in rice smuggling as in the case of Nigeria”.

The government of Ghana is also seeking to actively promote local rice production to reduce import dependency and attain full self-sufficiency by 2018, “when production is targeted to reach 1.2 million tonnes”. The government has developed a range of input subsidy and improvement programmes (particularly targeting youth) and is supporting a range of irrigation initiatives. The FAO, however, implies that the Ghanaian government self-sufficiency target may be over-ambitious, since it would require 20% annual production growth.

The government of Liberia is hoping to encourage local rice production by introducing a 25% local procurement requirement for all government agencies. This is projected to create a market for some 3,500 tonnes of rice. Rice purchase areas are already taking place from farmers operating under a USAID support rice development scheme. Creating market opportunities for local rice producers through such public procurement initiatives is seen as essential if production development efforts are to prove sustainable. 

FAO’s July 2014 Rice Market Monitor reported on improved prospects for rice production in East Africa. Compared to average production from 2009 to 2011, rice production is projected to be 17% higher in 2014. Despite initial fears over 2014 production levels, the Tanzanian rice production is forecast to be 200,000 tonnes higher than in 2013, with a harvest of 2.1 million tonnes (1.4 million tonnes, milled basis), representing a 4% increase.

This expansion in production was attributed to an increase in the area under rice and achieving yields of 2 tonnes per ha, contrasting to the 1.7 tonnes per ha in 2005. The government has been supporting irrigation schemes, the adoption of improved seed varieties and subsidised input programmes. This is projected to see Tanzanian rice imports fall to 95,000 tonnes from 121,000 tonnes in 2013.

Rice production in Kenya is expected to stabilise at the record harvest level attained in 2013 of 147,000 tonnes (95,000 tonnes milled basis). Despite this production trend, “Kenya is expected to increase imports by 4% in 2014 to 420,000 tonnes.”

Production prospects have been less favourable in Rwanda where output has been depressed by “erratic rains and shortages of inputs”. Even with these production challenges, imports of rice into Rwanda are forecast to be stable.

In terms of rice trading, government policy measures play an important role. Although the EAC Common External Tariff (CET) on rice imports is nominally 75%, member states have made use of a range of national exemptions approved on a year-by-year basis.

In June 2014 EAC ministers agreed to increase the applied tariff from 25 to 35%, in the face of protests from farmers over the market impact of cheap rice imports. However, Uganda declined to commit to the new 35% rate, preferring to maintain a 75% duty in order to promote domestic rice production.

This broad agreement meant that the government of Tanzania allowed tariff waivers introduced in 2013 to lapse, “in order to quell inflationary pressure”.

In the case of Rwanda for 2014, FAO reports that “less favorable duty concessions have also been announced”. Imported rice “will attract a 45 percent tariff rate (or USD 200 per tonne, whichever is higher) until June 2015”.

For its part Kenya, while applying the 35% tariff, has raised the minimum tariff per tonne to US$200 compared to US$100 per tonne in 2013.

Rice farmers welcomed the increased protection introduced, with Kenyan farmers also calling for more investment in irrigation and more support for input supplies.

Kenyan rice importers, meanwhile, have complained that the increased tariff could drive small-scale importers out of business. For their part, Pakistani rice exporters maintain that the new charges will cause total fees collected on Kenya’s annual rice imports of 400,000 tonnes to increase from US$ 180 million to US$260 million.

To date the Kenyan moves to increase tariff protection in the rice sector have not led to any countervailing moves by the Pakistani authorities with regard to Kenyan tea exports, where tariff concessions had earlier been bilaterally exchanged. 

In mid August 2014, the government of Tanzania “appealed to individual traders and agencies to buy and export surplus maize following bumper harvests” in certain regions. Farmers’ leaders in the Ruvuma region have expressed concerns that much of the 300,000 tonnes of maize harvest in the region could spoil if markets were not found.

Some commentators have argued that farmers lack “knowledge on the procedures needed to export the produce”, while the government’s capacity to purchase the maize is limited. This season Tanzania’s National Food Reserve Agency (NFRA) targeted purchases of “only 40,000 tonnes from the Ruvuma, Iringa, Njombe, Rikwa and Mbeya regions”. The government is however working with farmers to help them find markets outside the country and understand market requirements.

Government officials said that “doors are open for local traders to buy and sell maize to neighbouring countries… all the documents are available at our office, interested buyers can visit us to get the procedures.” Government officials have identified markets for Tanzanian maize in Kenya, Sudan and the DRC. However, in the preceding weeks, the District Commissioner for Songea District had warned small-scale farmers against selling maize to local brokers, since these offered low prices and made high marks-up when selling to consumers. He advised farmers that all “agricultural surplus crops should be sold directly to the national food Reserve Agency.”

Ruvuma farmers are reported to be working with the Tanzania Chamber of Commerce, Industry and Agriculture (TCCIA) in an effort to sell thousands of tonnes of maize to the DRC.

These developments need to be seen against the background of warnings that “some 20 million people are facing acute food insecurity in eastern and central Africa” (up from 15.8 million in July 2013). The East and Central Africa Food Security and Nutrition Group, a multi-stakeholder forum, issued warnings that the situation could deteriorate still further “in the absence of quick action”.

The Chief Executive of the Southern Agricultural Growth Corridor of Tanzania (SAGCOT) highlighted the efforts made to boost production through the provision of quality seeds and fertilisers, but stressed that there also needed to be a plan “to ensure that there are reliable markets for [farmers’] produce.”

A report from Business Monitor International meanwhile suggests there are structural problems facing Tanzania in its efforts to become a competitive regional maize supplier, despite the immense opportunities potentially available. Representatives of the Tanzania Exporters Association implied that government administrative arrangements were not geared towards supporting exports, with difficulties, for example, in obtaining export permits.

The report called for a review of the government’s export policy with a view to stimulating regional trade, taking into account the capacity constraints of farmers, particularly literacy levels. It also highlighted the scope for TCCIA to organise producers, traders and transporters into “business clubs to be targeted for training on how to utilise immense opportunities lying within the [East African Community Market]”. 

The World Bank has published a policy paper on the scope for improving informal cross-border trade in maize, rice and beans, proposing the establishment of a ‘Charter for cross-border traders’. The charter would enshrine rights and obligations of both traders and officials, and would be aimed at promoting the formalisation of trade in cereals and beans. It would seek to build on existing departmental guidelines but would also introduce a credible complaint mechanism using toll-free phone lines and an effective performance measurement system.

The policy paper argues that allowing informal traders to integrate into the formal economy “would boost trade and the private sector base for future growth and development”. This is seen as particularly important for women, who are the majority of informal cross-border traders and for whom such trade is often the main or sole source of income.

At present, informal cross-border trade flows are substantial. It is estimated that in East Africa in 2013, 3 million tonnes of food staples were traded informally. In Southern Africa in 2011/12, informal cross-border trade in maize was estimated at 139,243 tonnes, rice at 8,485 tonnes and beans at 15,380 tonnes.

Currently the costs of cross-border transactions “remain expensive for small traders in Africa”. In a review of Malawi–Zambia border posts, costs were on average 62% more expensive for small traders than for formal sector traders. This, however, is less than the additional costs faced by small-scale traders if they trade formally – these are estimated to be 125% higher than for large-scale traders.

The situation in the Malawi–Zambia border area, which was the subject of a case study included in the policy paper, is seen as indicative of more general problems across the region. Factors increasing costs and driving informal trade include:

• high customs duties and taxes;
• time-consuming and inefficient border procedures;
• opaque or arbitrary application of rules;
• hostility and harassment by border officials of small-scale traders (particularly women);
• trader registration and tax identification requirements;
• the centralisation of administration of import and export licences and SPS certificates.

The paper maintains that while a range of simplified trade regimes have been launched to facilitate cross-border trade, “a host of registration and other requirements remain in place and increase small trader costs to uncompetitive levels.”

In August 2014, COMESA launched a dialogue with MPs from the region on how to ensure that arrangements for intra-regional trade in staple foods are made more transparent and predictable. The aim is to enlist the active support of MPs to ensure that ad hoc measures affecting imports and exports are less frequently used. The use of such measures generates “market gluts at the producer level”, thus depressing farm gate prices, and increases the costs of cross-border trade, to the detriment of consumers and food security objectives. 

On 1 September 2014 the farmer-owned Dutch dairy cooperative FrieslandCampina announced that it had acquired Olam International’s dairy business in Côte d’Ivoire, including the right to use Olam’s Pearl brand for sweet condensed and evaporated milk “in designated African countries”.

Olam’s facility in Abidjan “processes local fresh milk and milk powder into sweetened condensed milk and evaporated milk for the local market”, but the Dutch cooperative’s purchase of Olam’s dairy business supplements FrieslandCampina’s existing involvement in Nigeria and its presence in established export markets for its Bonnet Rouge brand of evaporated milk (see Agritrade article ‘ Expanding Dutch corporate involvement in local milk procurement in Nigeria’, 15 April 2013).

FrieslandCampina’s media relations director, Jan-Willem ter Avest, has described the purchase of Olam’s dairy business in Côte d’Ivoire as “an opportunity to export milk powder from the Netherlands to the Ivory Coast”.

While forming part of FrieslandCampina’s longer-term strategy the acquisition also needs to be seen against the background of the market effects of Russia’s import ban on EU dairy products. In 2013 FrieslandCampina exported cheese to the value of €50 million to Russia. In response to the Russian import embargo, some alternative markets have been found for the existing cheese produced for the Russian market, but now “cheese production specifically for the Russian market has been suspended”. This means that “more milk powder is being produced to relieve the cheese market.”

The acquisition also needs to be seen in the context of a 44% decline in skimmed-milk powder prices at the GlobalDairyTrade auction in the course of 2014. 

Roots and tubers have traditionally been the second largest sub-category of food production in the Caribbean, with imports equivalent to around 19% of domestic production and exports around 5% of domestic production. Haiti and Jamaica traditionally dominated production of roots and tubers in the Caribbean (around 90%)

Recent press reports suggest, however, that exports of roots and tubers are growing in importance in the Caribbean. It was reported in July that in 2013 “Jamaica exported more yam than traditional agricultural exports combined.” This reflects a wider trend in growth of non-traditional exports, such as yam, dasheen, ginger, pumpkin, papaya and pepper.

This in part reflects changing consumption patterns in major developed country markets, with a number of ‘ethnic’ crops now going mainstream, and large supermarkets such as Tesco and Walmart now stocking such products. It is estimated, for example, that US consumption of sweet potato increased by 50% between 2002 and 2012, as the health benefits of sweet potato have been increasingly recognised.

Against this background, the Jamaican government is to launch an export platform framework that facilitates exchange between suppliers and purchasers in Jamaica and overseas. The initiative is being carried out under the Agriculture Ministry’s “Agricultural Competitiveness Programme (ACP), in collaboration with the Inter-American Institute for Cooperation in Agriculture (IICA)”. The initiative includes training for farmers on export market opportunities, market requirements, and direct support for marketing and participation in trade fairs. It is recognised by exporters and the Ministry that “Jamaica has to improve its export practices, at least in terms of consistency, if its products are to secure a spot on mainstream shelves”.

The Jamaican Agriculture Minister reported “strong interests from the Fresh Produce Consortium of the United Kingdom” (FPC) whose representatives had visited Jamaica “to explore the possibilities of acquiring supplies of sweet potato”. He also reported that a number of large farmers operating in the government-supported agro-park schemes were already “negotiating contracts with buyers in the Fresh Produce Consortium to supply sweet potato”, with these farmers now sourcing “planting material for the variety of sweet potato required by the Consortium”. The government is now assisting the farmers concerned in conforming with the “good agricultural practices” that are a critical requirement for exports to FPC buyers in the UK.

Beyond Jamaica, the government in Trinidad and Tobago is promoting the use of cassava in its School Feeding Programme, for blending with flour and for use in animal feed. This forms part of efforts to promote public–private sector partnerships to reduce the country’s food import bill. Production of yam, cassava and sweet potato reportedly increased by 15.2, 52.2 and 58.2% respectively between 2012 and 2013.

In September 2014, FAO warned that the outbreak of the Ebola disease in Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone, “the three West African countries most affected”, was disrupting food production and trade in basic foodstuffs. It warned that labour shortages were “putting the upcoming harvest season at serious risk” in those countries, where “quarantine zones and restrictions on people’s movement” had also been introduced.

These restrictions on people’s movement have also “curtailed the movement and marketing of food”. According to FAO, this has led to “panic buying, food shortages and significant food price hikes on some commodities, especially in urban centres”. FAO argues that “these latest price spikes are effectively putting food completely out” the reach of many urban consumers (particularly in Liberia and Sierra Leone).

These developments have severely affected what had promised to be a favourable harvest. FAO representatives have now warned that “food insecurity is poised to intensify in the weeks and months to come.” It is thought that the current situation “will have long-lasting impacts on farmers’ livelihoods and rural economies”.

FAO believes that “measures to revive internal trade are essential to ease supply constraints and mitigate further food price increases.” In response to the emerging crisis, the UN WFP “has launched a regional emergency operation targeting some 65,000 tonnes of food to 1.3 million people”.

Imports from overseas are also being affected, with Thai rice exporters reporting growing difficulties in securing ships to deliver cargoes to West African ports – as ship owners face difficulties in recruiting personnel for deliveries to West Africa, and European ship owners are increasing freight rates and imposing surcharges for calls at West African ports (see Agritrade article ‘Guyana looking to develop rice exports to West Africa’, forthcoming 2014). These factors, alongside the landing and tranship of cargo via ports less severely affected for onward shipping by road, are likely to greatly increase the costs of food deliveries to Ebola-affected West Africa countries in the coming months.

Meanwhile, in an attempt to contain the cost-increasing effects of the Ebola outbreak, the government of Liberia has sought to regulate the price of rice and other staple foods. This involves setting maximum prices which retailers and consumers are being urged not to exceed.

According to reports in the East African press, imports of maize from neighbouring countries have led to maize prices in parts of the Rift Valley dropping “by more than 40 per cent”. In August, this saw the price offered by maize traders to farmers fall from KSh3,300 to KSh2,000 (from approx. €30 to 18) per 90-kg bag in a 1-month period. According to traders, maize millers were offering low prices because “the maize imports from mainly Uganda and Tanzania have flooded the markets in Eldoret, Kitale and other towns in Western Kenya.” Press reports cited Ministry of Agriculture officials stating that some 1.8 million bags of maize would be imported from the EAC area between August and October 2014.

The falling prices have created problems for the maize traders, many of whom have been left holding high stock levels, retained in the expectation of higher prices following earlier predictions of a maize deficit of 10 million bags.

However, other press reports suggest that imports may not be the sole reason for the price declines, arguing that “maize prices in the north Rift Valley have hit their lowest level in eight months as farmers release the produce they have been hoarding.” This release of stocks held by farmers took place in the expectation of increased levels of imports that would then further impact on prices.

In mid August 2014, press reports suggested that production would be at the lower end of the range cited by the Cabinet secretary – some 34 million bags, compared to a target of 42 million bags. The situation led Kenya’s National Drought Management Authority and the Kenyan Red Cross to issue warnings of “a looming famine following the prolonged drought”.

The Kenyan Agriculture Cabinet Secretary, Felix Koskei, denied reports of maize shortages. He commented that the country had a “reserve of 2.9 million bags” at NCPB depots, a figure expected to rise to 3.4 million bags (this compares to a reported optimum reserve level of 5 million bags). It was argued by Mr Koskei that affordability was a more important issue for food-deficit households.

Nevertheless, there remain uncertainties: decreased rainfall and a resurgence of the viral disease affecting maize continue to raise concerns. 

The South African government’s introduction of stricter sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) controls on imports of livestock in May 2014 highlighted the importance of both flexible government and private sector responses to SPS challenges, as well as to and market diversification and investment in value-added processing.

At a meeting of the Namibian Livestock Producers Organisation in August 2014, it was reported that, to respond to SPS challenges, the Namibian government had moved quickly to restructure its Department of Veterinary Services “to increase capacity with regard to vaccinations and testing” and explore the scope for accreditation of private vets to immediately increase the technical capacity to meeting vaccination and testing requirements. The Namibian meat industry’s umbrella body, the Meat Board, for its part planned “eight new positions on a contract basis to relieve the temporary shortage of capacity with regard to vaccinations and testing”, and drafted a “standardized document which clearly reflects the export requirements” for the South African market.

These actions took place alongside an ongoing bilateral dialogue on an appropriate cost-effective basis for meeting South African SPS requirements, in view of Namibia’s favourable animal disease status.

The actions place in context ongoing SADC efforts to operationalise the SPS annex attached to the SADC Trade Protocol that was agreed in 2008. The efforts are being intensified with the assistance of the EU under the Regional Economic Integration Support (REIS) programme, given the growing importance of SPS issues as a barrier to intra-regional trade. It is hoped that putting the SPS annex into operation will not only strengthen the protection of human, plant and animal health in the SADC region through increasing national implementation capacities, but also provide a forum for addressing SPS issues and resolving SPS disputes.

However, SADC efforts, as illustrated by the August 2014 experts’ workshop in Tanzania, are primarily focused on information sharing and, with the help of the EU REIS programme, stakeholder training on SPS requirements.

In terms of SPS policy discussions, the SADC SPS Coordinating Committee has to date mainly focused on providing a forum for regional discussions on issues coming up in international forum, such as the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE), the International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC), Codex Alimentarius and the WTO SPS Committee.

In terms of market diversification Namibia’s Meat Board is more actively exploring markets in livestock and livestock products in Angola, the Democratic Republic of Congo, and Zambia, and looking at the goat sector in the Middle East. In the medium term, efforts are also under way to expand feedlot capacity to allow more animals to be raised locally for processing prior to export. The May 2014 SPS-based disruptions of exports to South Africa were described as a “wake-up call for Namibia to invite more investors to invest in local abattoirs and feedlots”.