THE STRUCTURE AND BALANCEOF INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTIONIN TANZANIAl C.E. BARKER,+ M.R. BHAGAVAN,++P.M. vonMlTCHKE-COLLANDE! " D.V. WIELD,.. and A.C. COULSON"H "I INTRODUCTION Social Production has often been analysed with the help of a division into sectors of production. Marx in using two departmetns (i. e. the means of production on the one hand the articles of consumption on the other) attempted to "lay bare" the innermost workings of the system of reproduc- tion. The two departments were meant to show the weight of the two main classes in capitalist society na mely the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. Marx bases his analysis of the excha nge between the two departments in the exchange between the two main classes.2 Marx goes on to analyse the move- ment of capital between the classes; thus the va riable capital paying for labour power in Department I (means of production) does not return to. capitalists in Department I directly. I t is used in money form to buy commo- dities in Department II (consumer goods) and passes in money form into the hands of capita lists in Department II. Only when the capita lists in Department II remvest in the means of production does the capita I return into the hands of capitalists in Department I, and so on. 3 Samir Amin describes "peripheral" economies as being originally based on primary product exports. He describes the gradua I development of parasi- tic classes, latifundia, commercial bourgeoisie, kulaks and state bureaucracies, whose needs are manifested internally in the sha pe of luxury goods production. 4 This goes along with production for peasants and workers of only absolute necessities, often produced locally on a small scale. Amingoes on to assert tha t it is possible for la rger countries especially, to introduce some ca pital goods industries, but the existence of these does not alter the economic structures, as they serve the sectors of luxury and export production. He leaves open the question of whether some countries like Brazil and Mexi co could not become fully developed provinces of the United States 5 in the way +Ministry of Health, Maputo, Mozambique. ++DevelopmentStudies, University of Zambia, Lusaka. I .Faculty of Engineering, University of Dar es Salaam. I " "University of Maputo, Mozambique• .!!Formerly Senior Lecturer, Depa rtment of EconOmics, University of Dar es Salaam, now at the University of Bradford. 81 Canada has. However, he believes tha t the general tendency is for the gulf between centre and periphery to get wider. Within this framework Amin asserts that the dominant relationship in capitalism "at the centre" is between production of capital goods and mass consumer goods, whereas the periphery is between production of goods for export and luxury goods. We shall analyse Tanzanian industrial production as reflected in the national data available, and data from detailed study undertaken of a cross- section of the larger and more important enterprises of industry in Tanzania. In this analysis we shall attempt amongother things to see the extent to which Amin's assertion is reflected in the structure of Tanzanian industrial produc- tion. It is worthwhile to review the work of others who have been concerned with the balance of industry in Tanzania. Siedman,6 in an analysis of govern- ment controlled National Development Corporation investments up to 1968, breaks down the industries into six sectors: raw materials; producer goods; consumer necessities; luxury consumer goods; export processing; and tourism. Siedman puts both raw materials and producer goods into Department 1 normally reserved for capital goods. So NDC's investment in Siedman's Department 1 includes lime products, sisal, and diamonds all of which are exported, and none of which wouldnormally be thought of as the means of production required for self-centred development. The producer goods sector includes construction, motor assembly, plastic pipes, cement and metal boxes - not the base on which Tanzania's industry would naturally grow from a use of natural resources, since metal, tin and chemicals are not locally available for the industries as now set up. Of consumer goods 75 per cent of investments were in luxuries and only 25 per cent in necessities. NDC's investment in export processing was a little below that in consumer necessities. So Siedman's approach gives some indication of the imbalance the so-called producer goods secto.r and Depa rtment I in general. Almost all the minerals coming from the ground are exported and Siedma n' s producer goods are actually intermediate goods for the construction, export packaging and vehicle assembly industries. Rweyemamu's7 classification of the Tanzanian economy is more relevant for an analysis based on the realities of underdevelopment. He concludes "In Tanzania, as in many of the underdeveloped countries, exports were not only the one autonomous source of income growth but were the dynamic centre of the whole economy". Rweyemamusplit industry into six sectors, namely; consumer necessities; luxuries; construction goods; capital (he asserts there are none); producers supplies; and export industries. In his work he looked at all production in Tanzania not just tha t of NDC. To investigate the export 82 sector, for example, he went through the industrial branch classification of Tanzanian industry tabulating actual production going on which was mostly for export like tea, sisal, cotton, etc. He does not confuse the producer goods sector like Siedman but shows that there is no capital goods sector in Tanzania. His producer's supplies sector includes petroleum refining and metal products and thus rightly does not confuse these products for Department I production. From his brea kdownhe is able to show that industrially produced exportables account for 33 per cent of the industrial value added and 34 per cent of employmentand goes on to suggest that it is this which makes the Tanzanian economyinflexible. He further shows tha t in Tanzania mass consumer goods industries have been instituted at a much lower ca pital intensity than luxury consumer ~oods industry. Tschannerl's recent study8 uses Samir Amin's four sector modelin an attempt to analyse Tanzania's industrial activity and agricultural production. Tschannerl also makes it clear that intermediate goods do not constitute capital goods and is ca reful to look at the real nature of so-called capital goods industries such as motor assembly. He concentrates on consumer goods, however, and does not go into the quite large and expanding but easily misunderstood intermediate goods sector. His analysis of consumer goods shows that the value of industrial output of export and luxury goods com- bined equals the value of mass consumer goods production for the Tanzanian workers and peasants. Tschannerl and Rweyemamubuilt up their sectoral data from the statistical data of the .Survey of Industrial Production9 which only classifies production into broad branches as we mentioned earlier. Neither of them attempts to look at specific institutions in Tanzania to observe the actual production of goods going on. Our own approach has been both to use nationai data and to consider the goods produced in cross-section of factories in Tanzania. AminI s four sector model has been modified and used to consider Tanzanian industrialisation in the knowledge that we are looking at only one aspect of the totality Aminwas trying to analyse. This testing against a model has been used since it seems to help classify Tanzanian industry more specifi- cally and economIc context within which industrialisation has taken place. Wehave attempted to expand Tschrannerl's and Rweyemamu'stheses to consider the nature of the intermediate goods sector, the nature of consumer goods imported to Tanzania and to consider the nature of production in the selected establishments studied in some detail in our survey. SECTORALBALANCEOF INDUSTRY-NATIONALDATA If the whole socia-economic formation as it relates to industrial produc- tion in Tanzania is to be investigated the class nature of product choice as 83 it relates to the major branches of industrial production must be discussed. If we know for whomgoods are produced by using a sectoral breakdown of production according to the class nature of consumption and production then it should be possible to show, for example, how far the relative sophisti- cation of technology is dictated by the necessity to fulfil these needs and how they are fulfilled in Tanzania. I f they are controlled by the peasants and workers then we must expect production of their needs and improvement over time in production of quantity and quality of goods, and thus a redefini- tion over time of what are necessities. If they are not in control of production then we would not expect this sort of sectoral breakdown of production but an emphasis in production of goods to fulfil the needs of a small class in control of the state. This would mean production not just of basic mass consumer goods but of luxury consumerrgoods too. This in turn would affect the choice of technology in Tanzania since it is fairly clear as a generality tha t present necessities can be produced with a lower c"apitalintensity. 10 For the purpose of considering industry in Tanzania we will break down the production into four sectors: mass consumer goods; luxury consumer goods; exported manufactured goods. and intermediate and capital goods. Table A shows this sort of sectoral distribution taken from a modification to Tschannerl's sectoral break down brought up to 1972, the lateS't year for government statistics. Tschannerl did not concentra te on intermediate goods so that the part of the table dealing with that is completely new. By using this sectoral break down of industrial production in Tanzania we hope to give some indication of the progress made towards meeting the needs of the peasants and workers. From this analysis we shall try to show the implications in terms of transfer of technology to Tanzania. From Table A we can see that the ex port manufacturing sector comes to about two-thirds of the output value of mass consumer goods. This value is still low compared with the primary unprocessed export of agricultural products and diamonds which totalled 1,423 million shillings in 1972. There is a tendency, however, towards increasing both the proportion of processing of agricultural goods for export, reflected in the recent plans to set up two large sisal rope pIa nts and five cashew processing factories, and in increasing other manufactured exports such as textiles, matches, tyres and other described in more detail later in this section. Even though this export sector is much lower than the primary production for export it makes up a substantial proportion of manufactured production in Tanzania. Output value of the luxury goods sector was 371 million shillings in 1972, just over 50 per cent of the value of output of the mass s ector as estimated by the national data. One difficulty is that of classifying luxury and mass 84 consumer goods. It was easier perhaps for Marx to write "we may call this entire sub-division consumer necessities regardless of whether such a product as tobacco is really a consumer necessity from the physiological point of view. It suffices that it is habitually such" than to analyse the consumption habits within Tanzania. 1n Ta nzania the consumptionhabits of various classes are not often clear. I t is difficult to know whether milk is consumed by work- ing classes in Tanzania and thus is a necessity of life without knowing who buys milk or even in which areas of the towns milk is distributed. However we have chara cterised milk and sugar, for example, a s mass goods even though it is unlikely that the working classes consume these as much as the upper classes in Tanzania. Thus the mass consumer sector includes the total con- sumption of these goods in Tanzania, i. e., it includes the consumption by the upper classes as well. There is therefore no measure of what proportion of consumption is done by the various classes in Tanzania. However, the balance of consumption can be estimated sufficiently for certain conclusions to emerge. Local production for luxury consumption is between 50 per cent and 55 per CE'ntof production for necessities. SECTORAL BALANCES OF INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION - FACTORY SURVEYS The sectoral distribution tabulated in the previous pa ragraphs was taken from only a survey of statistical data and lumps together many sectorally unrelated production activities with no chance of segregation. Because of this our studies on indivi dual fa ctories were able to throw more light on the sectoral distribution of production. In each factory it was possible to check the value of production and the value of each product line. Each product evaluated in terms of whether it was luxury or necessity. This is more accurati! than a blanket evaluation of each bra nch of industry. Table B shows all the factories investigated in this study, their size in number of employees, and their value of output in 1972. I none ca se where value has already been added to a product in Tanzania before its arrival at the factory the va lue added at the factory is noted for 1972. The next column (column4) then gives a sectoral break down of production in each institution movingfrom the i.nternational branch of industry cla ssification to a brea k down as in Table A above. The sectoral break downused is export produc- tion; mass consumer; luxury consumer; intermediate goods i. e. goods which are used in other production processes; and construction industry. This is similar to the gortof classification which Rweyemamuand Tschannerl made using national statistics. Column 5 describes the actual production observed at the factory. This more accurate direct data allows a quantitative estimate to be made of sectoral balance of each enterprise. Column 6 gives this quanti- 85 !ative estimate using a sectoral break down as follows: export goods; mass consumer; luxury consumer; intermedia te goods. The intermediate goods sector is further sub-divided as to whether the goods are in fact inputs to export; mass; or luxury production as described in more detail below. BALANCEOF CONSUMERGOODS- PRODUCTIONFACTORYSURVEY From the fa ctory survey data estima tes were made of sectoral ba la nce into sectors as above. Sectors were chosen by considering which classes consumed the goods produced. 1tems consumed by urban workers and/or the peasantry were considered as mass consumer goods. Other items were considered as luxury consumer goods. Goods for export could be cha racter- ised automatically and directly. 1n the factories we visited, the mass consumer goods being produced were cotton textiles, plastic rubber and canvas shoes, matches, plastic buckets, one- ba nd ra dios, sugar, and tea dust. Table C gives the detailed estimates of production of consumer dnd export goods in the sample of factories visited. It can be summarised as follows. Cn the basis of production from factories visited ca tegorised into sectors under the national branch classification (i. e. not from our own obser- vations of production), the following values are derived: Mass consumer goods 89.8 million shillings Luxury consumer goods 44.6 million shillings Export production 57.0 million shillings Estimates made from the observation of production in factories in our survey gives the sectoral breakdown of: Mass consumer goods 73.8 million shillings Luxury consumer goods 9).4 million shillings Export production 73.1 million shillings So a study of production in factories which make up about 15 per cent of the total output value of consumer goods and export goods in Tanzania shows that the conventional analysis underestimated production of luxuries by 13 per cent and of exports by 28 per cent whilst overestimating mass goods by 18 per cent. An extension of this sample to Tanzanian production as a whole would give an export sector value of about 630 million shillings, a luxury sector of about 410 million shillings and a mass sector a round 590 million shillings using 1972 Iigures right through. This extension should be treated with some caution since our sample was not homogeneous. Neverthe- less the results do point to the conclusion tha t earlier calcula tions of sectors or production erred on the optimistic si de in their analysis of whether the Tanzanian economywas moving towards self-centredness. 86 BALANCEOF INTERMEDIATE GOODSPRODUCTION-FACTORY SURVEYS We were also able to characterise the intermediate and producer goods produced in Tanzania in a similar way. In Ta ble B we noted this by Inter- mediary to Ma ss; I ntemediary to Luxury; Intermediary to Export. I n this case we looked for the sectors in which the goods were used. For example inputs to mass consumer production from our survey were si sa I bags from Tanzania Bag Corporation used for storing maize, steel for some mass consumer bulding, ploughs and hoes used for production of local mass consumed agricultural crops and so on. This sectoral break down of inter- mediate goods is given in Table D. Those intermediate products which on investigation were found to be directly consumed or exported have been omitted since they ha ve a lready been sectora lly cla ssified (see Table C). There were more difficulties in estimating the intermediate goods production than the direct consumer goods since it was not possible to know comprehensively what the goods were used for without visiting all the firms using the inter- mediate goods as inputs. The estimates are thus less reliable than for the directly consumed products. Still it has been possible to estimate with rea- sonable accuracy. For example, it was possible to estima te for which crops the Tanzania Fertiliser was used and we were able to find out the use of the buildings built by Mecco in 1972, etc. The most difficult product wa shoes. I n the end we decided to divide this input exactly as the value of crops, i . e. 25 per cent of total agricultural production was for exports in 197~ so we estimated that one-quarter of hoes were used in the export crop sector. This may be an overestimate since it is likely tha t the export sector is more mechanised. The other estimations were stright forward, e.g. AmboniCentral Workshop mends sisal machinery only so is totally export oriented. From the estimations summarised in Table D we can see tha t inter- mediate goods feeding to industries producing mass consumer goods in Tanzania were of the value of 17 million shillings in 1972 in the factori es covered by our survey; intermediate goods feeding to luxury consumer industries were of the value of 30 million shillings; and feeding to export production were of the value of 30 million shillings. Thus from our survey which covered about 16 per cent of the value of production of intermediate goods, mass goods inputs were only about one-fifth of the total output va lue. This plus the almost non-existent capita I goods sector shows that the moves towards self-centredness and production for the masses in the economy was very weak, in 1972 at least. This conclusion is of major importance since many development economists point to the growth of an intermediate goods sector as a positive movementtowards local self-sufficiency. Tanzania's intermediate goods sector has grown very rapidly since independence but 87 3.ppears to be oriented towards exports and the luxury consumer sector rather than towards mass consumer or to capital goods .sectors. BALANCEOF IMPORTED CONSUMERGOODS Moving from domestic production for a moment we shall now consider the sectoral balance of imported conSUmergoods for 1972. The value of consumer goods imported into Tanzania in 1972 was 828 million shillings. 11 Surprisingly, most of this amount consists of primary produce. Manufac- tured goods imported were of value 280 million shillings, the remainder 548 million shillings being primary goods such as food grains. This at least confounds the simplistic notion that underdeveloped countries export prima ry goods, and import manufactured goods. 65 per cent of Tanzania's consumer imports in 1972 were of prima ry goods. We shall concentrate on the manu- factured imports since presumably there is a tendency to import substitute for them and thus set up manufacturing industries in Tanzania. We studied the manufactured consumables imported into Tanzania and characterised them sectorally as necessities or luxuries as above in a class based way. The mass consumer sector had a va lue of about 110 million shillings in 1972. The major lt~ms were milk, whea t and maize flour, sugar, yeast, bicycle tyres, mosquiteo nets, oil burners, plastic rubber and canvas footwear and hurrica ne lamps. The luxury sector was much higher at about 170 million shillings. This sector contains a large variety of goods, mostly imported in small quantities. 1t includes, for example, evaporated milk, baby food, preserved vegetables and fruit, honey, soups, wine, spirits, toba ceo, synthetic textiles, velvets, glass bottles, cookers, fridges, butter, cheese,sweets, instant coffee, perfume, cars, spare parts, batteries, handbags, leather shoes, wrist watches, records and jewellery. Thus in 1972, 60 per cent of imported manufactured goods were for luxury consumption. 1f production patterns are following consumption patterns then we would expect a tendency towards increasing luxury production. We attempted to check this by considering government investment patterns between 1966 and 1972 and by looking at new production since 1972 in the factories we visited. THE BALANCEOF RECENT GOVERNMENTINVESTMENT AND PRODUCTION CHANGESIN FACTORIES VI Sl TED Recent government investment in manufacturing industry is shown in Table III .2.D of our recent report. 12 If it is split up as in our original aggregate sectoral break down we can see that investment in consumer production between 1966 and 1972 was as follows: Export 152.3 million shillings Mass 76.4 million shillings Luxury 77.8 million shillings 88 Estimates for 1972-75 could be broken down as: Export 215.0 million shillings Mass 91.7 million shillings Luxury 139.5 million shillings Clearly neither in reality during 1966-72 nor in planning during 1972-75 WaS the production of goods to meet the needs of the masses of the people, a priority at the level of government investment. Further we know from the fa ctory surveys that the aggregate sectoral brea k downs tend to err towards overestimating mass consumer goods at the expense of export and luxury consumer goods. In the factories visited for the survey we checked the investment increase since 1972 and thus were able to observe what new areas investments were in. In some factories new investments wi11not change the sectora I balance. In others the sectora I balance will cha nge. Four factories were investing to increase their proportion of export goods. These were Kibo Match Co., Tanzania Bag Co., AmboniPia stics Ltd., and Sikh Saw Mills - Moshi. Four factories appear to be investing to increase their proportion of luxury goods. Tanzania Shoes will be substitute for fashion lea ther shoes, Kibo Match ha ve introduced match strip production, Philips are cutting the proportion of one- band radios produced, and Kiltex- Arusha are producing polyester artificial fabrics. No factories were investing to increase the proportion of mass consumer goods produced. From the factory surveys, from the national statistics of production, from the surveys of government expenditure, and.from the study of imported consumer goods there is little or no evidence that any redistribution of resources has taken pIa ce towa rds integrating the economyor towards rapi d increase in production of goods to satisfy the basic needs of the workers and peasants. 8.9 Table A. Sectoral breakdown of industrial pr~duction in Tanzania, 1972. Branch of industrial activity Gross output Value added (mill. shs) (mill. shs) EXPORT. Slaughtering and meat canning coffee and cashew 102.9 6.7 Tea - processing and other foods n. e. c. 164.4 ffJ.7 Cotton ginning SO.O 14.2 Sisal decortication 145.0 ? Cordage, rope and twine 10.4+ 10.4 Misc. chemical products n. e. c. 22.0 ? TOTAL 494.7 MASS CONSUMPTION. Dairy products 20.0 3.1 Grain mill products 214.9 41.7 Bakery products 6.4+ 6.4 Sugar factories and refineries 90.6 38.5 Cocoa, chocolate and sugar confections 2.2+ 2.2 Vegetable and animal oils and fats 113.1 21.1 Spinning and weaving of textiles 110.0+ 110.0 Knitting mills 10.7+ 10.7 Footwear and rubber plastics n.e.c. SO.1 11.2 Made up textiles, wearing apparel etc. 15.3+ 15.3 Paper and paper products 5.9 3.9 Tanneries a nd leather finishing 29.2 8.0 Soap, perfumes and cleaning goods 55.8 7.9 TOTAL 724.2 280.0 90 LUXURY CONSUMPTION •• Breweries 101.7 53.7 Soft drinks 28.6 8.0 Tobacco manufacturing 108.4 53.5 Furniture and fixtures 23.1 7.1 Non-electrical machinery 23.2 8.3 Electrical machinery 46.5 10.7 Jewelry and other Misc. manf. 39.4 13.1 TOTAL 370.9 154.4 TOTAL CONSUMER GOODS 1589.8 INTERMEDIATE AND PRODUCER GOODS (not already classified above) Textiles except wearing apparel 41.3 15.3 Saw milling and plywood 49.5 17.5 Wood products except furniture 19.1 7.3 Printing and publishing 58.9 20.7 Basic industrial chemicals 94.2 17.9 Paints 15.9 3.4 Petroleum refinery 65.0 49.0 Bricks, tiles, cement and glass 61.8 37.2 Aluminium rolling and metal- working 174.6 47.8 Motor vehicle assembly 122.7 30.9 TOTAL 704.0 247.0 n. e. c. not elsewhere classified + Value added, not gross output, is tabulated so that some output values are not counted twice e. g. bakeries use grain mill products, textile production uses cotton which ha s been ginned. 91 * 8 ...... U ..l o o \D ...... N ...... ...... Ul , o P.. ~e o o o 0> o 0'1 8 <') ..... o o Z , .~ s.- ...u G ..." O <= .. f.1.lt-lE . Uu :::S.....1W e- .. .9= E= B: ]= ~~E= ~B: = = , >, , U Iii ..",,9 ' >< ;:l ..... ~....l ",,'" fa"'" • ...o ..<=: ;:l
  • , Iii I-< , '" '" I-< 00 ttl ~ .... Q) .6 0 I-< = Q) o~.o .~ jj ....'" I-< 0 III P< =
  • < Q) << :::s '" U :Sa W 01) 0 0 .. 01) 'id ....= .. 0 l- u
  • , ....'i;; ..<=: .... ,"" I-< $ ~ -.;t .... -.;t N N co ...... ...... N ~ .. El 8'-' Qj
  • , 0 'P.. El 0 ~ /il 8 ~ W .9 &5 .... ...... ...... \D ....0 0 ;z; .. I': o III U +:l 01) , ... .... " <1) .,0 = 0 p:: 'id ij~ .. cl <1) Iii ~ ij t ... <1) ~ ~ I-<~ ~iil CIl:::S :::s <..? 93 ""o...... o Uu ~ ::8.....l~ .. .s ~: = = = ...... 2 '"Cl o OJ ..0 1::o t p. ~ >< OJ .E ....o '" o .p u '" o .p .g o u !-< P. b ..... o '" .: U o "" o 0'> u p .: o p'" o u OJ ", .. ... ::8 p'" o u u ~& '" !-< '" OJ .~ u ....~ b ..... u >< Ei OJ • OJ b .:'" '" .: OJ • ~ '" u o U o ..0 U • !-< U '" o .. u oj ]::0 o If) 50 u ...... to to ............ <'l :::o f-< '" OJ OJ ;>, o 'P.. o o o If) o o ....~o l' <'l -.t <'l <'l o R :z '-' ;>, !-< o io ....o u U u u U ::8'" ....o o ;z; <;:: o u '-' 95 Table C Summary of sectoral breakdown of production in surveyed firms; CONSUMER GOODS. Factory Aggregate sectoral breakdown After factory studies Mass Luxury Export Mass Luxury Export Kiltex Arusha 6.0 - - 4.8 1.2 - Tanz. Shoe 11.2 - - 8.7 2.5 - Tanz. Breweries - 22.0 - - 22.0 Kibo Match - - 12.0 11.8 - 0.2 Phillips Elect. - 22.6 - 2.3 12.3 8.0 General Tyre 21. 7 - - - 11.0 7.7 Tang. Ind. Corp - - 8.5 - - 7.7 Kigombe hecogenin - - 1.2 - - 1.2 Tanz. Tanneries 5.4 - - - 1.4 4.0 Sikh Saw Mills (Tanga - - - - - 3.0 TPC 45.5 - - 45.5 - - Karimi Ltd. - - 4.1 0.7 - 3.4 Tang. Extract - - 26.2 - - 26.2 Kigombe Sisal - - 5.0 - - 5.0 Kioo glass - - - - - 0.3 Amboni plastics - - - - - 1.5 Tanz. fertilizer - - - - - 4.9 TOTAL 89.8 44.6 57.0 73.8 50.4 73.1 %difference - - - 18% +13% +28% 96 Table D Summary of sectoral breakdown of production in surveyed firms. INTERMEDIATE GOODS. After factory studies Factory Aggregate breakdown Intermediate inputs to Mass Luxury Export Tanz. Bag 7.6 2.7 4.6 Kioo Glass 6.3 - 6.0 - AIIlboni Plastics 4.8 0.8 2.4 0.1 Tanz. Fertilizer 14.9 2.0 - 8.0 SRM 8.0 1.6 6.4 - Mtava 1.3 0.8 - 0.5 General Tyre 21.7 1.0 1.0 1.0 Sikh Saw Mills (Tanga) 5.9 0.4 0.5 2.0 Tang. Ind. Corp 0.8 0.6 - 0.2 DFl 3.7 2.8 - 0.9 Amboni Gen. Workshop 2.3 - - 2.3 TAMTU 0.1 0.1 - - MECCa 28.0 4.0 14.0 10.0 TOTAL 105.4 16.8 30.3 29.7 Note. The totals in these two tables do not necessa rily add up because there are overlaps in production. Some factories produce both consumer and intermediate goods. 97 FOOTNOTES 1. This paper is drawn from a report being written for the Institute of Development Studies, University of Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, based on an I nterdisciplinary research proj ect conducted from that Institute. We are most grateful to the Universi ty of Da r es Salaam for sponsoring this study. 2. K. Marx, Capital, Volume 2, p. 403. Progress Publishers, Moscow. 3. There is an interesting discussion of Marx's reproduction model in Tarbuck's introduction to Luxembourge and Bukha rin 1mperi alism and the accumulation of Capital, New left Books. 4. S. Amin, Accumulation on a world scale, Monthly Review, 1973, p. 170. 5. S. Amin, op. cit. , p. 8:>5. 6. A. Siedman, Com"1,arativeindustrial strategies in East Africa, Economic Research Bureau 9. 21 (969). 7. J. F. Rweyemamu, I ndustrialisation and Underdevelopment, OUP, 1973. 8. G. Tschannerl, "Periphery development and the working population in Tanzania, Utafiti, Vol. 1, No.1, (1976). 9. United Republic of Tanzania. Survey of Industrial Production. Published yearly since 1965. 16.J. F. Rweyemamu, op. cit. 11. East African Community. East African Trade Statistics, 1972. 12. Barker, Bhagavan, Mitschke-Collande and Wield; "Industrial Production and Transfer of Technology in Tanzania", IDS, Dar es Salaam. 98