. ill} tepvlli.‘ .. 10.. HAWKMW~N23JSHKHX .1 INA. n. ...m....w. 2.... . . . . . I .- . (:24..th1...‘ .2. II. a. u nrb . I‘Krfllolb v.0 {fir-0‘ . ll '3 . . l '. 'z . . I ’II o . f0 . . u . I .lllvtwu..Iv-.nIIvOnI-uv.|r.pnn PM”; oh . . ... . . .. ... u (III 2 c . nun fr. - . . . . Ix. . 0r!” uni .5 it. i . . . o x . KI!- o.[n.l| (VAL-l. I. 1.1.“ . . . . . . - ... 2. .a 1.7 ...n . 2 . . ufl! .942; . . . . . . . {9:35. .2. a I . r . A . I . - . . . . .III. n.N.m.-. 2.3.1.... v : . . f, . ..Wk.$..A..m ha; . . I: n u ‘9‘ Ill» . .. ... . . .o. 2..A...I-JNCY. h‘hlvvla I. 113:: I . ...... I... ,. v. 5.2,, . ’YILDVU‘QNIOPI..)~ ‘52... ‘u.’ ‘iauol .. . 2 . . Z . . O for? 1; l-In Yral. Icon 0:... a _ . ~ . ~ o . l I! uxglilxr'vflrvi’ OJIIJNV 2 . i . .. t 4!. \.| n n . C , v. -XnWQ n l.\. n O DIV!) v \| -. ‘rlhlulc . . n!” . K . 2 o I. ‘0 ll . .MHIIJHH .3 unarn. H . Lit" .T a . £1.10on |J ., , ,. ,.. . . 2 u .0 u . DM'WVvM‘gAJJvI Ari lbmf“. O. éflflfl! fimeM....lmmmtfl.n Hank“. .c.I.d...m....b Jll .. I} .22 2 :1... ‘ l I, : .l. ul((.l)lxt.| : ill . If . 0““. ‘0‘. tall. I QhHWW’..’...IIIrIIIl "YIfi.|!-»; pd") ”if”! .Unlfluflw..l?luuu.rfl. rid! p.2hndlcu4Mu.dbr.l.t:v . . .. .. .. . . - . . . . .. . . . . ‘DA’PII . .. . .. . . . u. a u...| . 2 A I . .. ¢ 2 . . . n . . .itf. . ”NM“?! . . . . I . .. .. . Irma..- ..... . . [HI . . . . . . . . . .. ... . ... 395 9.2".qu 4r . . ..Il134‘v.vf‘-2 ... . a ‘ #Jfi-QVANVM. .. A4. I 5.9.x. afiq. .11.. .PcP "U? ‘K- . -. fly! .4: JINI. p..._.fl‘..¢p1r|. . .u "41.9.6511 r“..u..o.Pn~ _ 2.. i _ «34...»? Jaw. wt... «9.3.». «79.x. .. v. .I. | u. .21.. $2.2“. .19. . I. . . fink . . . .lrfl. . .. :r. 1 fr at... A . t I Q . 2 «award. 2' . . T . 4 .u’u... . . 1.? .4 . . - I. 2“.“ . . .. . . ll \«rsal...uf..l\fl)l AH! J . . i .a . .. “.11‘tv’ufll} 17 f- .2! . 111‘ t. 121...}. o .. . . . 1 .3121?“ N 9.5212334531an2211. ”In! Manufact. . . {Nu .A\.H-.N...31.HH. 14.43" . . . u. .k ATM... . Ta»... 4 .. .....l...2...4- ; .14.. (Y2. uni? . 1.11.3.(1. «J .um” _ .. .,. 3...}.,-.ufl.clilju.du.alfi.s.k31h¢: a. .. . . . . .. . . . . ... 5.2.5:. u‘xv .. 2.1. .301 .1 3. . 1.. . .c 2 2.20. C Int-.11... . .. 2..2\ \ .. , ‘ .. .1. . . . 2 . . . , . . . I .2. . .u . u 1 A . v . . . . n . . . .. . 2 1 LIBRARY 1” Michigan State UniverllL l This is to certify that the dissertation entitled Rural Food Security in Zambia presented by Lovejoy Mulambo Malambo has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph-D. degree in erl opment WW fi— / Major professor Date June: 22; 1987 MS U it an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution 0-12771 RETURNING MATERIALS: )V1ESI.] Place in book drop to remove this checkout from LIBRARIES . your record. FINES Wlll be charged if book is returned after the date stamped below. ‘ ,. AUG 2 3 :9 9 MAY 01”. J‘ _ 125 3(30 A.Z (JUNW' “I ‘5 ii. . «xx 0135 lMUL 15w; . . 199 . ' “A; “1252993 2272222 5 'w :7 '3 M “I. 0.1 I 1995 g 280. iii? 2 ' m I J?" o Jlfl4120747mi -3, 91L- , RURAL FOOD SECURITY IN ZNBIA ‘V- {IN . . By LoveJoy Mulambo Malanbo ' ». A Dissertation Submitted to Michigan State University in partial ful fill-eat of the requirements for the degree of ,- 2 MOTOR (F PHILOSWHY 2 Department of Resource Devel opment ABSTRACT RURAL FOOD SECURITY IN ZAlBIA By Lovejoy Mulambo Malambo The purpose of this study was to provide a better understanding of food security problems in Zambia from a rural household perspective. The study specifically addresses itself to how households meet target consumption levels on a yearly basis in the face of fluctuating production. prices and household incomes. The dissertation includes a descriptive analysis of the food grain production and distribution system in Zambia. followed by an investigation of rural households' food production and disposal behavior. including the utilization of on- farm storage facilities. The data used in the analysis were collected by the author from both primary and secondary sources. Primary data were collected from a sample of 132 rural households in Mumbwa District. between July and November 1985. Secondary data were collected from published and unpublished reports from a number of government departments. parastatal organizations and international agencies. Maize is the major food grain produced in Zambia and is also the main staple food commodity. Besides being the most important food item among the rural households. it is also the main source of income. Over 60 percent of the maize produced is used for home consumption. the rest is sold to the monopsonistic grain marketing board or cooperative unions that operate in each Zambian province. The government policy of Lovejoy Mulambo Malambo pan-territorial and pan-seasonal pricing has made it unprofitable to store food crops on farms and has encouraged farmers to sell the grain following the harvest. This has made rural food deficit households more vulnerable to food insecurity. The public sector grain marketing system operates to move grain from rural areas to urban centers but have largely neglected the back- flow of grain. Grain deficit households in rural areas mainly depend on other rural households for supplemental food supplies. The investigations also revealed that households undertake various actions to guard against poor food harvests. These include storing more grain than what is required in a single season. undertaking other agricultural activities that can raise income. such as growing vegetables and other cash crops. practicing mixed cropping or selling animals. beer and fish. Beer selling was particularly common among the low income households. _w_._‘w'v . 7 ‘-._ ' ' TH'LL' l'iifii My 5. " .' ' . ‘- . . ,. ‘ -;~".1o;- :45" L, . - 4s W; Professo- ,:v,)-. ‘ ‘ ' T , .7 _ ' f. ‘wr. "I also wish i - i. ‘ - .-. .m. 3117.395 we ..A‘. ~ A...... “. . ( f 2- ,flacbing support .31:!"I"' ' '-- ., g : -- ic-l".7“"'2:"} Shuts”. ‘0 ”.lWDO- Fob-f. 5‘ ‘ i ‘. .._ ... \ 4‘," 'de ' «nevi; 3r lite feted greatly to in!) .v.:‘.V-se_~-.:. s.‘ a) viu' » -: -W1'.‘.'\"-‘._§ln state *- greteful to Or. woman. can my 'xitzgr‘kgfi‘l-Zg an up: has ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am indebted to many individuals and institutions for their support throughout my doctoral program. My sincere appreciation is due to Professor Harold Riley. Chairman of my dissertation committee. I am greatly indebted to him for the guidance. encouragement and support he offered during the preparation of this dissertation and during my entire program. I wish to thank Professor Manfred Thullen my academic advisor for his advice. encouragement and constructive criticism throughout the program. I gratefully acknowledge the contributions and assistance of the other members of my dissertation committee. Professor Carl K. Eicher. Professor Frank Fear and Professor Milton Steinmueller. I also wish to thank my wife Catherine. who always offered me unflinching support during the doctoral program. Mwanakatiwe Sikasula. Lweendo Malambo. Butambo Malambo and LoveJoy Malambo Jr. also contributed greatly to the success of my studies at Michigan State University. I am grateful to Dr. Kabede Daka for catographing the maps that are in this dissertation. Special thanks to Professor Carl K. Eicher for his intellectual stimulation and initiation of my program. 111 I am grateful to the African-American Institute (AAI) for funding my doctoral program and the University of Zambia (UNZA) for granting me study leave. At AAI. I am particularly grateful to Anita Johnson. Gale Baker and Louis Africa for their love and friendship. Assistance given by Professor K. Mwauluka (Principal UNZA. Lusaka Campus) and Professor Ziche (formerly of the Department of Rural Economy and Extension Education. School of Agricultural Sciences) during the field research for this study is also greatly appreciated. Nora Beckett deserves a special mention for typing this dissertation. TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TMLEsIOCOI0.0C0....OI0.0.0I.0...IO.IOOOCOIOCIOOIIIOOCOIII. x1 LIST OF FIGURESOOICC.IIOUIOO..ICDC.00.0.0000...OOIOOCIIOOCOOOOICIOC x1v ”REVIATIWS MD EASUREMENTSOOOCCIIIO..O.I....IC..I...I.....CIIOI xv mmERl-INTRODl’CTIoNOCQCOOOOIIOI0...0....IIOOODIOIIOIIOOIIOOIOO Food sxur1tyIOOOIOCCO......00....IOOCCCCICIOOC'OOOOIOOCIOIOOO The concept of Food SOCUritYeeeeeeeeeeeeeoeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee \OU'IHH Food Security in Zambia....................................... Performance of the Agricultural Sector in Zambia.............. 12 Focus of this Study........................................... 17 Significance of the Study..................................... 18 Study Objectives.............................................. 20 Research Procedure.............£.............................. 21 Selection of Study Area....................................... 24 Geographic Location...................................... 24 Physical Characteristics of the Area..................... 25 Food Grain Production and Production Potential........... 25 Internal Transport Infrastructure........................ 26 Organization of Study......................................... 26 CHAPTER 2 - FARM LEVEL FOOD GRAIN PRODUCTION IN ZAIBIA............. 28 Review of the Development of the Agricultural Sector.......... 28 The Colonial Period...................................... 29 Present Structure of the Agricultural Sector............. 33 Crop Production............................................... 34 Food Grain Production.................................... 38 Food Production Systems....................................... 40 ' Traditional Farms........................................ 40 Small-Scale or Emergent Farms............................ 43 Commercial Producers..................................... 44 State Fanns.............................................. 45 Maize Production Trends.................................. 46 Wheat Production Trends.................................. 50 Sorghum and Millet Production Trends..................... 52 smaryIOCOCOCOOOQIOOCIOII.I0.0...OOUCOOOCIOOOCOICOIIOICO 54 CHAPTER 3 - THE ORGANIZATION OF THE FOOD GRAIN DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM IN MIA: ADESmIFrIoNOCOCOIOOIOI...O....OOCIOCOCCOOOIOODOICIIOIOCC The Food Grain Distribution System............................ 56 Types of Food Grain Markets................................... 64 Rural Markets............................................ 65 Urban Markets............................................ 66 Food Grain Distribution....................................... 67 Maize Distribution....................................... 67 Channels of Distribution................................. 69 Channel One.............................................. 69 Channel Two.............................................. 70 Channel Three............................................ 71 Maize Exports and Imports................................ 75 Transportation........................................... 77 Storage.................................................. 79 Processing............................................... 82 Retailing................................................ 85 Costs.................................................... 86 Distribut1°n of "heatOOOOIIIOOICCODICUOOIIOOOOOOIOOCICCOO 87 vi Distribution of Sorghum and Millet....................... sumaryIQOCOIOIGI.OOIIIOIIIIIIIOOOOIIOOOOOCOOIOIIOOCCOOOICCOO. CHAPTER 4 - RESEARCH METHODOLCEY................................... Selection of the Study Site................................... Physical Characteristics of the Area..................... Food Grain Production.................................... Population and Population Distribution................... Internal Transport Infrastructure........................ Local Language........................................... Geographic Location...................................... Relevant Institutional Arrangements...................... Research Design and Instruments............................... Data Collection Methods.................................. Survey Period............................................ Data Collection.......................................... Units of Study........................................... Household Unit........................................... Marketing Organizations.................................. The Survey Process....................................... Selection and Training Enumerators....................... Field Data Collection Method............................. Sample Design............................................ sample S126...O0.00II.OIII.CCCIOOOIIIIOICOOOOOICOOOIII... Types of Data Collected by the Survey.................... vii 87 88 91 91 91 92 95 96 97 97 98 100 101 101 102 103 103 104 104 105 107 108 110 114 CHAPTER 5 Data Preparation and Analysis............................ Data L1m1tat1°n5eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee - FOOD SECURITY AT RURAL HOUSEHOLD AND VILLAGE LEVEL..... Introduct1on.IOOOIIOCOOOI0.0.0...0..OI.OOOIOOCIIOOCOUIIOOCCCIO Househ01d character‘st1CSoeelo.I...OIIIoecceeeooteeeeoteeeeooo Crop Size of Households....................................... Number of People Fed Per Household....................... Distribution of Heads of Households...................... Level of Education....................................... Household Income......................................... Crop Sales............................................... Cattle Sales............................................. Beer Sales............................................... Remittances.............................................. Fish Sales............................................... Game Meat Sales.......................................... Production............................................... Cash Crop Production..................................... Food Crop Production..................................... Groundnuts Production............................... Maize Production.................................... Methods Used in Estimating Output........................ Decision Making in Maize Production...................... Reasons for Growing Maize................................ Maize varieties Gran...0.0.0....OUOIIOOUOCIOOCICOOOIOICI viii 116 116 118 118 120 120 124 125 126 127 130 131 132 132 133 134 134 135 136 136 138 142 143 145 147 Crop Mixtures............................................ Producers' Disposal Patterns.................................. Conceptual and Operational Definitions................... Grain Flow Statement................................ Marketed and Marketable Surplus..................... Maize Disposal Activities................................ Decision Making in Maize Disposal................... Marketing in the Study Regions...................... Maize Sellers....................................... Maize Buyers........................................ Rural-Rural Market Linkages.............................. Farm Households' Storage Facilities and Practices............. Capacities of Maize Storage Facilities................... Maize Storage Practices.................................. Usage of Stored Maize.................................... Maize Storage losses..................................... Storage Costs............................................ Decision Making in Maize Storage......................... Strategies and Measurers to Guard Against Hunger.............. Sources of Market InfomationIOIUICIOOO...|...C...ICOIIIOOCIOO CHAPTER 6 - SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS................................ Major Findings................................................ The Food Production System in Zambia..................... The Food Distribution System............................. survey Resu1t50eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee-eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee ix 152 154 154 154 160 161 162 165 167 167 169 171 177 178 179 185 186 186 186 188 190 192 193 194 199 ConCIusionSUIOe00.0.0000ll.0'Ione.II.lIOCOOIeeeleleoeeeeeeeleO Lessons and Imp]1cat1°ns...'..OIO..0I.IDOOOICIIOIOOOOICI'COOCO Limitations of studyOIIIOCCOIOOIOOOOIOI.I...I...O.IOOIOOO.UOO. Further Research Needs...I.I0.0.00.0...OOIOOIOIIIICIIICOIIOOII Recmendat10nSOOCOCOUOI...0.000....II.IICOOCOCIIICGOIICCIOIOO Append1x AC...IO..IIOOOOOICCOCOIOIIOOOIO§0.00ICIOICIOOIOCIOCJCOIOOC Append‘x B..0.CIOOOII.UOI.'IOOOCOCOOOOOIIOOOCCOCCQIOIIIOOCIIICOCIOI Appendix Cee.eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee Appendix DCOOOCIOIOIIOI.0.0.0.0...O...COIIOOOIOOOCOOOCOCIOOOIIOU... Append1x ECO-OOIIOIOOCIOCOQCCCI...COOOOI0.0000IIIIOOOOOIOIICOIOOOOI Appendix F.CIOIIII.OUCCICOCOOIOOUOIOQOIIIOCOOIIICOCOIIIOOIIOOIOOQOO BIBLImWYeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeaeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee 210 212 213 214 215 219 220 221 238 239 240 241 Table 1.1 Table 1.2 Table 1.3 Table 1.4 Table 1.5 Table 2.1 Table 2.2 Table 2.3 Table 2.4 Table 2.5 Table 2.6 Table 2.7 Table 2.8 Table 2.9 Table 3.1 Table 3.2 Table 3.3 Table 3.4 LIST OF TABLES Comparative Growth of Agriculture in Selected African countIQSeeeeeeeeeeeeeeveeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeo Food Self-Sufficiency Ratios in Selected Sub-Saharan countr‘IeSeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee Zambia - Population by Province. 1963. 1969. 1980 and Inter censa] erth RatSOOOIIOIDOC-.00..ICIIIIIOOIOOOIOII Sectoral Shares in Gross Domestic Product................ Growth of Agriculture Production in Zambia............... Major Ecological Zones in Zambia......................... Hectarage and Marketed Output of Food Grain. Zambia...... Structure and Characteristics of Farm Households. About 19850....IIOOIOCOOI.IIQOOOOIOOOOICOOOOOOCOOIOIOOQOC Maize Production Costs and Margins by Farming Type 1982/8300eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeaeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee Commercial Production of Maize (1965-1982)............... Marketed Production of Maize by Province................. Zambia: Projected Demand for Maize...................... Wheat Production and Prices in Zambia.................... Officially Marketed Production and Producer Price of sorghl’m and M1119t' Zmbia...‘Ill...IIIOOOIOICOIOOOIIOCOO Nominal Protection in Maize Production (1966-1982)....... Maize Imports and Exports................................ Existing Maize Storage Facilities in Zambia.............. Storage Capacity for Maize Central province.............. xi 3 4 13 14 35 39 41 44 48 49 50 51 76 77 81 82 Table 3.5 Table 3.6 Table 4.1 Table 4.2 Table 4.3 Table 5.1 Table 5.2 Table 5.3 Table 5.4 Table 5.5 Table 5.6 Table 5.7 Table 5.8 Table 5.9 Estimated Flow of Maize Production from Processing Industry to consumers-Ill...ClOII0.0000CIOOIOOOOUOOOOIOI. 84 Maize Allocations to Millers by Cooperative Unions and NMMDOUOOOOOOOIIOOOIIOOOCIIOOOICIOOIOIOOOOIIIIOIIC % Production and Consumption of Food Crops in Mumbwa District 1980 and IQBIIIOIOOIIOOICIIIOCIIOIOIOOOOOIOOOCIO 93 Central province: Population Distribution by District by D‘str1Ct 1963' 1969 and 1980......0.IOCIOIOOOOOOOIOOOC 95 Distribution of Samples in Study Regions................. 113 Characteristics of the Households in the Study Sample.... 123 CPOP PrOdUCtTOn (1983-84 and 1984-85)aeoeeeeeeaeweoweeeee 135 Production Estimates for Maize in All the Survey Regions (1984 and 1985 Crop Years)....................... 142 Percentage Distribution of the Person Who Decides How Much Maize to Produce in the Survey Regions (1985)... 144 Percentage Distribution of Reasons Given by Farm Households for Producing Maize in the Survey Regions Averaged for 1984 and 1985 Crop Years.................... 146 Percentage Distribution of Farmers Who Grew Each Maize var‘ety1n1985CropYear.I0..IOCOIIOIOIOIOOIOOIOOOOOOIOO 149 Percentage Distribution of Reasons Given for Growing A Variety of Maize by Farm Households in the Survey Region (1985)0.0.0....0.0.0.000...OOIIOIOIIIOOOIIOIOOOOII 151 Distribution of Farm Households that Inter-planted Ma‘zew1th0‘thercrops (1985)O...OOIIOOOCIOOIOQOOIIOOIICI 153 Producers' Maize Disposal Patterns for 1983-84 Season.... 162 Table 5.10 Distribution of Average Distances to Maize and Food Table 5.11 Marketso'IICOIICDC-I...O...IIIOIOIIOOOOOCODCIOCCQCICCOOI 166 Distribution of Rural Households in the Survey Regions who bought Maize During 1984-85 Season.......... 170 Table 5.12 Distribution of Maize Storage Facilities Among the Farm Table 5.13 Households in the Survey Regions (1984)................. 177 Distribution of the Total Maize Storage Capacity Per Survey Region by Type of Facility (1984)................ 178 xii "1625.14 Quantities of Maize Stored in the Survey Regions ( -8‘)OIOOOOI.OIOOOOCOOIIIIIOOOOIOOOIOIGOIIOOOIIIOIOO I“ m. 5.15 Usage of Stored Maize by Number of Farm Households “v (Igu-BS)OOIIICIOOIOOOOOOOIOOOOUOOIOOOOIIOICOIIOOOOOIOOO 1” ii“. 5.1.6 Use of Stored Maize by Percentage of Total Stored ‘ (19%”)...‘0.00.000.00.000.0.0.0.0...IIOOOIICOOOIIOCI. 184 Figure 1.1 Figure 2.1 Figure 3.1 Figure 4.1 Figure 5.1 Figure 5.2 Figure 5.3 Figure 5.4 LIST OF FIGURES Administrative Decisions................................ 10 Map of the Republic of Zambia........................... 37 The Food Grain Distribution System in Zambia............ 59 Mumbwa District......................................... 94 Maize Drying Platform................................... 141 Timber Pole Type Maize (Cob) Store...................... 173 Woven Basket Type of Maize (Cob) Store.................. 173 Kimberley Brick Type of Cob Store with Cement Base...... 174 82 C88 C50 GDP GNP IBRD LINTCO GMB MAWD NAMBOARD CPCMU IFAD ILO NIEO ZADL INDECO UNDP ABBREVIATIONS AND MEASUREMENTS Bank of Zambia Cold Storage Board Central Statistical Office Gross Domestic Product Gross National Product International Bank for Reconstruction and Development Lint Company of Zambia Grain Marketing Board Rural Marketing Board Ministry of Agriculture and Water Development National Agricultural Marketing board National Milling Corporation] Central Province Cooperative Marketing Union International Fund for Agricultural Development International Labor Organization World Bank New International Ecoonomic Order Zambia Agricultural Development Limited Industrial Development Corporation Contract Hanlage Zambian Kwacha (currency unit) United Nations Development Program ‘aquare kilometer (kn?) - 0.39 square miles \ 3&1qu (kg) - 2.2 pounds (lb) 2: l I o \ fin-mic ton (ton) - 100 kg - 2.204 lb . (‘15: 1 hectare (ha) . 2.47 acres :azxa, ';ikevlhn CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Food Security in Developing Countries As the extensive literature on the subject attests. world hunger still remains as one of the serious problems of our time. About a quarter of the world's population -- that is. more than 800 million people living mostly in the Indian subcontinent. Southeast Asia. Africa south of the Sahara. Middle East and in parts of Latin American. are afflicted by hunger and malnutrition (Chisholm and Tyers. 1982). Studies on food production and population trends reveal that mankind will continue to struggle to feed itself. Pervasive poverty and consequent low effective demand for food are the primary causes of the widespread hunger and nutritional deficiencies. In Africa. the food situation is serious. even precarious. despite the current world food surpluses. Within less than a decade. Africa could be facing another severe food crisis (Lele. 1984). According to a recent World Bank report (1984). one in every five Africans is wasting away through hunger and malnutrition. The report further points out that half the children under the age of five in countries like Tanzania. Sudan. and Burundi are malnourished. which means that. even if they survive. they are likely to be physically and -mm‘ 2 mentally impaired for life. United Nations (1984) studies estimate that more than 35 million people in the drought-ravaged parts of Africa are desperately in need of food. Consequently. many food analysts have warned 'that the continent will suffer a "nightmare" of famine and economic collapse. at least for the rest of the century. unless urgent action is taken. The irony of the current food situation in Africa is that. prior to the early 19705. several countries in Africa were net exporters of most basic food commodities. But. going into the 19805 and the third decade of their independence. domestic food production in most of these countries has fallen behind population growth rates. A USDA report (1981). points out that Africa south of the Sahara was the only region in the world where per capita food production declined over the past two decades. Although data. particulary for subsistence production. is too poor to permit precise estimates. production (which during the 19605 grew at 2.3 percent per year) registered only 1.3 percent annual growth in the 19805. -- less than half the rate of growth of population during the same period. As a result. per capita food production. which fell by 7 percent during the 19605. declined by 15 percent in the 19705 (World Bank. 1981). Table 1.1 presents comparative growth rates of food and non-food products for selected African countries to illustrate these trends. 3 Table 1.1 Comparative Growth of Agriculture in Selected African Counties Average Annual Growth Rate Average Annual Growth Rate of Volume of Production of Total Production per Capita 1969-71 to 1977-79 1969-71 to 1977-79 Zambia 3.0 0.9 2.8 0.0 -3.9 -0.2 Tanzania 1.9 -0.5 1.4 -1.5 -3.9 -2.0 Uganda 1.7 -8.3 -0.5 -1.3 -11.3 -3.5 Botswana 1.1 2.0 1.1 -1.1 -0.2 -1.1 Kenya 2.9 7.5 4.0 -O.5 4.1 0.6 Malawi 3.1 8.6 4.0 0.3 5.8 1.2 Zimbabwe 2.6 3.8 2.9 -0.7 0.5 -0.4 Swaziland 3.7 14.6 4.6 1.2 12.1 2.1 Lesotho 2.4 -7.0 1.4 0.1 -9.3 -0.9 mummliorld Bank. WW. 1981. While per capita food production has declined in many African countries. population growth rates have. in contrast. increased. Eicher (1984) contends that Africa's population will likely double within the next 20-25 years. should the estimated 3 percent plus annual population growth rate be sustained. Because Africa has lost the ability to feed itself (as shown by comparative food self-sufficiency ratios in selected sub-Saharan countries in Table 1.2). food imports have become essential to meet production shortfalls. For example. it is estimated that food imports 4 doubled between 1975 and 1980 to about 24 million tons in the latter year. This resulted in the continent's cereal imports increasing tenfold during the 19705. reaching $5.6 billion in 1981 (World Bank. 1981). Table 1.2 Food Self-Sufficiency Ratios in Selected Sub-Saharan Countries (Average Percentages) Countrv lMme—mmsa— Zambia 97 79 ~16 Tanzania 96 93 - 3 Uganda 98 99 1 Botswana 25 37 12 Kenya 97 96 - 1 Malawi 101 97 - 4 Zimbabwe 96 113 17 Swaziland 86 85 - 1 Lesotho 93 77 -16 $61 f-Sufficiency = Wale—— Production & Imports - Exports of Cereals Sauna: Adapted from the World Bank. . (Report No. 4764-ZA). (1984). The World Bank's Agenda_£gn_fiction. estimates that in the past decade food imports in the sub-Saharan countries grew more than three times as 5 fast as the population. not accounting for the substantial food aid. What is of concern is not so much the volume of the food imports. but their costs which have become large in relation to the export earning capacities of these countries. To deal with the problem. most African countries are undertaking broad efforts to improve their food situation. These efforts are based on the recognition that the rate of investment in physical and human capital must be increased in order to raise their agricultural and industrial productivity. Hence. increased food production and attainment of fggd_§§gunlty have become central policy goals for economic development. The ultimate (long-term) objective is to achieve a satisfactory degree of self-sufficiency in the production of major staple food commodities by replacing imports with local production. The Concept of Food Security The concept of food security became widely used during the world food crisis of the middle-early 19705. when a confluence of droughts and high food prices caused widespread hunger and human misery. Caldwell. 1975. for example. estimated that the drought that plagued the Sahelian countries in West Africa during the 1968-74 period reduced total food production by a third or more and was directly responsible for the deaths of up to 100.000 people. Responding to the crisis. the United Nations convened the World Food Conference in Rome in 1974. The major concern of the delegates at the conference was how to abate the threat of mass starvation in many low-income Asian and African countries. which had become a distinct 6 possibility (Eicher. 1984). Debates at the conference centered around the concept of food security. Since that time. the concept of food security has gained wide usage in the development literature. The concept of food security and the means of its attainment have many interpretations. For instance. at the World Food Conference. attainment of food security referred to the assurance of adequate food supplies. In recent years. however. the concept of food security has acquired a broader meaning. The broadest definition of food security. which constitutes the various elements discussed in the literature. is summarized as the ability of a country. regions. or households to meet target consumption levels on a yearly basis in the face of fluctuating production. prices and incomes (Siamwalla and Valdes. 1984. Reutlinger. 1984 and Chisholm and Tyers. 1982). According to this definition. the meaning of food security has been broadened in the sense that it also stresses the need to maintain consumption of essential foods at acceptable levels by all population sectors (Roumasset. 1982). Thus. the current meaning of food security incorporates both supply and demand. In addition. this definition helps to classify sources of food insecurity according to whether they affect the price. the household's production. or the household's income (Chisholm and Tyers. 1982). In all. the literature discusses the following sources of food insecurity: 7 1. Village or household level ability to grow food constrained by technical exigencies such as unfavorable climatic conditions. disease and insect attacks. etc.; inadequate rural income and inability to purchase food; and inadequate market and transport systems to move food from surplus to deficit areas within the country. 2. National Level population growth outstripping production increases; inequities of supply-distribution between urban and rural areas; inadequacy of distribution facilities; development priorities do not include food production and distribution; fluctuations in food import bill due to production fluctuations; international debt and balance of payment problems; national budget deficits; and reliance on food aid and creating tastes for imported grains. _ 3. International level imbalance of food production (e.g. domination of North America and Australia in wheat exports); 8 - lack of commodity or effective fora for price stability (e.g. the collapse of the Wheat Agreement talks in 1979); - lack of coordination of national and international stocks for world grain stabilization;‘ - lack of financial assistance to ameliorate/fluctuating import bills; - and trade barriers. It can be seen from the lists of variables presented above that food security issues are a function of. and depend upon. the general level of development of a country at all levels. A number of approaches have been suggested to cope with food security problems in developing countries. In the long-run. the goal of achieving food security can be attained by developing agricultural and industrial productivity. Improved productivity should increase food production and lead to widespread increases in incomes. particularly among the poor. Higher incomes will have to come primarily from increased productivity and profitability of agriculture. from the development of industry. from employment in construction and public works and from the generation of the diverse services that will be in demand as rural areas become prosperous. In the short-run. food security can be attained through managing food supplies. including imports and food aid. The major approaches that are often mentioned to alleviate short-term food security problems at the national level include: 1) stockpiling of food grains at > \‘5\‘ A 9 national and international levels; 2) financial food facilities; 3) food aid; 4) improving trade policies. and 5) intervention in the capital market and the pricing and distribution of food for vulnerable groups. Food Security in Zambia With a land area of 752.614 square kilometers. the Republic of Zambia has an estimated population of 6.2 million people (WB. 1984). Table 1.3 presents the population distribution by provinces for the period 1963-1980. Once almost a rural society. Zambia is now one of the most urbanized countries in black Africa. About 43 percent of the people live in a highly industrialized and well developed agricultural zone which lies in the central region of the country and along the railway line (Livingston-Lusaka-Ndola). The remaining 57 percent of the people reside irI thinly populated rural areas (estimated at 2 persons per square kilometer scattered about all over the country (see Figure 1.1). Table 1.3 Zambia - Population by Province. 1963. 1969. 1980 and Inter-Censal Growth Rate 1963 1969 1980 Average Annual Growth Central 309.407 358.655 513.835 2.5 3.3 Copperbelt 543.465 816.309 1.248.888 7.0 3.9 Lusaka 195.755 353.975 693.878 1.4 6.3 Luapula 357.018 355.584 412.798 -1.0 1.9 Northern 563.995 545.096 677.894 -0.6 2.0 Northwestern 211.189 231.733 301.677 1.6 2.4 Eastern 479.866 509.515 656.381 1.0 2.3 Western 362.480 410.087 487.988 2.1 1.6 Southern 455.321 495.541 555.459 1.0 43.0 1555] Zampjg 3.459.554 4.555.995 5.519.555 2.5 3.1 $95255: Central Statistical Office (COS) Monthly Digest. 1982. 2N I .35 .oz apogee .5305 Housings?“ you auuwounuum van 3330 330m e353 "momma 10 3“ 3.513... e . .. . . . . . Ducal- _ u 3...: 1 .9..- mu. an d: . 0 :Je . o .. . -nukR? _ . «x 2m... #:0m x. v... _. I. z. e . l 7 .35.. 3:... «I . 3:32.. . zmmpmmg . . . f‘ . a... a. Aw. _ .. [Iii/)1 .. .1. A EEO ..... s... .3. . .3...,@.Hir 55.5mm; :13 ..u W: . . .lm a. x O z a A 3.1... . . 8.: e A 8...: O 5.0.:- e U 8.8. 0 ~/ h 83: 0 i .233... 1.... $20.35 was :5. no u:... ate—9’3 makings—lac — . — uxsufl m ill .II T (III) I I- I! 11 Because of the demographic characteristics and the duality in the economic structure. the social structure is highly stratified into the relatively urban rich and rural poor. Urban areas are characterized by a notable spatial concentration of wealth. which yields a standard of living that is prosperous even by world standards (IFAD. 1983). On the other hand. rural areas are economically depressed and receive meager and second-class welfare facilities. Rural Zambians generally live far from centers of government and. for most of them. the source of livelihood is the production of food or fiber crops or husbanding of animals that are adapted to local soils and climatic conditions. In most cases. the productivity of these crops and animals is abysmally low. Although some rural Zambians appear to have gained prosperity by entering into commercial production and marketing of some agricultural products. most of them have become relatively poorer than they were in the 605 and 705 (IFAD. 1983 and Gran. 1983). About half of the rural households have "incomes that are far below the official wages so that malnutrition and seasonal famine is a constant fear and frequent reality" (Gran. 1983). Income estimates for 'traditional farmers suggest that cash earnings are about half the annual cash earnings of farm workers. Such income differentials. cause traditional farmers to want to become farm workers and. in turn. cause farm workers to seek non-farm work in urban areas. Therefore. the demographic composition of the periphery is markedly distinct from that of the modern industrial and commercial sector. because of sustained out- migration (1L0. Vol. 1 pp. 12). In rural provinces such as Northern. Northwestern. and Western. for example. there is a high proportion of 12 households that are headed by females due to migration of males to urban areas. The Zambian economy is predominantly export oriented. with copper and other metals (zinc. lead and cobalt) earning about 95 percent of the nation's foreign exchange. Fluctuations on the world metal markets strongly influence the economy. Today. Zambia is facing financial and economic difficulties. These difficulties started in 1975 when copper prices declined sharply. By 1984. copper prices were almost 60 percent lower than they were in 1974. Zambia's economic difficulties were exacerbated by long liberation wars in southern Africa. rising oil prices. failure by the international community to agree on practical steps towards the New International Economic Order (NIEO). as well as by the poor performance of its agricultural sector. In an attempt to revitalize the sagging economy and reduce the socio-economic disparities between the urban and rural areas. the Zambian Government has tried to restructure the economy away from mineral dependence. Agriculture was recognized as an essential base for national economic restructuring. Since the mid-19705. agriculture has been accorded "priority of priorities". Perfonlance of the Agricultural Sector in Zalbia The recognition that Agriculture must replace mining as a leading sector of the Zambian economy has led the Government to take various measures to improve agricultural policies and institutional performance. However. despite the steps that have been taken and the high priority that it has been accorded. the performance of 'the 13 agricultural sector is still far below its potential. For example. agriculture only accounts for about 12 to 15 percent of the gross domestic product (GDP) (see Table 1.4). Table 1.4 Sectoral Shares in Gross Domestic Product (Percent of GDP. period averages) Sector 1970-74 1975-79 1955-82 1951_____ Agriculture 12 15 14 14 Mining 30 15 14 15 Other Industries 21 25 24 23 Services 37 45 48 48 GDP. Market Prices 155 155 155 155 555295: 080. Monthly Digest of Statistics (1983) Estimates by the World Bank (1984) indicate that real overall growth in agriculture averaged 2.8 percent per annum during 1970-78. which although high by east African countries' standards. was below potential. Much of the registered growth came from the commercial sub- sector which was responding to improved price and tax incentives introduced by the Government. Growth in the traditional sub-sector was virtually stagnant. about 0.4 percent per year over the same period (see Table 1.5). Since 1979. however. the situation deteriorated. due to poor rains (1979 to 1982). : T's"- -. 14 Table 1.5 Growth of Agriculture Production in Zambia (percent per annum) 197 0-78 191% Food 3 .0 NA Non-Food 0.9 NA Subsistence 1.7 -0.8 Commercial 4.8 2.4 Total Production 2.8 0-4 NA = Not Available Sums: World Bank. WWW minim. 1981. Faced with the deteriorating food situation (see Table 2.2) under conditions of rapid population growth (estimated at 3.0 percent per year IFAD. 1983). Zambia is faced with the challenge of how to provide adequate and reliable food supplies to all sectors of the population. Consequently. attainment of self-sufficiency in food production has become a clearly enunciated and major policy goal of the Zambian Government (World Bank. 1984). Zambia has two major geographical disadvantages. First. the country is land locked with a long distance (1.500 to 2.000 km) of communication lines to the coast. Second. there is a large internal regional imbalance between a well developed industrial and agricultural zone whicfl lies in the central region of the country and along the railway line. and the periphery north and scuth of the central region. 15 Like in many other African countries. the Zambian Government has linked the goal of achieving food security to the goal of food self- sufficiency. The ultimate objective. is to be self-sufficient in the production of' major food crops. such as maize and wheat. so that incremental food demand can be met by domestic production. The belief that food self-sufficiency can improve Zambia's food security is based on the argument that Zambia. with its enormous agricultural potential (physical resources base). is susceptible to fluctuations in international trade and that susceptibility can be reduced by decreasing food imports (IFAD. 1983). In an attempt to attain food security. a variety of programs were adopted by the Government. However. most of these programs have had limited impacts on achieving the intended objective. For urban Zambians. who are well linked to the food distribution system. fluctuations in food prices have been the major source of food insecurity. Nevertheless. fluctuations in food supplies have been reduced by various government food policy actions. As an example. almost all domestic or national food reserves are located in urban centers. thus assuring availability of supplies to urban population. Furthermore. the fixing of prices on controlled food stuffs such as maize. and the allocation of government subsidies for food security purposes. have been based on "fairness to the consumer" and "political acceptability" considerations. For these reasons. it can be argued that food security policies in Zambia have been framed in terms of meeting urban food demand. 16 For rural Zambians. who live in relatively isolated communities. the food insecurity problem has an additional dimension. Generally. each family or household has to produce its present food requirements plus an additional quantity of food and other agricultural products to provide cash to meet other family needs. A reduction in food supply (availability). for example. may cause some families to have little to eat. and even lead to widespread human suffering. Such short-falls in food availability are usually accompanied by reductions in family incomes. The problem is even greater for non-farm rural households. Fluctuations in farm output affect their employment or sales opportunities. which in turn. affect their incomes. Despite the importance of food security in Zambia. very few relevant empirical studies have been conducted on the subject. The few studies that have been done have concentrated mainly on analyzing aggregate. national data. Worse still. their published results are not easily accessible to those who need then or can use them. Village or household food security studies have largely been ignored. Although macro-level data analysis may be useful. in a country like Zambia. it does not always provide sufficient information on which to base more efficient national food security policies. The need for micro-level studies in Zambia arises for two main reasons: First. the dualistic agricultural sector consisting of a relatively small. but well developed. large-scale conlnercial sub-sector and a much larger traditional subsistence sub-sector. means that only the commercial sub-sector is well linked to the market economy. Linkages of the traditional sub-sector to the market economy are 17 limited and even where they exist they are weak. Hence. it is important to know how rural households manage their food supplies between harvests. Second. lack of rural food-handling infrastructure means that food surpluses produced in these areas have to be moved to urban centers where they can be processed and stored. The irony of this situation is that. when there are food shortages in rural areas. there are no distributional facilities where food from national food reserves located in urban areas can be moved into. Consequently. it has been argued that there are always pockets of food shortages in rural areas- - even in good crop years. Focus of this Study Food security problems in Zambia can be analyzed within two time frames. First. there is the chronic problem of persistent malnutrition caused by low productive capacity and secular problems of abject poverty. This is a long term problem that can only be overcome by improving agricultural and industrial productivity through an improved technological base and widespread increases in family incomes. Second. and the main focus of this study. is the short-term (transitory) problem of variability of entitlenent of consumers to food. Food insecurity of this nature stans from temporary fluctuations in real income of the consumer. which in turn. affects the ability of these people to purchase food. In view of the fact that most studies that have been conducted on this subject have concentrated on analyzing aggregate. national data. 18 this study attempts to evaluate socio-economic parameters associated with food security from a rural household and rural community perspective. Because of the distributional constraints in rural areas. rural food security is largely a question of food self-sufficiency. Therefore. this study concentrates on examining strategies and mechanisms that are used or could be used to "insulate" (protect) households from short-term food security problems. An additional focus is to investigate the nature and the extent of the marketing system's involvement in rural food security concerns. Significance of the Study In Zambia. to ensure access to a sufficient and continuous food supply to all sectors of the population involves more than just expanding food production. It also involves increasing family incomes. particularly among the poor. as well as developing a well coordinated food distribution system that can channel excess production from the producer to the final consumer at the right time. place. and form. For rural Zambians. who are more exposed to high food prices and to low food entitlement. attainment of food security even goes beyond self-sufficiency in food production and increasing family incomes. it also entails managing stocks between harvests. If research is to contribute to the understanding of food security problems in Zambia and even other African countries with similar problems. it must do more than just analyzing aggregate. national level data. It should also investigate problems at village or household 19 levels. It is only when one has a better understanding of the problem from both the micro and macro perspective that one can suggest solutions. Simple observations and enquiries suggest that food crop supply in Zambia is no longer secure despite the increase in imports. This could be attributed to constraints originating from the following: (a) high rate of rural to urban migration. (b) shortage of foreign exchange. (c) structural deficiencies of food storage facilities. and (d) transport bottlenecks for the marketed produce. Lack of food handling infrastructure. for example. means that food surpluses produced in the periphery have to be moved to urban centers where they can be processed and stored. As a result. much of the value added is lost to the periphery and there are always pockets of food shortages in rural areas even in good crop years. Although food deficit areas are known to exist. their location is not known and the extent of the shortfalls can only be guessed at best. Knowledge of deficit areas and the extent of the shortages is particulary important to planners and policy makers because it Can enable them determine the exact quantities of food to be delivered to the affected areas. Furthermore. such information can help policy makers formulate better and more efficient food security policies. as well as determine types of food handling infrastructure required in these areas. The need to study food security at the village or household level in Zambia is important for two more reasons. First. the study comes at a time when the Zambian Government is in the process of embarking on an ambitious program of building large-scale strategic food grain >...- 20 reserves. Since food security systems based on public food distribution have inadequately solved problems of rural households in the past. there is even greater need to search«for more appropriate approaches 'to cope with village-level food insecurity problems. Second. the need to investigate rural food security is not only strengthened by the fact that famines are a rural phenomenon. but because food insecurity is also a rural phenomenon. In a country where more than 50 percent of the people still live in rural areas. and where a large section of the rural dwellers are still dependent on agriculture for their livelihood. it almost becomes morally imperative to analyze the nature and the extent of the problem. Study Objectives As already indicated. rural food security in Zambia is not only a matter of lack of income to purchase food. it is also a matter of a general shortfall in food supply. Therefore. for any food security study to be realistic. it should consider both income effects of food policies as well as supply effects. A number of constraints directly limit attainment of food security at the village or household level in Zambia. A single study cannot effectively investigate all constraints at the same time. The overall objective of this study is to provide a better understanding of food security problems from a rural household and village perspective. This study is exploratory in nature and had the following specific objectives: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) 21 To describe the food grain production and distribution system in Zambia. To examine the impacts of the grain distribution system on rural food security. To identify and describe the characteristics of the rural households in the study area and the specific problems they face in their efforts to attain secure food supplies. To examine on-farm food storage practices and their impact on household food security. To provide suggestions for further research and policy recommendations for improving rural household food security. Research Procedure As already pointed out. the general objective of this study was to increase 'the understanding of the rural food security problems in Zambia. This overall objective was accomplished through studying the food production and distribution system in Zambia. rural households' food production and disposal behavior. farmers' utilization of on-farm storage facilities and other social economic characteristics of households that affect their food security. The field survey draws on both primary and secondary data that bear recognizable relationship to the study objectives. 22 Information used for the first two study objectives were obtained from published and unpublished government. private and international agencies' reports. Information used to accomplish objectives 3 and 4 were obtained from a sample of rural households selected for the study. The following were the specific objectives of the field survey: To obtain information on important social economic characteristics of the households surveyed. It was hoped that this type of information would provide insights of the important variables that influence rural households' food security. To obtain information on food production levels and identify food deficit or surplus zones within the study area. To gather information on households' food disposal patterns to help in the understanding of how households manage food supplies between harvests. To collect information that could help identify strategies and mechanisms that rural households use to translate fluctuating prices and incomes into a "smooth" consumption stream. Stated in another way. an attempt was made to identify methods that rural households use to meet food consumption targets in the face of fluctuating prices and 23 incomes. The assumption is that any strategy that can minimize these fluctuations has the potential for preserving household security and. as such. is worth investigating. Information obtained could be incorporated in formulating national food security policies. To collect information on farmers' utilization of on-farm storage. Food storage is perhaps one of the most direct mechanisms used in managing food supplies among rural households. In Zambia. the main role of on-farm storage is to overcome the problem of seasonality by smoothing out food supply between one harvest and the next (Adams and Harman. 1977). To the extent that losses occur. this flow is disrupted. It is important to understand the role of small on-farm storage facilities versus the more centralized national food storage facilities for two main reasons. First. the food produced in rural areas is sold to the parastatal marketing organizations that move it to urban areas where it is stored. This is mainly due to lack of storage and processing facilities in rural areas. However. the processed maize is rarely returned to the periphery. For this reason. rural households have to store their own food supplies. Second. the majority of the rural households consume much of what they produce. During bad crop years. not only do they not have enough to consume frcm their own production. but may also not have the income to buy the food. 24 Therefore. if on-farm storage facilities are utilized. then deficit households can be able to obtain supplies from neighbors. For whatever reasons -- be they buffer stock management. price controls or urban food security. the Zambian Government seems to be directing efforts towards establishing large grain storage facilities. Such schemes may not benefit rural people. As Lele and Candler (1984) have observed. "rural food security in East Africa can only be achieved through increased research on production of drought-resistant crops. such as sorghum. millet and cassava; improving communication networks; produce marketing and an effective farm household storage". Selection of the Study Area A number of factors were considered in selecting the location of the study area. They included: (1) the geographic location of the area; (2) the physical characteristics of the area; (3) food grain production and production potential; and (4) the transportation infrastructure. Each is discussed briefly below. GmuanLLosam Because the overall objective of this study was to examine food security at the rural household or village level. it was important to conduct the field research in area that is outside the railway line 25 zone. As discussed in Chapters 2 and 3. the areas along the railway line are well served with a market infrastructure that food can easily be moved from one place to another. . Because of sporadic shortages of fuel in the country at the time of the field survey. it was decided that the research be conducted in a district not far from Lusaka (the capital city) where fuel supplies were better than in most other areas in the country. Furthermore. we wanted to conduct the research in a district that has linkages with the developed zone. This was considered to be important to this study because it could help in the examination of the back-flow of grains to rural areas. Ehxs1sal_Chanastenistics_oi_tbe_bnsa The climatic and soil conditions of an area are the main determinants of the physical environment and the land use potential. It was therefore. considered to be important to select a study area which has the physical potential to increase its food production which. in turn. can reduce food insecurity of the local residents. E99d_GIi1n_EI9dusI1Qn_nnn_E:9du§119n_EnI§n11§l Maize is the main staple food item among the rural people in Zambia. Consequently. for rural food security analysis to be realistic. production. distribution and/or consumption of maize should always be taken into consideration. Therefore. only maize producing districts were considered in this study. 26 W The internal transport infrastructure in Zambia is relatively well developed by the African standards. According to a recent World Bank report. the transport network includes more than 35.000 kilometers of roads of various standards; about 3.000 kilometers of railways; 120 airfields of various types; and a few inland navigation facilities. To facilitate the research process. we were looking for a rural area which could easily be accessible. Organization of the Study This study is organized into six chapters. Chapters 2 and 3 provide a description of the production and distribution system of food grains in Zambia. Chapter 3 also describes the linkages that exists between the producer and the consumer (urban-rural. and rural-rural linkages). Chapter 4. discusses the different aspects of the research procedure that were followed during the field work. In particular. the chapter discusses the physical characteristics of the study area. the study design. the organization of the field research. the drawing of the sample and types of data collected. Chapter 5. utilizes the information obtained during the survey and analyzes food grain production and disposal behavior of households in the study villages. It also attempts to identify the various strategies households use to ensure a sufficient and continuous food .supply between harvests. 27 Chapter 6 reviews and summarizes the major findings of the study :'-, .1. :jlg'flmd provides policy recon-endations for improving rural food security. Furthermore. future research needs are suggested in this chapter. 'i ‘ 2.1.. A. ‘ CHAPTER 2 FARM LEVEL FOOD GRAIN PRODUCTION IN ZAABIA To be able to have a clear understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of the food production and distribution system in Zambia requires a review of the colonial as well as the present development of the economy. The historical review of the Zambian economy presented here will not be exhaustive. but should provide the reader with insights into the important characteristics of the economy that influenced the formation of the present structure of the food production system. Review of the Development of the Agricultural Sector When Zambia attained its independence. it inherited an economic structure that comes close to a typical model of acute dualism (WB. 1984. IFAD. 1983. Kinsey. 1978. Dodge. 1977 and Baldwin. 1976). Under acute dualism. an economy is characterized by the existence of two sectors -- namely. the "growth" sector and the "backward" sector (de .lanvry. 1982). The growth sector focuses on a narrow. geographic region and caters to a specific socio-economic group. Development in this sector. is generated by industrial and commercial investment and consumer demand of the socio-economic group it encompasses. 28 29 On the other hand. the backward sector exists in virtual economic isolation from the growth sector. Except for occasional marketable surpluses that move into the monetized sector of the economy. the backward sector has no economic linkages with the growth sector (de Janvry. 1982 and Yotopoulos and Nugent. 1976). In the section that follows. a brief account of how the present structure of the agricultural sector in Zambia developed is presented. W The development of the present structure of the Zambian agricultural sector. can be traced back to the colonial period. The discussion that follows draws heavily from Doris Dodge's account of the agricultural policy and performance in Zambia (Dodge. 1977). The colonial period began in 1890 when trading companies began moving into the territory from the south and east. and lasted until October 24. 1964 when the colonial government handed over the responsibilities of governing the territory to an African government. As we shall see. it was during this period that the present dualistic structure of the food production and distribution system developed. During the early- and mid-19005. mineral deposits (zinc. lead and copper) were discovered in Kabwe and in an area known in Zambia as the ”Copperbelt" (see Figure 1.1). The discovery of these mineral deposits subsequently led to the development of mines in these areas. It was the development of the mines that had far-reaching impacts on the present structure of the economy and the food system. 30 The develOpment of the mines led to two other major developments in the Zanbian economy. First. it spurred the construction of a railway line that connected the southern. central. and northern parts of the country (Kinsey. 1978). The railway line (hereafter referred to as the line-of-rail). was built mainly to transport the mineral ore to coastal ports. in route to western industrial markets. Second. the development of the mining industry led to a proliferation of urban centers in the Copperbelt and along the line-of- rail (see Figure 1.1). As a recent report by the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) put it. "Zambia which less than a century ago was covered by forests. is now a country full of cities of 100.000 or more people. and these cities contain more than 40 percent of the country's population." Associated with the growth of towns. was the rapid growth of an urbanized wage labor force. The urbanized wage earning labor force in turn. created the expansion of market demand for agricultural commodities (Kinsey. 1977 and Baldwin. 1976). In order to provide the mine workers with adequate. low cost food requirenents. both the colonial government and mining companies. encouraged the establishment of large-scale farms in the areas along the line-of-rail. Both the government and mining companies felt that the function of providing mine workers with reliable and low cost food requirements could best be fulfilled by encouraging inmigration of European farmers and establishing commercial agriculture in the areas along the line-of-rail (Dodge. 1977). As Bates (1976) points out. the development of large scale farms in the areas along the railway line was not accidental. He argues that 31 it was orchestrated by the colonial government and mining companies. who recognized that agricultural production could most profitably be undertaken only in the areas along the line-of-rail. and that Africans in the territory used primitive techniques to produce their subsistence requirements and. as such. showed little promise of being able to provide sufficient surplus to meet the newly expanded market demand. Therefore. the primary objective of the colonial government was to reserve commercial agriculture primarily for white settlers along the line-of-rail. At the same time. the primary objective of the colonial government towards African agriculture was one of maintaining the status quo (Dodge. 1977). To promote commercial agriculture and to encourage permanent white settlement in the areas along the line-of-rail. the colonial government adopted a number of policy measures. For example. in the late 19205. "native reserves" were set up in areas along the line-of-rail where there was a problem of Europeans and Africans wanting to use the same land. The land adjacent to the line-of-rail was retained exclusively for European use and the free-hold land tenure system was introduced in these white occupied areas. Under free-hold tenurial arrangements. the government provided security for commercial agricultural investment and assured markets for agricultural inputs and output. 0n the other hand. in the area outside the European occupied zone (known as the traditional periphery). traditional or customary land tenure systens were left intact. Land tenure arrangements are important to agricultural development for three main reasons. They determine: (a) people's access to land 32 as a resource. and hence. their income earning opportunities; (b) in part. the type and extent of investments in agriculture by farmers and; (c) whether land can form adequate security for borrowed funds. Hence. land tenure can facilitate or hinder the administration of agricultural credit in a country (WB. 1984). The introduction of government controlled agricultural marketing was another powerful instrument used by the colonial government to implement the pol icy of encouraging European comercial agriculture along the line-of-rail areas. To attain this objective. a statutory marketing board was established. The Board was given the power to buy and sell maize at fixed prices in the areas along the line-of-rail. While the pan-territorial (unifonm) pricing policy was introduced in the depots along the line-of-rail. prices in the traditional periphery were set low to reflect transport costs. The objective of this policy was two-fold; one was to promote European farms in the "favored" zone. the other was to ensure that African production did not take up an increasing share of the market. This type of price policy had a depressing effect on the growth of traditional farmers' cash sales (Dodge. 1977). Government monopoly in the marketing of the country's major crops seriously impeded the development of private marketing since it prevented the spreading of overhead costs and the generation of sufficient volume to make the marketing of other crops economical. The short-lived federation (1953-63) between Zimbabwe (then Southern Rhodesia). Malawi (then Nyansaland) and Zambia (then Northern Rhodesia). did little to improve conditions of the African farmer. The 33 federation carried over the policies of the previous government. For instance. marketing of commercial agricultural products still renained the sole responsibility of the government. In addition. the concept of uniform pricing and the pol icy of subsidizing food for urban consumers was also adopted by the federal government. As commercial farming thrived in the areas along the line-of-rail. traditional (African) agriculture in the periphery was untouched by the technological innovations that made European agriculture profitable. It was in this way that the acutely dualistic structure of the agricultural sector in Zambia was formed. WW As already indicated. at independence. the Republic of Zambia inherited an economic structure that was dualistic in many ways. Basically. there were two widely divergent agricultural systems: the European and the African. caused by the colonial government's pol icy of separate and unequal treatment. The agricultural system that exists today is still dualistic. with a relatively small but well developed large-scale commercial farms. in the areas along the line-of-rail and in parts of the Eastern Province; and a much larger traditional (subsistence) subsector scattered over the country. a characteristic of the colonial legacy. Although the dualism is still present. it has becme less marked with the emergence of an increasing group of small-scale conwnercial farmers (WB. 1984). As alluded to in Chapter 1. the overall performance of the agriculture sector in Zambia is still very sluggish. To illustrate 34 this point. the average annual growth rate in the commercial subsector was 5.9 percent for the 1965-82 period. while growth in the traditional subsector only registered 0.4 percent per year over the same period (IFAD. 1983). The contribution of commercial agriculture to the sectorial output increased from 19 percent in 1965 to 41 percent in 1982. According to the World Bank report (1984). a combination of weather and dramatic improvaients in the producer prices. especially during 1979-80 season. was responsible for the increase in conwne'rcial agriculture production. 0n the other hand. the contribution of the traditional subsector to the sectorial output; decline from 81 percent in 1964 to only 59 percent in 1982. Crop Production The crops grown in Zanbia can be grouped broadly into four major categories: (a) feed grains. comprising of maize. wheat. sorghum and millet; (b) vegetable oil seeds. which consists of cotton. soybean. sunflower and ground nuts; (c) beverage crops comprising coffee. sugar and tea; and (d) minor crops that include cassava. fruits and vegetables. In the remaining sections of this chapter. attention is focused on the production of major food crops in Zambia with special emphasis on maize. the country's main staple food grain. A discussion of food production in Zambia must start with a description of the natural enviromnent. Zambia. as indicated in chapter one. is a large country with a land mass of 752.614 square kilometers. There is only one rainy season a year. during the months of November through ecological zones. March. The country is characterized by four major These zones are described in the World Bank report (Zambia Policy Options and Strategies for Agricultural Growth. Report No. 4764-ZA). they are summarized in Table 2.1 below and shown in Figure 2.2. Major Ecological Zones in Zambia Table 2.1 Rural Population Area Population Density Zones ( (0001_al_ .in The Northern W 350 1.552 440—— The Western ____Ani.d_E.l.aute 2118 64.0 3.10 The Central. Southern and Eastenn_Elatsaux, 94 1:037 11-00 The Luanguea - W! 101 295 2-90 151114, 753 3.534 4-70 a] Based on World Bank estimates (1982) Source: World Bank (1984). W. (Report NO- 4764-24) Zone. comprises major parts of Northern. Luapula. Copperbelt Northwestern Provinces. and is characterized by highly leached. relatively infertile ferralitic soils. The zone which occupies about 46 percent of Zanbia is really only suitable for the production of perennial tree-crops under extensive cultivation systems as exemplified by the traditional Chitemene (shifting cultivation system). Very carefully managed farming systems 36 would be essential if a more intensive settled agricultural conmunity were to be supported or if reasonable surpluses were to be produced requiring increased use of fertilizers. The Zone has limited potential for the production of cotton. tobacco. maize. sorghum. millet. groundnuts. beans. cassava and rice. Iha_fl§§t§Ln_§§mizAnln_Elains Zone. includes most of Western Province and Zambezi District of North-western and is characterized by the low rainfall. large diurnal fluctuations in temperatures and acid soils. The zone which covers 28 percent of Zambia is most suited for extensive cattle production and is generally tsetse-free. There is restricted potential for seasonal cultivation on alluvial soils along the fringes of the river valley and varying systems of semi- permanent hoe cultivation are utilized. The current population density of the zone is very low at 3 persons per square kilometer. Wm“ generally contain the most fertile soils in Zambia and have highest population density. currently averaging 11 persons per square kilometer. The zone constitutes only 12 percent of the country and is characterized by a moderate seasonal rainfall of 800 to 1000 millimeters and large areas of relative fertile ferro solic soils. Permanent. settled systems of agriculture are feasible and potentially high yields of maize. tobacco. cotton. sunflower and other annual arable crops are possible. There is also a high potential for beef production. WM Zone» covers 14 Percent Of Zambia and is characterized by the steep sides of the rift system. which are useless for agriculture and by the solonetzic soils of the valleys. The soils. which are very hard and impenetrable when dry and have low permeability when wet are also notoriously difficult to manage and require a high input of draft and labor to realize their potential. Although the average rainfall is less that 800 millimeters. the zone is hot and humid on account of its low altitude and the population is relatively sparse at 2.9 persons per square kilometer. Suitable crops are sorghum and millet. together with cotton. Limited cultivation of rice is also possible. 37 VlVW .‘-\ all) . AmN . some .02 upoaumv .5330 “as. so.” me.“ museum ecu moon o yuzom seesaw 3.5ng / i, (a ’1 ( V .2...~: \ a w x ._ .5 P. Q We. .i\/) iI—.OJ\/ \V 5.. er .lx'll\<.-.1 a o.oc~ occ.ooo peach .ucouuaau ecu coxo «on: .uexcas _ . one Lo; appear so apogee—savage eeoavocm H.o con oe coca cannons apnoeaeucea .naoaoaau ecu cexo eons .«exL-s as» com aspen: Lo appcac.eoeecq aeoauoca o.o oom.m cc . am opaoenes.ee: .«excae co» ec- co_uqe=ucou ego a_c so» neoaeoga .upsqc_ 28a 3229:... 23 233.3. 2:2 .3 .coxo .Lon-p specs» use: .ooo.o-acoo.co ace mauas.aae access: on no xce> «season “.mu coo.eo on a m accuse-u .ueaqucsn apneuexces Paco—uaooo g«.s cowuaesecoo use use Lac up.aae_ca nauseous ecu «poop can; 0.52.. ecu Lona. xP.e- u=_u= ue»e>.up=o m.mm ooo.ocm m case one; panopupeech Jag—5 «an a? “flag. a eu.e scam . .Illlldaqquuuqmexusafillll mama «soa< .nepogeeso: seen me no.ue.coooeaago ecu ecsaoacam m.~ epoch 42 Zambia (WB. 1984 and IFAD. 1983). It is estimated that they cultivate an average of two hectares per farm household. using family labor and simple hand tools. Lack of regular cash incomes. appropriate technological packages and irregular supply of farm inputs preclude the use of purchased inputs among these farmers. Land among traditional farmers is generally held in common with inherited usufruct rights. Stated in other words. land tenure arrangements under traditional agricultural systems are still under customary law which puts emphasis on access to land for all to grow food for one's family. Traditional farmers are said to be cultivating about 1.6 nflllion hectares of land per year (W8. 1984 and IFAD. 1983). Maize. sorghum and millet are the principle food crops produced by traditional farmers. However. sorghum and millet. are mostly produced in areas where maize production is less suitable. When major food crops are produced among traditional farmers. they are often considered as men's crops. and the husband or an adult male in the family will control the field and its product. The existence of such a large traditional subsector. most of which is yet to produce for the market. represents a huge albeit potential. which if mobilized with appropriate technological packages. can increase food production in the country. which in turn can improve Zambia's food security. 43 Sma11:Scals_on_Emsnusnt_Eanms Sources vary on the exact number of emergent or small scale farms in Zambia. The World Bank puts the number to be between 60.000 to 120.000. which is about 10 to 20 percent of the farm households in Zambia. It is estimated that emergent farmers cultivate S to 20 hectares of land. producing both for subsistence and for the market. using family labor. oxen or hired tractors and some purchased inputs. It is estimated that emergent farmers produce about 60 percent of the volume of the marketed maize and 45 percent of the other marketed crops in Zambia. According to the analysis of maize production costs and margins by farm types (see Table 2.4). under the existing technical packages and price of inputs and output. these farmers are the most profitable maize producers in the country in terms of financial margins (W8. 1984). Maize Production Costs and Margins by Farming Type 1982/83 44 Table 2.4 Small- Enodust19n_Costs__ Zambian Kwada Seed 4.00 ‘ 20.80 20.80 26.00 Fertilizers - 116.12 116.12 222.80 Herbicides - - - 91.20 Labour (Hired - - 22.50 53.15 Machinery Operating - - - 202.95 Transport - 17.00 17.00 32.00 Combine - - - 38.65 Semi-skilled - - - 30.45 Skilled Labour - - - 16.35 Ox-Cultivation - - 40.00 - Farm Tools 12.0 12.00 5.00 - Repairs and Maintenance - 4.00 4.00 43.70 Insurance 8 Interest - 4.14 19.83 67.80 Depreciation 1.20 1.20 4.50 24.16 Total Cost 17.20 180.51 279.15 862.71 Yield kg/ha 1.000.00 2.000.00 3.150.00 4.500.00 Producer Price m/t 203.33 203.33 203.33 203.33 Revenue/ha 203.33' 406.63 640.50 915.00 Gross Margin 186.13 226.12 361.35 52.29 Net Margin/manday 2.48 2.51 6.82 - Source: WB. 1984 Gnfllth. (Report No. 4764-ZA). Commercia1_Enoducens Comercial farmers. number about 6.000 or 1 percent of all the farm households in Zambia. but produce about 40 percent of the volume of the maize that is marketed and about 55 percent of the other marketed farm produce. They constitute 5.300 semi-commercial farmers. cultivating 20 to 40 hectares of land. using oxen and tractors and 45 about 700 large-scale. highly mechanized farmers. who cultivate up to 600 hectares of land per year (WB. 1984 and IFAD. 1983). Commercial farmers and some of the emergent farmers are located in the areas along the line-of-rail and in parts of the Eastern Province (see Figure 1.1). Because they are favorably placed in toms of the infrastructural and marketing facilities. especially commercial farmers. the large-scale farmers. have been the principle beneficiaries of the agricultural support services. public investments and policies and imported agricultural inputs. a characteristic of the colonial legacy (W8. 1984. IFAD. 1983. and Gran. 1982). We There are two types of state farms. depending whether they are wholely owned and operated by the state. Those that are entirely owned and managed by the government are known in Zambia as "state farms" and those that are partly managed or partly owned by the state are known as "parastatal farms". Besides the proposed 18 state farms of which only two are currently operating. at present. there are 23 primary production units operated on behalf of the Government. Most of these parastatal farms are operated by the Zambia Agricultural Development Limited (ZADL). They produce both crops and livestock. Due to a number of operational problems. the contribution of these farms to the national volume of output. has been very limited. Following the recognition of the importance of obtaining national food security. the Government in 1981 proclaimed a program to establish state farms. The objective 46 underlying this program was to establish a total of 18 state farms (two in each province). as a measure to solve the country's food and balance of payments problems (Government Economic Report. 1981). These farms of varying sizes (depending on existing local conditions). are registered under the Companies Act. This implies that they should be operated on sound commercial principles and practices. as stipulated in the Act. WW Maize. being the main staple food for both Zambia's urban population and about 70 percent of the rural people. is the most important crop grown in Zambia. The Food-Strategy Study. 1982. estimates that maize constitutes about 80 percent of the per capita intake of all cereals. Because of its importance as the main national food staple. crop production policies in Zambia have been dominated by programs that are aimed at achieving self-sufficiency in maize production. A variety of programs. some of which have included direct government involvement in production. have been undertaken to promote maize production in all parts of the country. For example. production has been promoted through price incentives; a multiplicity of production schemes; and to a lesser extent through applied research and extension. which are aimed at developing high yielding maize varieties and improving farmers' husbandry practices (Food Strategy Study. 1982). Fer these reasons. maize is practically produced everywhere in the country. 47 Price fixing on the basis of the cost of production; input subsidy on fertilizer and farm machinery; pan-territorial pricing of maize; and subsidies to cover maize marketing and processing costs have been. the major mechanisms used by the Zambian Government to promote maize production in the country. These policies. have lead to a considerable bias in maize production. and in turn. have caused the dominance of maize culture within Zambian agriculture. even in areas which are only marginal for its production. As already pointed out. the area planted to maize during the early post-independence years (1965-74). generally remained static. increasing only at a rate of 3 percent per year. However. after 1977. disregarding the annual variations. the area planted to maize has increased at an average rate of 10 percent per year. Estimates of the land planted to maize presented in Table 2.2. show that maize hectarage was relatively constant at about 266.000 hectares per year during 1965- 74 period. and then increased markedly to about 540.000 hectares a year. reaching an all-time high of 595.000 hectares in 1978. While the land area planted to maize has increased over the last 10 years. land productivity in terms of yield per hectare. has remained static since independence. The overall increase in the production tonnage can be attributed to the increase in the area cultivated. rather than an increase in yields per hectare. As already explained. the increase in the area planted to maize is largely attributed to the number of farmers entering into maize production because of the production incentives introduced by the Government. 48 Should the present favorable producer price incentives continue. the area cultivated to maize may continue increasing and therefore production tonnage should continue to increase (Table 2.5) Table 2.5 Commercial Production of Maize (1965-1982) ._Q£on_Xsar 000 Tons 1965 263 1966 385 1967 383 1968 264 1969 274 1970 132 1971 384 1972 589 1973 339 1974 588 1975 559 1976 750 1977 696 1978 582 1979 336 1980 382 1981 693 1982 508 .fluune: 1. 080: Annual Agricultural Statistical Bulletin. 1981 (November 1982) - data for 1970-1982 2. 050: Monthly Digest of Statistics (October/December 1981) - data for 1965-1969 Although maize is produced almost everywhere in Zambia. almost 95 percent of the marketed output comes from three provinces. Southern. Central and Eastern Provinces (Table 2.6). The presence of large-scale farmers and favorable climatic conditions contribute to the high maize output in these provinces. .Aoooanohouv uudaauualuaaluuaduMIaqaqqc .omoLm axons; com co.»o=eocq eeuoxces weapon. ompe nouns—umu 0 «unassumm a .map 00a 00 uneven. 0x 00 so amen :. couscous; no: muses «scarce Head sock a «cannon 49' hum.0v 0u<.0vn.~ oom.om moa.omn 0mm.0m 00>.0vm v-~0m mmo.m00.m nNooH 0H0.0v onm.onn.~ mom.om 00m.hm~ hoh.om mm0.~mm cmv.om 00m.ouo.m naoofi HHO.mH 0mm40mh.u va.m~ Hmo.h- mmo.h~ “NR.QMh oou.mm e~m.0~n.~ 000d m00.mm va.0mm.~ "mm.um oNB.N~H 50v.o~ h0~.m~m 005.«v um0.vuv.u ohm” omv.om o~0.m~o.~ ~mo.vm «mm.~o~ oou.vm 0mm.mo~ 00m.~m 000.NN¢.N chad mms.mo mmo.~00.~ vm0.0v HNN.N0~ moh.~m hmm.Nm0 oom.~h H0h.0~m.m shad «mm.0o H50.h00.m H00.0m ~00.moa mmm.m~ o~m.o~o Nam.nh 0N0.0mm.m whoa o~v.¢h hm04mmm.u 500.0N mmm.-~ voo.h~ nun.00h 0mm.mm 000.vvo.N mp0" mNH.0m 0H5.0¢o.u ”00.0m h00.~0 o~m4mu H0~.N~o 0mm.v~ m00.0N0.m ohm" 0mh.vH mam.ovm.u cam-mu «00.0m oo~.o~ sm0.m0m n<0.~ma www.mmm.~ mead 000.0” 000.00m.~ 000.0m 000.00 000.5N 000.0mm 000.0m 000.00N.v whoa 000.5N 00N.v0m.H 00~.mm 0004no 00¢.mN 0004~m~ 000.mm 00v.v00.~ ”no“ 000.HH 00v.~o¢ 00N.mH 000.0m 000.0“ 00o.m~ 00h.0 00N.m00 050A 000.~N 000.mvv.~ 00m.o~ 000.n- 00>.om 00H.0N 000.5N 00N.NNm.~ 000A 000.0N v0m.0m0.~ 000.cu 0004mm 000.~N ~0M.hsu ~m0.m~ moh.0om.~ mood 000.- dov.oho.d 000.0" 000.00 000.0H 000.00 000.0N oom.o~m.~ noon 000.N 000.c05.n 000.5 000.0N 0004va 000.vm~ 000.HH 000.0mm.~ mood 000.H 000.000 000.v 000.mm 000.5 000.00 000.v 000.000.” mood _,.'e‘ 0.N ops-h u.ln.ee. 1.95 9. 8:: 82 856.... a. .25.. ca 5.858.... 82...... U 50 Maize production prospects in Zambia will remain favorable since population increases. particularly for the urban population which is growing at 6.0 percent per year. will continue expanding market demand. (Table 2.7 below. shows the projected demands for maize and other food grains up to the end of this century.) Table 2.7 Zambia: Projected Demand for Maize (000 tons) WL 1976-82 1937 1992 199.5.— Urban population (million) 2.40 3.00 3.75 4.69 Maize Food 468 576 720 900 Maize Stockfeed 47 $8 72 90 Maiz§_flgfig 10. &§, 108 136 Mud 585 720 900 1. 125 55mm: World Bank 1984. mm Report "Go 4764-“- Wands wheat which is consumed mainly by urban population. is largely an imported crop. although domestic production has increased in the past few years (Table 2.8). 51 Table 2.8 Wheat Production and Prices in Zambia Production Line-of-Rail Area (1.000 Productivity Price m: (LOWW 1965 - - - 5.70 1966 0.041 0.081 1.980 5.70 1967 0.120 0.203 1.692 6.20 1968 0.150 0.204 1.360 6.20 1969 0.100 0.224 2.240 7.50 1970 0.100 0.103 1.030 7.50 1971 0.100 0.102 1.020 7.50 1972 0.100 0.101 1.010 7.50 1973 0.100 0.102 1.020 7.50 1974 0.200 0.204 1.020 7.50 1975 1.000 1.018 1.018 14.00 1976 3.000 4.072 1.357 16.00 1977 1.700 5.419 3.188 16.00 1978 1.585 6.515 4.110 20.00 1979 2.100 7.250 3.450 20.00 1980 2.400 11.836 4.431 24.00 1981 3.200 14.130 4.415 26.00 12321g§:1___4.500 20.322 14.516 32.00 Seance: (1) National Milling Corporation (2) Economic Report. 1982. All the wheat produced in Zambia is grown under irrigation and in rotation with soybeans. Therefore. wheat production is almost exclusively undertaken by large-scale commercial farmers. To reduce the wheat import bill. the Zambian Government. has in recent years provided wheat farmers production incentives to stimulate domestic output (Table 2.8). The production incentives have resulted in an increase in the area cultivated as well as in the improvement yield per hectare. The area cultivated increased from 1.700 hectares in 1977 to about 4.500 hectares in 1982. with yields varying from 5.000 tons to 20.300 tons during the same period (050. 1984). Yields 52 increased from 200 kilograms (2 tons) per hectare in 1977 to about 4.500 kilograms (4.5 tons) per hectare in 1982. Production prospects for wheat have also been favorable. 0n the basis of efficiency considerations. in terms of low production costs and high yields per hectare. Zambia has no competitive advantage in domestic wheat production. but will continue to be encouraged by the government. WWW Practically all sorghum and millet is produced by traditional (subsistence) farmers with the exception of very limited plantings of hybrid sorghum by a few commercial farmers. Both sorghum and millet are produced in rural areas where the production of maize is less suitable. Therefore. these two crops form the principle staple foods in areas where maize is not produced. Sorghum and millet are frequently intercropped with a variety of crops. such as beans. ground nuts. okra. sweet potatoes and pumpkins. As already mentioned. data on area planted to sorghum and millet is very unreliable due to the fact that the crops are mainly produced for subsistence. However. some area estimates indicate that up to 80.000 hectares of sorghum was grown in 1977. but thereafter declined and may have been as low as 20.000 hectares in 1982 (MB. 1984). It is further estimated that an average farm household cultivates between 0.25 to 1.5 hectares of these crops. with no fertilizers or other purchased inputs. using hoe or ox plow cultivation methods. 53 Statistics on production figures are also unreliable. as only a very small proportions of the crops are traded through official channels. The Food Strategy Study (1982) estimated sorghum and millet production to be 182.000 metric tons. which may be unrealistic due to low land productivity in the traditional sector. Table 2.9 presents the estimated marketed production of sorghun and millet. with their respective official prices. Table 2.9 Officially Marketed Production and Producer Price of Sorghum and Millet. Zambia Mil lg: Producer Producer Production Price 1/ Production Price damn (mu—Isms (W 1964 39 n.a. 22 n.a. 1965 1 n.a. 51 n.a. 1966 3 n.a. 48 n.a. 1967 nil 4.70 60 n.a. 1968 1 4.70 44 n.a. 1969 1.120 4.70 11 n.a 1970 530 4.70 33 n.a. 1971 102 4.70 5 n.a. 1972 221 4.70 3 n.a. 1973 35 4.70 nil n.a. 1974 325 5.00 nil n.a. 1975 92 6.00 nil n.a. 1976 106 6.00 3 n.a. 1977 799 6.00 1 n.a. 1978 818 6.00 nil 6.00 1979 149 6.00 nil 6.00 1980 93 6.00 238 6.00 1981 12 9.00 220 6.00 1982 18 9.00 52 6.00 1933 114. 16.00 n. 1. 29.06 Sauna: Annual Agricultural Statistical Bulletin. Government of Zambia. November 1982. 1/Grade A only. 54 Production projections for sorghum and millet have received mixed reviews. Some reports indicate that the future is favorable since both crops do well in poor leached soils and areas of uneven rainfall. Swan The purpose of this chapter was to describe the characteristics of the food production system in Zambia. It was noted that Zambian agriculture was acutely dualistic prior to and imediately after independence with a relatively small large-scale conmercial (market- oriented) farming subsector and a large traditional subsistence subsector. Although this dualism is still present it has become less marked due to the increase in the number of small-scale comercial farmers. Four major types of food production systems were identified- namely. traditional farmers. emergent farmers. large— and medium-scale farmers and state farms. There are literally hundreds of variations in each pattern of production. These variations may include the size of the fields cultivated. resource endowment. type of food crops produced. land tenure arrangements. access to purchased inputs. family size. specific sex roles in production. public or private control. etc. Maize is by far the most important food crop produced in Zambia. In nutritional terms it is the staple of the Zambian diet. In terms of value of crops marketed through official channels. it accounts for over 70 percent of marketed value of agricultural commodities. Being the main staple food comodity. crop production policies have been dominated by maize. Domestic producer price incentives and 55 inputs subsidies for production have been given to maize by the Zambian Government more than to other crops. Consequently. this has led to the production of maize even in areas that are less suitable for its production. replacing other food grains such as sorghum and millet. CHAPTER 3 THE ORE-ANIZATION OF THE FOOD GRAIN DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM IN ZAbBIA: A DESCRIPTION The objective of this chapter is to examine the food distribution system in Zambia by presenting a brief description of each stage in the marketing channel and the functions of the various participants. As previously discussed. to ensure a sufficient and continuous food supply to all sectors of the population in Zambia involves more than just expanding food production. it also involves increasing household income as well as developing a well-coordinated food distribution system that can channel excess production from the producer to the final consumer at the right time. place. and form. In this context. knowledge of food distribution arrangements becomes crucial to this study not only because distribution arrangements affect food security at all levels. but because they also affect the pace of economic development. The Food Grain Distribution System The food grain distribution system in Zambia is comprised of various participants and numerous exchange points where physical functions of marketing such as assembly. transportation. 56 57 standardization. storage. and processing are performed. This chapter will attempt to describe the stages of the food grain marketing process. The food grain marketing process in Zambia ranges from the simple exchange between households at the village level. to the movement of the grain from rural areas to urban areas. The characteristics of the grain marketing process are highly dependent upon the structure of production. Production of food grain takes place in varying amounts depending on the type and size of the farm. These food grain producers are scattered over large areas all over the country. For this reason. the marketing of these food grains involves a large number of transactions and participants. Generally. the marketing system should assemble the marketable surpluses produced all over the country. and move them to nearest markets which serve as outlets to local. as well as urban. communities. When these crops are moved. a number of market intermediaries are involved. This usually results in a lengthy marketing chain. To facilitate the description. the distribution system is broken down into various successive stages of economic activity -- namely production. assembly. storage. processing and retailing. Literature review and the author's personal knowledge are the basis of this general description of the organization of the food grain distribution system in Zambia. Maize and wheat. as already mentioned. are the major food crops in Zambia. particularly in urban areas where they constitute the preferred cereals. while sorghum and millet are the principal food crops in rural areas where maize production is technically less suitable. Therefore. 58 the following account of the organization of the food grain distribution system in Zambia will be restricted to these four food crops. Furthermore. because of the differences in the structure of production of these crops. the distribution of each crop will be discussed separately. Figure 3.1 depicts a generalized model of the food grain production and distribution system in Zambia. It shows the various stages of economic activity by which food grains are moved from producers to final consumers. The diagram also shows the different groups of participants that are involved in the marketing process. The left side of the diagram represents the physical functions of marketing that are performed as the food moves from producers to consumers. Thus. the left side of Figure 3.1 represents the successive stages of economic activity by which food grains are assembled. stored. processed. distributed and finally consumed. The labelled boxes represent the different groups of participants. such as public organizations. private firms and individuals. that are involved in the food grain distribution system. The arrows link the various marketing functions or the successive stages of economic activity with participants. In general. there are two basic ways of marketing food grains in Zambia. First. the grain can move through official channels. normally through monopsonistic parastatal agencies. These are semi-autonomous public sector entities. working through several official agents. Second. food grains can move through unofficial private market channels. 59 Figure 3.1 The Food Grain Distribution System in Zanbia momma p n o D u c a a s omcnx. omcm anomcm ' . poop moo I 1mm up DONORS mm 2 U , I I . l ASSEMBLY us-orucm PROVINCIAL l l mm: coopm'rm maximums - muons | | 1 I l 1 2 2 l3 l3 3 3 1 l l l L w a u a o a n o l I I l ' | s'romx mum on narrow man I an escrow l aroma rooo stoma I i . I I I I I I f I I l I I II' ' . - L L mnco m mocsssmc noun mun NATIONAL PROCESSING nuns comm name I . i 1 I I I . , l mu man. man. ourms (memes!) & mm.) 1 l I 1 I common c o N 8 u a a a s ----- -- 'chern-ent Sanctioned Transactions Non-Government Sanctioned Transactions 1) Channel-1 2) Channel-2 3) Channel-3 60 In the literature. the distinction between "official" and "unofficial" market channels is not that clear. However. for the purpose of this study. the following definitions of the two terms are adopted. The official market channel will include all the public organizations. private sector firms and individuals who are authorized to engage in marketing food grains and who trade in conformity with the official price structure. In this regard. official trade involves authorization or licensing. and conformity with official prices. if any. In Figure 3.1. official trade is denoted by dotted arrows. 0n the other hand. an "unofficial" market includes private merchants who operate without government authorization or official marketing licenses as well as some private sector firms and individuals who are licensed to operate as part of the official market channel. but who purposely do not conform to the official price structure. In other words. in an unofficial market (referred to by Michael Morris. 1986 as a parallel market) trading is by unauthorized (unlicensed) partners. or trading at non-official prices. The unofficial market channel in Figure 3.1 is depicted by bold arrows. Four dominant food grain production systems were identified in chapter 2 as: (1) small holder farmer production system; (2) emergent farmer production system; (3) commercial farmer production system; and (4) corporate farm production system. In general. corporate and commercial food grain production systems find it easier to sell through the official channels. inmediately after harvest or out of storage. due to their large size of operations and their better accessibility to information and other market 61 infrastructural services. For this reason. their decisions clearly affect urban. more than the rural consumption. 0n the other hand. traditional food grain production systems. theoretically. have both public and private sector sales options. They can also enter into some barter trading. as well as keeping some grain for self-consumption. The decision to barter depends in part on the total amount of production. the consumption substitutability of the good involved in the transaction. and the relative terms of the exchange. Thus. the decision on how much to retain for home consumption affects household food security. The development of the official food distribution system in Zambia can be traced back to the colonial period. Historically. the end of colonialism left behind a large bureaucratic apparatus and a heritage of numerous institutions aimed at solving national problems. To some extent. this led to a syndrome of dependency toward the state in terms of free (or subsidized) services and goods (such as marketing. input delivery. W and fertilizer) with major post-independence consequences (MB. 1984). Following independence. the state offered the best instrument for achieving the socio-political goals of economic freedom and control over the nation's destiny as well as the individual desires for material gain through rapid career advances in an expanding public sector. The tendency to view the state as the primary instrument of development was. no doubt. strengthened by not only the inheritance of a weak indigenous private sector. but also by the political struggle for control of the economy (N8. 1984 and IFAD. 1983). The fact that 62 the colonial government had played a highly interventionist role in some sectors such as agriculture and transport gave impetus to the new government's interventionistic tendencies in the post-independence period. The major form of such intervention was the establishment of public or state owned enterprises or parastatals (MB. 1984). At the institutional level. Government objectives for creating parastatals were: (a) to provide a market guarantee to farmers: (b) to maintain reasonably stable farm incomes through providing stable prices: (c) to provide input delivery services to farmers: and (d) to generate financial surplus for reinvestment in agriculture or elsewhere in the economy. It is now estimated that there are 47 parastatals and government supported Provincial Cooperative Unions operating in the agricultural sector alone (see Appendix A). However. when these parastatals are evaluated on the basis of these objectives. their performance has been unsatisfactory (MB. 1984). In agricultural marketing. Zambia has developed a rather complex distribution and pricing system in which twelve parastatal organizations and nine government supported Provincial Cooperative Unions play a dominant. and in some cases. an exclusive role. In the process of evolving this complex marketing system. it has become apparent the Government. with good intention. has tended to emphasize institutional creation and changes (IFAD. 1983). The creation of the Grain Marketing Board (em) (1964-69). which was charged with the responsibility of implementing a government administered price system. serves as an illustration of the 63 government's preference for public institutional intervention. Under the administered price system. purchase and selling prices for different grains were determined for the Board by the Ministry responsible for agriculture. around a ”price stabilization fund" for each controlled comedity. Over the same period (1964-69). another parastatal (the Rural Marketing Board) was created. It had similar functions like the GMB. but operated in remote districts and provinces away from the line-of-rail. Both of these organizations experienced financial problems which made them increasingly ineffective. In 1969. the two Boards were amalgamated into the National Agricultural Marketing Board (NAMBDARD). Although the new Board acquired a different name. it continued to operate under the same government rules which continued to influence production by increasing producer prices and at the same time maintaining low food prices (MB. 1984). Consequently. MAABOARD has also been plagued with heavy financial losses and has relied on government subsidies since its inception. At present Provincial Cooperative Unions and NAMBDARD have monopoly rights to trade in maize. The nine Provincial Cooperative Unions controlled by the Ministry of Cooperatives. are responsible for intra-provincial trade. Before the creation of the cooperative unions NAIBOARD was responsible for both intra-and inten- provincial maize trade. However. its function has been reduced to cover only international and inter-provincial trade. Both NAMBOARD and the nine Provincial Cooperative Unions critically depend upon government subsidies. largely due to internal inconsistency of the administered pricing policy (MB. 1984). 64 Types of Food Grain Markets Shepherd (1958). defined a manger as a group of buyers and sellers with facilities for trading with each other. In this context. the most simple form of marketing takes place between households at the village level and is referred to as "house trade" (Hill. 1969). This form of trade is usually conducted between producers and residents of the same village or neighboring villages. As already pointed out. the decision to trade with neighbors depends on the producer's total production. family needs and the relative terms of exchange. The trend common in Zambia today is the closing of many rural shops and the emptiness of those which remain (1L0. 1981). As a result. "house trade" is increasingly playing a large role in the everyday life of rural households. However. even though. house trading has become important among rural households in Zambia. it still does not usually result in significant amount of grains reaching the outside communities. For example. Adams and Harman (1977). in their study on the evaluation of losses in maize stored in Zambia. found out that where sales were made other than to the National Agricultural Marketing Board (NABOARD). (i.e. to local traders or fellow farmers). the quantities involved were smaller. and no farmer had sold more than 20 bags in this way. The other form of marketing occurs where buyers and sellers meet in some organized manner periodically to buy and sell commodities. This is probably the most common form'of grain exchange in Zambia and has resulted in the establishment of numerous rural marketing depots and urban food markets. In both cases. the official organization of 65 these markets is entrusted in individuals or organizations that oversee or perform certain market functions. W Rural markets in Zambia are mostly located in district administrative centers (known as Bang) and serve local communities. including surrounding villages. Because they are located in administrative centers. rural markets are usually on or near major roads. Hence. they are generally easily accessible. Rural markets consist of private and parastatal retail shops and open markets. They normally serve as outlets for processed food grains such as w (maize meal). flour. sugar and many other food commodities. In addition. they also serve as focal points for assenbling grains to be moved to major consumption areas. (mostly large cities). _ Because of easy accessibility by trucks and other modes of transport. these markets link the rural producers to the outside world. Because of the closure of many rural shops. households that want to buy basic goods (such as W). the country's staple food comodity have to bear a high cost in time. energy and cash to travel to rural markets at district centers. In most cases. the district centers are thanselves inadequately supplied. For example. when goods arrive in the shops or the open markets. they are quickly bought by those on the spot. Consequently. very little in terms of basic food commodities moves back into rural areas. A survey of nine parastatal retail stores. seven open markets. and five private stores in six districts and rural centers in Zambia 66 (conducted at intervals over a year and a half) (1979-80) illustrates the irregularity of supply and availability. mm was found only six times (five times in open markets. only once in a parastatal retail store) (ILD. 1981. p. 22). Such shortages and absences of important food items mean that when they become available. they are priced high by the traders. W Urban markets are those found in larger towns and cities. Characteristics of urban markets are similar to markets found in district centers. They are comprised of private and parastatal retail outlets and open markets. The only difference between the two is that in urban areas. there could be more than one open market and parastatal retail shops in the same city as opposed to only one of each found in rural district centers. In addition. urban markets are better stocked than rural markets. Like rural markets. urban markets operate daily and sell both processed and unprocessed food stuffs. The grain that is sold in urban markets is bought from traditional farmers scattered all over the country as well as from commercial farmers concentrated mostly in areas along the line-of-rail. Thus. the grain that moves into urban markets comes from rural markets and directly from farms that are near by. Once the grain reaches the urban markets. it is disposed of in one of the following three ways. First. part of the grain is sold to private millers and parastatal milling companies who process it into 67 flour or meal. The second portion is taken into storage for national food security purposes. The third portion is sold directly to consumers. in the open markets. However. because of government control on "essential" food commodities such as maize and wheat. the amounts of food grains that are disposed of in this way are not substantial. Furthermore. when the country produces more than what is domestically required. a portion of the grain that moves in urban areas is exported to other countries to get the much needed foreign exchange. The processed food grains are sold to private and government controlled wholesalers and retailers. In general. retailers in Zambia consist of private retail stores. parastatal retail shops and private individuals. all of whom sell to final consumers. Food Grain Distribution The movement of food grains from producers to final consumers usually involves one or more market intermediaries. The number of these intermediaries depends on the type of grain being distributed and on the structure of production. Since production structures of the food grains are different. the distribution system of each food grain is described separately. Wan As discussed in Chapter 1. achieving food security has become a fundamental objective of government pol icy in Zambia. Strategies for attaining this objective have revolved around the expansion of domestically produced food supplies. particularly maize. the country's 68 main staple food. Consequently. over the years. crop production. marketing and pricing policies in Zambia have been dominated by maize. The importance of maize to the Zambian economy is three-fold. First. a short fall in maize supply affects the economy generally because it requires foreign exchange for maize imports. Second. when maize has to be imported. at higher prices. it requires subsidy. which in turn. becomes an added burden on the national treasury. Third. when there is a maize shortage. it is often the poorer maize consumers. especially those who are less accessible. who are likely to suffer most (ILO. 1981). As already pointed out. maize produced in Zambia can be disposed off in one of the following three ways. One portion of the harvest is retained by the producer for home consumption. This practice is common among traditional farmers who produce mainly for household consumption. The maize retained by the producer can be used in many different ways which include personal consumption (i.e. food and beer making). gifts to friends and relatives. cermonies and religious purposes. such as tithe. The second portion of the maize harvest is disposed of by farmers through trade among households within the same village or neighboring villages. Terms of trade in this case can either be through the barter system. or the monetary exchange system. Maize disposed off in this manner is technically non-authorized. hence official prices may or may not be adhered to by trading parties. 69 The third and last portion of the harvest is disposed off through official marketing channels. This is the most important maize marketing channel in Zambia. W The distribution system in Zambia consists of three possible channels through which maize can move from producers to consumers. These distribution channels are designated as channels 1. 2 and 3 in Figure 3.1. Each channel results in maize reaching the final consumer. The flow of maize from producers to conscmiers can involvemore than one distribution channel. Therefore. this means that the process of marketing maize is not a simple unidirectional flow. QbanneLDna Channel one involves direct sale or exchange of maize between producers and consumers at the household level. It is the most simple form of marketing. This distribution channel is shown as channel 1 in Figure 3.1. This type of trade usually occurs between surplus and deficit households. with limited access to rural and urban food markets. The extent of house trading depends on local production and the degree of shortfalls among food deficit households. Hhen maize trade is between local residents. they enter into monetary or barter negotiations. As indicated earlier in the chapter. it is difficult to estimate the amount of maize that flows through this channel because transactions are not recorded or reported. 70 W Channel two involves the movement of maize from producers to consumers through the open markets that are found in district centers and urban areas. This form of trade is shown as channel 2 in Figure 3.1. The main characteristic of this form of maize marketing is that it is undertaken by unofficial private traders. These generally include different types of private business persons such as millers. shopkeepers. fisherman and even farmers themselves. Usually traders go to farms and buy the maize. and then transport it (in bags) either to temporary storage facilities or take it directly to markets where it is sold to consumers. Alternatively. the purchased maize can be taken to private millers (in rural or urban areas) to be processed into M before it is sold to consumers. Hhen farmers themselves undertake this type of trade. they normally deliver their own marketable surpluses to the market. where they sell it to consumers or other traders. In recent years. there has been a marked increase in the flow of maize and maize meal through this marketing channel to some neighboring food deficit countries. However. this trade (conwnonly known in Zambia as smuggling) is prohibited by the government. As previously mentioned. maize is one of the controlled products in Zmbia. It is therefore. supposed to be exclusively marketed by public marketing agencies. Consequently. quantities of maize that flow through the non-official marketing channel are not substantial when 71 compared to the amount that goes through the official marketing channel. The importance of this type of trade lies mostly in the marketing services it provides both to producers and consumers. For example. many private traders buy from farm gates and pay the farmers on the spot. In such cases. farmers do not have to bear transport costs. In addition. private traders can buy and sell maize in units of measure (such as tins and buckets) which are smaller that official units of measure which provides flexibility to the farmer. Furthermore. it has been reported that some private traders provide production and consumption credit to their customers. Such services provide convenience to customers. QbanneLIbnee Distribution channel three is the most important form of maize marketing in Zambia. It involves moving maize from producers. who are scattered all over the country. to major areas of consumption. through the official marketing channel (see channel 3 in Figure 3.1.) Before we describe the flow of maize through this channel. it may be necessary to trace the historical development of the official food distribution system in Zambia. In general. each cluster of villages or groups of farms in an area has a maize assembly point (depot) managed by either a cooperative union or NAMBOARD. Farmers with marketable surpluses shell their maize and put it in 90 kilogram bags. (Usually the bags are furnished by the marketing organization.) The bagged maize is then delivered by the 72 farmers (at their own expense) to the nearest depot. Modes of transportation vary among farmers. For example. most commercial farmers contract truckers to deliver their maize. while others use their own trucks or tractor-trailers. Traditional farmers on the other hand. use ox-carts and tractor-trailers to deliver their maize. although the use of hired private trucks is also cannon. Once maize is delivered to a depot. it is weighed and graded by a representative of the purchasing agency (cooperative unions or NAIBOARD). There are three grades by which maize is classified. These are grades A. B and C. Grade A being the best. Grading is done on the basis of duage and contmnination. After the maize is weighed and graded. the price is determined. Maize prices are set by the government. The price differentials between grades are not significantly different. Once the price is determined on the basis of the weight and grade. the farmer is given an invoice stating the number of bags delivered. the grades. the price(s) and the total amount to be paid. In the past. payments to farmers were made within few weeks after delivery. In recent years. however. because of the financial constraints the cooperative unions and NAIBOARD are experiencing. it can take months before farmers are paid. In fact. it is very common these days for farmers to make several trips to NAIBOARD or union districts or provincial offices pursuing payment (Good. 1986). The purchased maize is tenporarily stored at the receiving depots. awaiting for transportation to better and more permanent storage facilities which are usually located at district and provincial 73 headquarters and in major urban centers. Maize from temporary storage is loaded on to trucks. under contract to cooperative unions or NAMBOARD and shipped to permanent storage facilities. As previously shown in Table 2.7 the number of maize bags that were marketed through the official marketing channel during the period 1965-1982. The framework of crop pricing policy in Zambia still has not changed from that of the colonial period. Prices for controlled commodities (maize. wheat. cotton. sunflower. etc.) are still being administered by the government. Thus. farmers all over the country still receive the same payment for producing. say. a bag of maize. Price fixing is done by the Cabinet Office based on reconmIendations from the Ministry of Agriculture and Mater Development (MAWD). The government has advanced a number of reasons for maintaining the administered price system. Prominent among these are "fair return to the producers." and "fairness to consumers". Economists have analyzed the effects of administered pricing (both panterritorial and panseasonal). According to Elliot Berg (1985). the studies have yielded the following results. Uniform (panterritorial) national pricing was not only found to be costly. but found to be a stimulant of undesirable economic behavior. such as high consumption and production costs and ewen encourages illegal trade. 0n the other hand. maintaining a single price over the course of the year (panseasonal pricing). discourages private storage and shifts storage costs to the national budget. considering the fact that the marketing agencies are supported by the government. 74 In Zambia. the policy of uniform pricing (whereby location of production and seasonal and location-specific supply and demand conditions are disregarded) has had the following consequences on food production and distribution. First. it has made it unprofitable for farmers to store food crops on their farms. and thus. has encouraged a tendency by farmers to sell marketable surplus inmediately following harvest. The tendency to get rid of all the marketable surplus after harvest has in turn. overtaxed the buying. transport and storage facilities of both cooperative unions and NANBOARD. particularly during good crop seasons. Second. panterritorial and panseasonal pricing have made it impossible for private transporters to operate. except as contract carriers for cooperative unions or NABOARD and since both do not normally offer adequate incentives. the movement of food crops has often been handicapped by inadequate transport. resulting in much spoilage and waste. Third. uniform pricing has resulted in inefficient allocation of resources. As an example. it has encouraged the production of maize in almost every district in the country including some which are far from main centers of consumption and even in areas where maize production is technically less suitable. Fourth. because the government has encouraged maize production through the uniform pricing policy. maize has now replaced production of traditional crops. such as sorghum and millet for which some areas are most suited (MB. 1984 and IFAD. 1983). In Chapter 2. it was pointed out that maize producers in Zambia have over the years enjoyed high price protection. However. a quick glance at available data reveals that actual nominal producer prices 75 have been below world prices. It is only in the last few years that this situation has reversed itself (see Table 3.1). Therefore. although domestic production of maize has been promoted by various marketing and pricing policies at the expense of traditional crops. administered prices have until 1978. been below world prices. Wants Beside being responsible for interprovincial maize marketing. NAIBOARD is also responsible for exporting and importing maize. Figures in Table 3.2 show that Zambia exported maize to neighboring countries (Zaire. Tanzania. Angola and Mozambique) between 1971 and 1974; though the exports were mainly part of annual surpluses which could not be stored due to inadequate storage facilities. Since 1975 however. Zambia has consistently imported maize. with the net import volume rising from only 22.000 tons in 1975 to 376.000 tons in 1977 and 220 tons in 1982 (MB. 1984). Mith such perennial shortfalls. the role of NAMBOARD in maize marketing has steadily shifted from an interprovincial buyer to an importer. 76 Table 3.1 Nominal Protection in Maize Production (1966-1982) (K/Ton) World Price (K/ton) Equivalent Actual CmLSaason Lem-) ”Wm... 1966/67 40.3 34.4 -15 1967/68 33.3 32.2 -03 1968/69 65.6 35.6 -46 1969/70 90.7 38.9 -57 1970/71 90.7 44.4 -51 1971/72 77.1 47.8 -14 1972/73 42.0 47.8 -37 1973/74 75.8 47.8 -37 1974/75 75.8 55.6 -27 1975/76 83.6 70.0 -16 1976/77 89.1 70.0 -21 1977/78 89.1 75.5 -15 1978/79 92.4 100.0 08 1979/80 100.2 130.0 30 1980/81 92.8 150.0 63 1981/82 112.5 177.8 58 J'Nominal Protection in Maize Production Saunas: D.J. Dodge. Zambia Agricultural Pricing Study. 1977 Mission estimates to 1979-82. 1979 for 1966- 77 Table 3.2 Maize Imports and Exports (000 Tons) rear Impacts Exannis Net_Imnazts_£xnntis. 1970 0.01 0.01 1971 8.06 8.06 1972 1.09 1.09 1973 50.01 50.01 1974 110.04 110.04 1975 39.00 16.06 (22.04) 1976 25.00 8.08 (16.02) 1977 401.06 25.06 (376.00) 1978 22.00 60.09 38.09 1979 71.00 0.00 (71.00) 1980 237.08 0.00 (237.08) 1981 98.04 0.00 (98.04) 1982, 220.01 0.00 (220.01) Saunas: 1. NAIBOARD and MAMD. 2. Bank of Zambia. Quarterly Financial and Statistical Review. W Zambia's internal transport infrastructure is relatively well developed by the African standards (MB. 1984). Road transport is most important for moving maize from producers to major areas of consumption. The road network includes 4.000 kilometers of paved roads and 8.000 kilometers of gravel all-weather roads. Due to the prolonged dry period (6 months) during and after harvesting. transport could not have been a serious constraint on maize marketing in most parts of the country if it had not been for the limited number of small trucks 78 (within the national vehicle fleet) that are appropriate for use on rural roads. As already discussed. maize is transported from farms to cooperative union or NAIBOARD rural depots on ox-carts. tractor- trailers or hired trucks. From the depots to storage facilities. maize is transported by carriers on contract with the cooperative unions. Before the creation of the nine Provincial Cooperative Unions. most of the intra- and inter-provincial maize trade was done by NAIBOARD and maize was transported from rural depots by Contract Haul age (CH) (a parastatal transport organization) . Mith the introduction of the uniform maize producer price (1972) for the whole country. and throughout the marketing season. there has been a tendency by farmers to sell inmediately following the harvest. This overtaxed CH by making it unprofitable for private transporters to get involved in maize haul age. In this connection. the Bank of Zambia. in its Report and Statements of Accounts for the Year Ended December 31. 1977 (p. 19) made the following plea: "There should be some incentives in the form of rates paid to private transporters by marketing organizations. Such a policy will eliminate the current waste of produce brought about by lack of transport especially in the (rmte) rural areas." The actual cost of transporting maize from the rural depots to union storage depots amounted to K 7.00 per ton in 1983 . 79 5100808 In Zambia. maize is stored either by farmers who produce it or by the marketing organization that buys it. Most of the maize stored by farm households is for non-commercial uses. Because it is the subsistence producer who retains, a large proportion of his production for home consumption. most of the maize A stored at the farm level is stored by traditional farmers. M. Newman (1977) pointed out that on-farm storage covers an interface between production and ultimate use. allowing lagged allocative decisions or intentional savings. He identified alternative purposes for which on- farm storage facilities can be used. These include: 1. As short run security in consumption. assuring food availability between harvests: 2. As a store of value. because stored grain can be used in sale. barter or transfer for obtaining other goods not produced at home: 3. As a way of providing social status. satisfying customary obligations: 4. As a means of avoiding risk (of a bad harvest. for example): and 5. For speculation. on the ability to reap gains bigger than storage costs and take advantage of price fluctuations. Reasons for storing grain on the farm after harvest are influenced by existing differences in income. productivity and consumption patterns of households. For example. while low income households might be able to store grain for security in consumption. the relatively 80 small amount that they produce would be a constraint for storing grain for other purposes. The maize marketed through channel 2 (private trade) is stored mostly in bags kept in houses of the traders or in market stalls. Because the amount of maize that flows through this channel is not substantial. only small quantities are stored by those engaged in this trade. NAABOARD and cooperative unions are responsible for storing the maize they buy for national food security purposes or until it is sold toimillers or exported to other countries. The cooperative unions as already explained. buy maize from farmers and temporarily store it in their rural maize depots before transporting it to better storage facilities. The maintenance of panterritorial and panseasonal prices. have made it unprofitable for commercial farmers to store maize on the farms. thus shifting the entire burden of storing the marketed and marketable surpluses to the marketing agencies. The Food Strategy Study (1983). which evaluated rural storage capacity in Zambia in detail. concluded that storage capacity is generally adequate. except in Luapul a. North-western and Copperbelt provinces. where additional storage capacity is required if losses and transport costs were to be minimized. The study also pointed out that additional storage facilities will be required in the future at the district level. if maize production expands above present levels (NB. 1984). At present. there are several food storage projects underway that are to augent the existing storage facilities. Table 3.3 presents the available maize storage capacity in Zambia by province and 81 000. .2302: 38:8 .8. 88.2.. . .33 :83... 8...... 88.8. 2.8.8.... . £3... .38 8°... 08.... .8. 8...... . :82... .38 88.: 8.. .5 2.8 88.3 . 8381:... .33 88.. 80.. 008. 000.0.— I 9.00000 70.00. 000.0.— .8» 8.... . 8.5.... .38... 80.. 8.. .5 .8» 80.... . 2.28.8 .38.. 000.00.. 000.00 000.3 000.00 000.3 000.00 05.003303... 08.03 33% 25...! 22.0 03.3. 2.00300 «100.0008 000.00 ISHJIII 000.00 000.00." 000.3 000.00 000.0 000.3 000.00 000.3 000.00 000.0." 000. 00 23.. 8.83 . 2.33 .38. 08 m 08.2 . 0.0000000 000.8 000.0. 3.3.... a :8... 000.08 .. .9508 .30.. 000..« 000.3 00...... 09.5.2.8 22:0. 00...... 3003.. 3.3.8. 0025-28 000... e 8... . .88.. 2. 000.0" 9.33.... 000.: 000.00 33800 3.0.05. 2.0.55. .233 2.3 000.000 .. 0.05:8 .36... 000.00 000.0. 000$ 3.203.. 00...... 000.« in 00..« 00...... 08.8 80.. 00...... emu—ax 263. 2.9.0.0 000...... 000.0. 3.3.. 000.0 03.05.... fig gag-3a .23. .3... 5 83:8... 8.88 .2... 83.3 0.0 030... 82 by type of storage facilities. As can be seen from Table 3.3. large storage facilities are found in line-of-rail provinces. Table 3.5 is a district level analysis of the existing storage capacity for maize (in metric tons) in the Central Province. which includes Mumbwa the study district. Table 3.4 Storage Capacity for Maize Central Province Metric Tons W Wading— District Kabwe - Main 30.960 Kabwe - Rural - Sub-Total 30.960 Mkushi - Main 16.650 Mkushi - Rural - Sub-Total 16.650 Mumbwa - Main 6.750 Mumbwa - Rural - Sub-Total 6.750 Serenje - Main 1.800 Serenje - Rural - Sub-Total 19800 _____ngal 56.160 Source: MAND. 1984 8099955109 Maize assembled through the official channels (cooperative unions and NAMBOARD) is sold either to private millers.1 cooperative mills and 1All the private milling companies were nationalized by the government following the December 1986. food riots (Times of Zambia. DOC. 25' 1986)e 83 to public millers (National Milling Corporation and Industrial Development Corporation mills). The National Milling Corporation (NMC) and Industrial Development Corporation (INDECO) mills process the maize into mga113_mgal and animal feeds. Norld Bank estimates indicate that of the maize that is processed by MIC and INDEG). 86 percent is processed into mealie meal. 6 percent into animal feeds. 7 percent is sold to breweries for production of local beer (Chjbnku) and the rest to other users. The bulk of the annum], processed by these organizations is consumed in urban centers as the major staple food. Table 3.5 shows the estimated flow of maize products from processing industry to consumers in the nine provinces in Zambia. while Table 3.6 presents a sumary of maize allocations to millers among the nine Zambian provinces. Maire that is processed through private millers is either processed by small plants owned and operated by private entrepreneurs competing with NMC and INDECO or by small hammer mills in rural areas. In some remote districts. maize. (like sorghum and millet). is still processed at the household level in the traditional way. that is. by hand pounding or grinding. 84 .8... .823. .85... .83. .3328 86.. an... in...“ .20. .3. 00>... a..- 30002 00280 .0 .uo... .auov .0» .6 ensue-0.60 0. ce>.0 a. 000. 06.0. 0¢<0mx0 0000 e~.em .6 00.9006... .o 0.000 2.... .3 032...... .2338... we... 0... 8.023.... 3...... .56.. 00.3.2... 028...... 3.02.8 00.389... 3 336.. a... 8. 08.8.3433. 8.. E :3 N m .2 .2 2.. E33: .2 m m 000 000 00m 533.. em mm 8.... mm... com . ~80.~ .. .8 «.o.....oo «N «N «0.... «00.. 00. 02 «I... he. 3.3.... N. N. 00. 00. 02. .0308 v e 000 mmu mmu 0.000.... N m 00.. 00. . 00. 0.35.32 m .. 0Q 2N 2N. 0.330 2 u. an. 80 00. .0. 0.05:8 Iggldqlaaulldqjallnqwlujiu «an flu new 405 3.20 .6 a 9200 ganglia)... is 0.0.. .2 m: 8 0.... mo <3 0.. <0 00 0... Nuzc0>x Am 52.8.. . ‘ e a «533.6 3 ._ . 5.8.8.5: ; . . a , o «u n42 as ass. 8 z/ I \ 4,.ezuo <2; <6z<~. _ .z~ eaves a mcpmoogo Lo» cameos on» me .3532. op 005330.... 3.33% so: 9:30 «39.33: E: o3. 05. so one o .socm o» xaovce> ouwee e acvaoopom Low cameos on» me :xoeuue concave op ooceumvmocs eo—epooam so: mc_u_o Lessee ago a .sogm on apepce> emcee e memmoozo so» ceases oz» as seven» coon: somepoeam co: m:.a—o nausea; mean» on» mo ago a md m w «A NN ed m ma Q 3 «flag means so .02 o o.m~ o a o a o o o.m~ c u use m c o o o ..k~ c.o~ a o.om o s.o~ a on. m o o.m~ o o o o o s.om o a 0 we. < n.a" o o.m~ m.mm o c.s~ k.om c s.om m.om m as. < o.h o o o m.e c o o o o .xc.ooa.s Loewe o o 0 ..mm o m.mm o n.a o.om o .u. xp_P.n.Loam o.m~ o o 4.mm o n.a" o m.~m o a mac ou_La .05 m.~m o.°m o.m~ o.om n.a. k.o~ m.mo m.mm m.mm o.oe Ass x».F.s.._.>< o.om o a m.m~ m.h~ n.a o m.~m n.a H.a .e. m=.e.o.» =m.: cm. a a s a m «we m. N m .lwaauaum «comma: .moam. =o.mo¢ mosasm on» :. mupogousox seem an eu—oz mo zuo.ce> < mc—soco so» cos—o aconeom eo co_u:n_g»m.o omaacoogom h.m epoch 152 mmmm: It is commonly known that in most developing countries. including Zambia. many subsistence farm households inter-plant food crops with other crops. A number of reasons which include household food security have been advanced for this seemingly widespread fanning practice. Norman (1972a. p. 70 and 90) for example. noted that farmers in Zaria (Northern Nigeria) grow crops in mixtures to make maximum use of land and enable the maximum return to labor invested in land preparation or because of the beneficial effect of legumes on other crops. In the study area. it is also common to find households that grow maize together with other crops (pumpkins. green beans. okra. cucumbers. watermelons and even groundnuts). During the field research an attempt was made to determine the percentage of the farm households that grow maize together with other crops and the reasons for doing it. Table 5.8 presents the distribution of the farm households that grew maize with other crops during the 1984-85 crop year. To shed more light on the importance of this farming practice among maize producers in the survey regions. the number of fields that were grown to maize with other crops is also given in Table 5.8. 153 Table 5.8 Distribution of Farm Households that Inter-planted Maize With Other Crops (1985) Regions 5 of Infennetion 1 2 3. 4 5 6. 7 8. 9. 10 Intel No. of Maize Producers 10 13 15 5 16 22 14 8 7 15 95 No. of Farmers That Grew Maize with other crops 5 7 6 3 7 9 8 2 O 9 47 No. of Maize Fields 37 41 48 16 34 61 38 17 14 32 100 No. of Maize Fields with QIhfl£_C£QD§ 14 25 .19 7 10 .25 11 9 .8. 18 455 fiancee: Author's Rural Food Security Study Data. 1985. As the results presented in Table 5.8 show. out of the 95 percent of the farm households in the 10 survey regions that produced maize during the 1984-85 season. 47 percent indicated that they grew it with other crops. To determine why farm households studied produced maize together with other crops. we asked them to give not more than three important reasons for carrying out such a practice. From the responses obtained. it was surprising that over 72 percent said that they practice mixed cropping to safeguard their families against food shortages should a single crop fail. The other prominent reasons given include: (1) to control weeds in the maize fields: (2) to provide fertility to the soil; and (3) to make maximum use of land. Therefore. it can be concluded that mixed cropping is viewed by some farm households as a strategy for guarding against maize failure. Thus. growing maize with 154 other crops can. from a rural household perspective. be considered as a food security strategy. Producers' Disposal Patterns The present section will examine the households' maize disposal behavior. The analysis is important to this study because producers' disposal behavior affects the amount of food retained for family consumption after satisfying all other uses. Several studies by anthropologists and economists have attempted similar analysis mainly by estimating grain disposal. but few have examined the behavior in relation to rural household food security. In order to be able to examine households' maize disposal patterns in the study area. it is important to define some relevant concepts and Operational definitions. Winona (a) W The grain flow statement is derived from three. closely related concepts - namely. the conservation of flow principle: the cash flow statement and the balance sheet. The conservation of flow principle asserts that what flows into the household system either flows out or adds to stocks. The conservation of flow principle can be expressed as follows: Stock Change . Output - Input (5.1) Where Output includes all possible households uses of grain. 155 Change in stock being the difference between the beginning and the ending stock. The concept of grain flows is also closely related to the cash flow statement which is generated in farm management analysis. There are two types of grain flows that are related to the cash flow statement. These are the annual grain flow and the seasonal grain flow. The annual grain flow examines the total availability and use of food grain by the household unit. while the seasonal grain flow examines how the variability of the sources and uses of food grains might lead to seasonal (short-term) food shortages. In this regard. both annual and seasonal food grain flow statements are useful in the sense that they can be used to identify food supply problems that might not be apparent otherwise (Ouedrago. 1983). The grain flow statement is closely related to the food balance sheet. food budget or food matrix popularized by FAO (Smith et al.. 1981). The food balance sheets were devised to measure food flows for entire countries or regions of the world. Their main purpose is to estimate food supply available for consumption by accounting for export-import. industrial use. and waste. At present. there is a general consensus among food analysts that these balance sheets could also be applied to food flows at the household or village level (micro level version). From the general cash flow statement. the grain flow statement has been expressed as flows: Total Sources of Grain = Tbtal Uses of Grain (5.2) 156 In order to be able to use the identity in analyzing households maize disposal behavior for the 1984-85 season. all the possible sources and uses of maize in the survey regions were identified. The following were some of the sources of maize that were identified during the field survey: 1) 2) 3) 4) S) 6) 7) Beginning stock - carry over stock from the previous harvest. gifts and purchases Production - 1984 harvest Purchases - including maize re-purchased: a) for household uses - such as family consumption. seed and animal feed b) for processing and sale of other food stuffs such as beer (mutete. tnhle and "58188—18159). c) for purposes of later resale Gifts received Maize borrowed Maize received as payments for loans extended (in cash or in kind) Maize received as payment for work or services rendered. The uses of maize by households in the survey regions were identified as follows: 157 1) Household consumption 2) Seed and animal feed 3) Sales: including a) of own production and stock b) of maize previously bought for resale c) of processed maize or grains for beer making 4) Gifts given 5) Loans extended 6) Maize given away as payment for borrowing (in cash or in kind) 7) Maize given in hired labor or payment 8) Losses 9) Trading stock as of June. 1985 To simplify the presentation of the grain flow statement the sources and uses of maize identified above were grouped into four broad categories -- namely; production. exchange. household disappearance and stock. By production we mean all the maize that was harvested by the household during the 1984 crop year. Exchange on the other hand. refers to all-purpose purchases and sales. gifts. credit and labor transactions. Household disappearance includes household consumption and farm uses (seed. and feed) as well as losses. Stock refers to the beginning and ending inventories. For further simplification. exchange is