Page 1

Namibian Agronomic Board ANNUAL REPORT 1 April 2005 to 31 March 2006

No. 19

anual report 1

CONTENTS List of abbreviations.................................................................................................................. i


CHAIRPERSON’S REPORT.............................................................................2


CEO’S REPORT................................................................................................6


THE NAMIBIAN AGRONOMIC BOARD...........................................................8

3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5

Vision, mission and objectives...................................................................................... 1 Board and Advisory Committee composition................................................................ 1 Board and Advisory Committee meetings..................................................................... 1 Board Secretariat.......................................................................................................... 1 Board financing............................................................................................................. 1


GRAIN PRODUCERS AND PROCESSORS.................................................. 11


CONTROLLED CROPS.................................................................................. 11

5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5

White maize.................................................................................................................. 1 Yellow maize................................................................................................................. 1 Wheat........................................................................................................................... 1 National Horticulture Development Initiative................................................................. 1 Master Agronomist competition.................................................................................... 1


MAHANGU: BECOMING A CONTROLLED CROP.......................................20


NON-CONTROLLED CROPS.........................................................................21


BORDER CONTROL AND INSPECTION SERVICES....................................22


SUPPORT SERVICES....................................................................................22

9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5 9.6 9.7 9.8 9.9 9.10 9.11 9.12

Mahangu and sorghum................................................................................................. 1 Processing of indigenous plants................................................................................... 1 Grain storage................................................................................................................ 1 Wild Silk Project............................................................................................................ 1 Cotton Promotion Campaign........................................................................................ 1 Agri Services Reform Programme................................................................................ 1 Tractor Training Support Services Project....................................................................... 1 Draught Animal Power Acceleration Project................................................................. 1 Productivity Upliftment Micro-projects Project.............................................................. 1 San Draught Animal Power Acceleration Project.......................................................... 1 Wheat funds.................................................................................................................. 1 Conservation tillage...................................................................................................... 1


NAMIBIAN GRAIN PROCESSORS’ ASSOCIATION.....................................30



11.1 11.2 11.3 11.4 11.5

The role of the Agricultural Trade Forum of Namibia.................................................... 1 Activities of the Agricultural Trade Forum..................................................................... 1 Involvement of the Agricultural Trade Forum in trade negotiations.............................. 1 Informing stakeholders................................................................................................. 1 Conclusion: A word of thanks........................................................................................ 1


REPORT OF THE AUDITOR GENERAL........................................................34

anual report 2

Board photo


Agricultural Trade Forum Centre for Research, Information and Action in Africa: Southern Africa Development and Consulting Draught Animal Power Acceleration Project Directorate of Extension and Engineering Services (MAWF) hectare Indigenous Plant Task Team Ministry of Agriculture, Water and Forestry Mahangu Marketing Intelligence Unit Mahangu and Sorghum Task Team Namibian Agronomic Board Namibia Dollar National Agricultural Support Services Programme North-central Region Namibian Grain Processors’ Association National Horticulture Development Initiative Namibia Mahangu Millers and Producers Association Namibia National Farmers Union Productivity Upliftment Micro Project Southern African Customs Union Southern African Development Community Southern African Development Community – Economic Partnership Agreement South African Futures Exchange (metric) tonne

anual report 3



“To develop and promote a sustainable and diverse Namibian agronomic industry through management, facilitation, advice and regulation”: this is the mission of the Namibian Agronomic Board (NAB). Although the objectives are more related to controlled products (to facilitate the production, processing, storage and marketing of controlled products in Namibia), the mission is clearly a lot broader. To achieve the first part of this mission – to develop and promote a sustainable and diverse agronomic industry – it would definitely not be sufficient to manage and regulate the existing agronomic industry. This Annual Report reflects the good balance achieved in managing, facilitating, and investigating new sectors such as the future control of mahangu crops, rendering border control and inspection services, and offering support services to the Ministry of Agriculture, Water and Forestry, amongst others. In a globalising environment, this mission is definitely not an easy one for Namibia to achieve, and I am grateful for all our stakeholders’ support and guidance, particularly that given by our Chief Executive Officer (CEO) in his active, focused work towards our common vision. The Report contains many relevant statistics on Board operations, so I will highlight only a few changes and trends here, as follows: 

Pearl millet, referred to locally as mahangu, is now in the final phase of becoming a controlled crop. Mahangu is Namibia’s most important staple food, both in terms of own production – being roughly double the tonnes of maize produced – and for food security at household level. Namibians in a wide range of age groups are involved, whether part- or full-time, in mahangu production and milling. The advantages of controlling mahangu will greatly depend on effective border control, consumer preferences, and industry support in the years to come. For maize production, the climatic environment was not as favourable as the previous season, but most producers were able to realise an average harvest; a stable price environment also enhanced future production. Maize production under irrigation increased significantly in 2003/4, but stabilised at that level for the past three seasons. As next year’s Report will show, the Hardap producers suffered not only a crop loss during the current season, but also extensive infrastructural damage due to the flood at Hardap Dam. Wheat production during the year under review was the highest recorded in Namibia since 1986, but it still represents only about 15% of wheat consumed in Namibia.

For the controlled crops – mahangu, maize and wheat – it is crucial that the total industry, that is producers, millers, producer millers, Government and consumers, adapt their marketing and control mechanisms to achieve our mission, which should be to the benefit of all Namibians. The National Horticulture Development Initiative, especially the horticulture market-share promotion (buying a percentage locally to qualify for an import permit), has clearly shown a tremendous increase in volumes produced locally. The fact that 57% of volume demanded locally represents only 20% of the value demanded in Namibia will most probably be addressed partly by a more effective market-share promotion, and partly by effective horticulture market mechanisms or infrastructure such as the envisaged overseer body.

anual report 4

In Namibia, a sheltered market environment based on import regulation is currently promoting a stable production and processing environment. In this context I am grateful to Mr J Hoffmann, a former producer, CEO and Chairperson of the NAB, for his continuous and focused work in regional and international trade issues to the benefit of our industry. Increasing fuel prices hamper production on the one hand, while on the other, increased production costs are partially absorbed into product prices for those commodities where Namibia is a net importer. Stable and high fuel prices will most probably propel efforts into alternative energy (bio-oil) production and use in Namibia. Stakeholders can manage production and marketing environments to an extent, but there will still be changes – and we will have to face these changes proactively, and investigate possible alternatives within a clear vision. It is with gratitude and appreciation towards my colleagues on the Board and the Board Secretariat that I wish to conclude this report. I am also grateful for the support given by the Honourable Minister of Agriculture, Water and Forestry and his Ministry. Gernot Eggert CHAIRPERSON

anual report 5



On the calendar of official events, the highlight of the year was the opening of the Board’s first full meeting of 2006 by His Excellency President Hifikepunye Pohamba in the presence of the Honourable Minister of Agriculture, Water and Forestry on 17 March 2006. Such manifestation of practical solidarity and support signals the welcome ultimate incentive and morale-booster to the agronomic industry in its widest sense! After the record white maize harvest of the previous year of almost 62,000 t, the harvest during the reporting period was some 40,466 t. Fortunately, the anticipated harvest for the coming year is estimated to be fairly good at approximately 56,000 t – about 3,000 t short of the 2003/4 record. The continued use of the pre-planting floor price formula based on the five-year average of the South African Futures Exchange (SAFEX) price has no doubt brought stability into the Namibian maize market and played a positive role in respect of producer confidence. However, the risk of the rain (or lack thereof) remains … the severe flood losses at Hardap serve to illustrate the risk of even too much rain. The three-year trial period of the horticultural/fresh produce arm of the Board came to the end of its three-year trial period. An external evaluation underlined that the gains made in the first three years warranted a continuation of Board activities stimulating Namibian production. However, the ‘generous’ approach of having field staff in all the major production areas was found to be financially unsustainable, and Board interventions were reduced to the core activities of concentrating on the Namibian Market Share Promotion (by which importers are required to purchase an escalating minimum percentage of their turnover within Namibia), which is underpinned by the availability of detailed production, marketing and import databases. The Board, as a founder member of Team Namibia, now provides one of the Directors of that initiative. The Green Scheme Agency, appointed by the Ministry of Agriculture, Water and Forestry (MAWF) in the previous year, with their small, professional and dedicated staff team continued to drive the implementation of the Green Scheme Policy – a process that proved to be tougher than expected. Nevertheless, depending on the magnitude of funding from Government and donors, the coming years are set to double and treble agronomic production in Namibia. Against this background, the Board’s decision to initiate the provision of a meaningful information service on export opportunities still stands firm, although finding start-up funds for this purpose will delay implementation into the next financial year. Furthermore, the study into the possibility of constructing and managing a Windhoek fresh produce market with satellite market floors in the main production areas was completed during the year under review. Hence, the MAWF appointed an Overseer Body, which falls under the auspices of the Board, that is in the process of soliciting interest among the private sector to build and hopefully also to invest in such markets. The coming year should deliver some decisive plans in this respect. As predicted in the previous Annual Report, the thrust to add mahangu to the existing gazetted controlled products, creating similar advantages to those enjoyed by the maize industry, culminated in Cabinet’s decision to support such a move in principle. It was noted, however, that such gazetting would occur only once a number of difficult constraints had been resolved. The Board created a dedicated Mahangu Advisory Committee, therefore, and is in the process of solving the last two of the said constraints in play. The Board is confident that mahangu will become a gazetted controlled product during the coming year. Through the Namibian Agricultural Trade Forum (ATF) – a multi-stakeholder, private sector focus group on agricultural trade issues within the Southern African Customs Union (SACU),

anual report 6

the Southern African Development Community (SADC) and internationally – and with good cooperation from the MAWF leadership and MAWF specialists, the Board has kept its finger on the pulse of new developments at these fora, and has maintained a Namibian marketing environment that is conducive to the growing and processing of crops. With the predicted increase in erratic fluctuations of weather patterns due to global warming, increasing international oil prices, and the increased desire of high carbon-emitting countries to buy ‘carbon credits’, the Board, with its strategic partners, organised a focus day on jatropha – a perennial dry-land oil-nut shrub, from which bio-diesel can be made. At face value, the future planting of jatropha in Namibia looked very promising and it was unanimously agreed that a holistic road map that would synchronise production, carbon-credit sales processing, and legal issues within Namibia needed to be developed. MAWF kindly agreed to sponsor this effort. Furthermore, MAWF kindly requested the Board to become more involved in issues related to energy derived from invader bush. The coming year should see some exciting new developments here as well. In the process of planning a suitable strategy to work towards the implementation of the Republic of Namibia’s Vision 2030, an even deeper partnership with MAWF has developed. The Board is truly grateful for this collaboration, which should further entrench win-win public–private partnerships in future. In this spirit, the Board – or, rather, the wider Plant Sector Development Forum – is continuing work on additional broad-based development project designs for possible funding under the United States’ Millennium Challenge Account and the European Union’s contribution to the Rural Poverty Reduction Programme through its European Development Fund 9. Such projects, in addition to other current projects that are centred on the development of mahangu and sorghum, conservation tillage, grain storage, useful indigenous plants, wild silk, and draught animal power, amongst others (details of which are contained in this report), might lead to the Board becoming a major development agent. Indeed, the Board needs to remain vigilant not to lose sight of its core function, namely “… creating a marketing environment that is conducive to growing and processing crops in Namibia”. I wish to thank all the Namibian producers, processors and traders of agronomic produce, the Honourable Minister of Agriculture, Water and Forestry and the ministerial team, Members of the Board, and my colleagues in the Board’s Secretariat for their enthusiastic and wise support to the agronomic industry as a whole, to the Board, and to me. With the certainty of such further support I look forward to the challenges of the coming year. Christof Brock CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

anual report 7



3.1 Vision, mission and objectives The Namibian Agronomic Board (NAB) is a statutory body instituted on 1 April 1985 in terms of the Agronomic Industry Proclamation AG 11 and AG 12 of 1985. This Proclamation was later replaced by the Agronomic Industry Act, 1992 (No. 20 of 1992). The vision of the NAB is to be a leading promoter of a vibrant agronomic industry. The mission of the NAB is to develop and promote a sustainable and diverse Namibian agronomic industry through management, facilitation, advice and regulation. In terms of section 9 of the said Act, the objectives of the NAB are to promote the agronomic industry and to facilitate the production, processing, storage and marketing of controlled products in Namibia. The controlled products are wheat, white maize, and horticultural fresh produce. Pearl millet, known locally as mahangu, is in the process of being gazetted as a controlled grain crop. The NAB’s main activities are as follows:    

 

To manage the trade environment, facilitate market development, and ensure that NAB clients are not exposed to unfair trading practices. To make recommendations to and advise the Ministry of Agriculture, Water and Forestry (MAWF) on all issues relating to the agronomic industry. To engage in activities that will promote domestically produced agronomic crops, and foster and improve the market for all declared crops and their products. To maintain a regulatory framework for controlled crops and their products, and gazette and maintain standards and quality control of controlled agronomic crops and their products. To establish and maintain an information service and database and provide industryrelated services to NAB clients. To lobby on behalf of and represent the agronomic industry.

3.2 Board and Advisory Committee composition 3.2.1 Board members The Minister of Agriculture, Water and Forestry appoints the members of the NAB. In terms of section 4(1) of the said Act, members are appointed from the various sectors of the agronomic industry, while one member is appointed as a Government representative. The following members served on the NAB during the year under review: Mr Gernot Eggert Chairperson Dry-land grain producers: Maize Triangle Mr Vilho Nghipondoka Deputy Chairperson Horticulture producers: North-central Regions (NCRs) Mr Gert Coetzee Processors’ representative Ms Anna Erastus Consumers’ representative Mr Anton Faul Government representative (resigned from Government during this

anual report 8

Ms Rejoice Ketji Ms Maria Hamata Mr Ricky Lilami Mr Schalk Oosthuizen Mr Robert Tobias Mr Georg Sievers Mr Gerhard van der Merwe Mr Kobus van Graan Mr Peter Zensi (Frozen post)

period) Government representative (substitute for Mr Anton Faul) Dry-land grain producers: NCRs Dry-land grain producers: Caprivi Irrigation grain producers: Kavango Dry-land grain producers: NCRs Dry-land grain producers: Maize Triangle Irrigation grain producers: Hardap Irrigation Project Trade representative Dry-land grain producers: Maize Triangle Marketing agent

The Board appointed three advisors (non-voting members) in terms of section 4(4) of the Act, as follows: Mr Tileinge Andima Ms Etuhole Ingo Rev. Ananias Iita Mr Louis Peens

Deputy Director: Ministry of Trade and Industry Agronomy Manager: Namibia National Farmers Union (NNFU) Chairperson: Namibian Mahangu Millers and Producers Association (NMMPA) Deputy Chairperson: National Horticulture Task Team; appointed as an Observer

3.2.2 Advisory Committee members The Board appoints six members from amongst its own members and advisors to serve on the NAB Advisory Committee. The following persons served on this Committee during the year under review: Mr Gernot Eggert Mr Vilho Nghipondoka Mr Kobus van Graan Ms Rejoice Ketji Mr Peter Zensi Ms Etuhole Ingo

Chairperson Deputy Chairperson Board member Board member Board member Advisor

3.3 Board and Advisory Committee meetings During the 2005/6 financial year, three Board meetings and one extraordinary Board meeting were held. Within the same period, three Advisory Committee meetings were held, one of which was an ad-hoc meeting to discuss horticulture issues with invited producers.

3.4 Board Secretariat The Board Secretariat consists of nine permanent employees, as follows: Mr Christof Brock Chief Executive Officer Ms Barbara Snyders Financial Manager Ms Antoinette Venter Administrative Manager Ms Annie Zapke Project Administrator

anual report 9

Mr Ludwig Araëb Inspector Mr Jesse Goliath Junior Accounting Clerk Gavin Frey Junior Accounting Clerk Claudene Brendell Junior Accounting Clerk Ms Bernice du Plessis Office Administrator Mr Johannes Gurubeb Messenger and Office Assistant Ms Lydia Keramin Cleaner and Office Assistant The Board employs two staff members on a three-year contract basis for the National Horticulture Development Initiative (NHDI). An additional two members were appointed in January 2006 to deal with mahangu issues: Mr Namene Kalili Ms Kathy Newaka Mr Lungameni Lucas Mr Robert Mupiri

Horticulture Officer Administrative Assistant Mahangu Officer: NCRs Mahangu Officer: Kavango and Caprivi

The following project staff members were appointed on contract with MAWF funds managed by the NAB: Mr Ralf Hoffmann Mr Gotfried !Keib Ms Lucia Namases Mr Actofel Kafula* Ms Theofilia Shilongo* Mr Jürgen Hoffmann

Manager: Productivity Upliftment Micro Projects (PUMP) and Draught Animal Power Acceleration Project (DAPAP – contract concluded in November 2005) Manager: PUMP and DAPAP (from December 2005) PUMP Administrator Manager: Mahangu Marketing Intelligence Unit (MMIU) Secretary: MMIU Foreign Trade Consultant – associated with the Agricultural Trade Forum (ATF)

* At the recommendation of the Mahangu and Sorghum Task Team (MSTT), and after approval by MAWF, the MMIU closed down on 15 January 2006.

3.5 Board financing The NAB’s activities are funded by levies paid by controlled grain producers and millers as well as horticulture producers and importers. White maize and wheat producers pay a levy of 1.4%, of which 0.9% is utilised for NAB activities and 0.5% is paid over to producers’ organisations, namely the Agronomy Producers Association (APA) and the Namibia National Farmers Union (NNFU). Millers pay a levy of 0.95%, of which 0.9% is utilised for NAB activities and 0.05% is paid over to the Namibian Grain Processors’ Association (NGPA). Horticulture producers and importers pay a levy of 1.2%. The NAB also renders contractual services to a number of MAWF projects, as well as secretarial services to the NGPA on a cost-recovery basis.

anual report 10



A total of 37 millers are registered with the NAB, of which –    

19 mill white maize 6 mill white maize and wheat 6 mill yellow maize, and 6 mill white and yellow maize.

During the period under review, three new milling licences were issued to the following:

Omahake Maize in Gobabis: White maize Best Maize in Katima Mulilo: White maize Pentagon Mills in Rundu: White maize and wheat



 

5.1 White maize In Namibia, white maize is produced under irrigation and dry-land conditions. Dry-land maize is planted in the following areas:    

Maize Triangle (Otavi–Grootfontein–Tsumeb area) Otjizondjupa Region (Hochfeld, Otjiwarongo) Omaheke Region (Gobabis and Summerdown) Caprivi and Kavango Regions

Dry-land producers normally commence with the planting process towards the end of November each year, after the first rain showers. The main marketing season commences in May the following year, and ends when the maize harvested between 1 May and 15 August is sold and milled. It is difficult to accurately determine the communal hectares planted by small-scale farmers in the Caprivi. Small-scale farmers in the Kavango also plant white maize under dry-land conditions, but it is mainly utilised for own consumption. Irrigation maize is produced in the following areas:      

Maize Triangle (Otavi–Grootfontein–Tsumeb area) Near Mariental (Hardap Irrigation Project) Stampriet and Gobabis areas Kavango Region (the Mashare, Musese, Sarasungu, Shadi Kongoro, Shitemo, and Vungu Vungu Irrigation Projects) North-central Regions (NCRs) (Etunda Irrigation Project) East of Outjo (one producer)

anual report 11

ď Ž ď Ž

South of Otjiwarongo (two producers) Near Omaruru (two producers)

Most irrigation producers plant in cycles. Maize planted in August/September each year will be harvested in February/March the following year.

Table 1: Hectares of white maize planted and marketed production Marketing year1

White maize planted (ha)1 Irrigated Dry-land Total

Marketed production (t)2 Irrigated Dry-land Total 1990/1 1,000 15,555 16,555 9,000 17,938 26,938 1991/2 1,000 32,618 33,618 8,000 27,000 35,000 1992/3 500 45,478 45,978 3,100 4,600 7,700 1993/4 900 22,310 23,210 6,400 6,109 12,509 1994/5 960 31,062 32,022 6,760 31,740 38,500 1995/6 500 11,534 12,034 3,168 2,193 5,361 1996/7 1,000 12,383 13,383 6,075 3,983 10,058 1997/8 977 12,123 13,100 10,062 29,945 37,007 1998/9 388 14,159 14,547 3,128 7,798 10,926 1999/2000 608 14,622 15,230 5,148 6,362 11,510 2000/1 765 8,717 9,482 5,590 29,410 35,000 2001/2 1,012 6,845 7,857 9,072 13,738 22,810 2002/3 3,413 7,7199 11,132 15,163 8,128 23,291 2003/4 4,788 8,704 13,492 25,027 3,248 28,275 2004/5 3,957 9,463 12,166 26,409 29,5263 61,734 2005/6 3,437 9,489 12,725 24,152 16,3143 40,4663 1 Note that the hectares planted were not planted during the marketing year of column 1, but mainly in December the previous year. 2 Maize harvested between 1 May and 15 August for marketing in the closed-border period, i.e. from 1 May until the domestic harvest is bought and milled. 3 Includes the 168.45 t marketed in the Caprivi. The hectares planted by small-scale farmers in the Caprivi Region are unknown.

The total tonnage harvested from the 12,725 ha planted was 40,466 t, of which 16,314 t were harvested from dry-land plantings and 24,152 t from irrigation plantings. A total volume of 5,025 t of white maize was retained, mostly by producers of the northern irrigation projects. The floor-price mechanism, as agreed upon by the stakeholders and applicable for maize harvested between 1 May and 15 August, was endorsed and managed by the NAB in terms of its regulatory powers. This mechanism was applied during the closed-border period that commenced on 1 May 2005 and lasted until the domestic harvest was bought and milled. On 22 November 2005, the borders opened again for imports of maize grain.

anual report 12

The South African Futures Exchange (SAFEX)-based floor price was calculated as a five-year average of the actual SAFEX spot price over the whole 12 months (adjusted for inflation). Therefore, the SAFEX-based component of the grade 1 white maize price formula was N$1,314.00/t. The transport component of the formula was based on the official transport differential exBloemhof (South Africa) landed per Namibian milling centre. The producer price (floor price), therefore, was calculated as follows: Floor price (N$1,314) + import parity per milling centre = N$1,683/t landed in Windhoek = N$1,824/t landed in Otavi Table 2: Producer prices, imports and exports of white maize Year

Producer price per tonne (N$)

Grain imports (t)1

Grain exports (t)1

Marketed production (t)

Total white maize consumption (t) 52,870 60,000 61,462 98,690 88,840 119,120 135,236 87,147 101,081 72,842 92,728 103,078 109,117 109,524 143,208 113,000

1990/1 440.96 25,932 _ 26,938 1991/2 464.00 25,000 _ 35,000 1992/3 493.09 53,762 _ 7,700 1993/4 636.73 86,181 _ 12,509 1994/5 701.43 50,340 _ 38,500 1995/6 760.00 113,759 _ 5,361 1996/7 700.0022 125,178 – 10,058 1997/8 850.003 52,732 2,592 37,007 1998/9 894.004 92,128 1,973 10,926 1999/2000 1,007.004 66,777 5,445 11,510 2000/1 846.005 62,958 5,230 35,000 2001/2 1,118.065 80,268 – 22,810 2002/3 1,728.855 85,886 – 23,291 2003/4 2,432.006 88,080 – 21,444 2004/5 1,755.006 87,434 5,960 61,734 2005/6 1,824.006 76,534 4,000 40,466 1 Import and export figures are based on figures from permits issued. 2 Indicating the floor price as approved by the Minister of Agriculture, Water and Rural Development. 3 Indicating the full-cost import parity guideline price for white maize delivered to Otavi. 4 Indicating a SAFEX-derived guideline price for white maize delivered to Otavi. 5 Indicating the average SAFEX-derived guideline price for maize delivered to Otavi in the closedborder period. 6 Indicating a floor price formula calculated as a five-year average of the SAFEX spot price over the whole five years, and adjusted for inflation.

During the period under review, 25,564 t of white maize meal and 464 t of hominy chop were exported to neighbouring countries.

5.2 Yellow maize anual report 13

Yellow maize is not deregulated as a grain product, but it is normally not utilised for human consumption. Yellow maize is only monitored for (import/export) statistical purposes. Yellow maize producers are not registered with the NAB. This crop is mostly planted under dry-land conditions and utilised to feed stock. Farmers also sell part of their harvests to fellow farmers or to animal-feed manufacturers. Table 3: Production, producer prices, imports and exports of yellow maize Year

Production (t)


Area planted (ha) 1,100




2002/3 2003/4

1,403 860

4,579 352








Price (N$/t) No information available No information available 1,974 No information available No information available 1,700

Imports (t)

Exports (t)



No information available 61,53 52,024

No information available – –


215 (meal)


5.3 Wheat Wheat is planted in the winter months of June/July, and harvested as from the middle of November until the middle of December each year. Since Namibia is a summer rainfall region, this crop is mainly produced under irrigation and in the following areas:  Near Mariental (Hardap Irrigation Project)  Kavango Region (Shadi, Shitemo Musese and Vungu Vungu Irrigation Projects)  NCRs (Etunda Irrigation Project)  Abenab, Kombat, Otavi and Tsumeb areas A total of 2,435 ha of wheat was planted, and 12,987 t were harvested and sold to the various wheat millers. Table 4: Hectares of wheat planted, marketed production, producer prices, imports and exports1 Year

1990/1 1991/2 1992/3

anual report 14

Area planted (ha) 1,000 1,000 500

Marketed production (t) 4,293 5,750 3,116

Producer price (N$/t) 563.86 587.45 670.92

Grain imports (t)1 27,963 27,000 34,478

Wheaten flour imports (t)1 – – –

Wheaten flour exports (t)1,2 – – –


Area planted (ha)

Marketed production (t)

Producer price (N$/t)

Grain imports (t)1

Wheaten flour imports (t)1 – – 695 – 3,789 6,569 5,906 5,563 3,124 – – – –

Wheaten flour exports (t)1,2 – – 2,121 2,325 2,484 8,839 4,664 5,230 13,962 20,196 – 2,212 3,065

1993/4 900 4,762 708.06 45,966 1994/5 960 6,000 708.06 50,329 1995/6 500 2,668 771.05 65,732 1996/7 1,000 3,516 895.00 25,310 1997/8 977 5,038 1,070.00 50,632 1998/9 388 2,896 1,070.00 61,392 1990/2000 608 3,429 1,251.00 47,485 2000/1 765 6,119 1,408.61 49,317 2001/2 1,012 6,846 1,974.00 41,695 2002/3 1,646 10,289 1,850.00 64,748 2003/4 1,479 8,262 1,837.00 65,108 2004/5 2,123 11,340 1,758.003 79,888 2005/6 2,435 12,987 1,851.004 73,411 1 Import and export figures are based on figures from permits issued. 2 Exports to non-Southern African Customs Union (SACU) countries. 3 Indicating an average SAFEX-derived price for wheat delivered from Hardap. 4 Indicating a five-year average (adjusted for inflation) of the actual SAFEX spot price from Upington to Windhoek, and a five-year average of the Hard Red Winter import parity price from the United States.

The wheat price was calculated on a formula that consists of a combination of –  30% of the five-year average (adjusted for inflation) of the actual SAFEX spot price, plus the transport differential from Upington to Windhoek, and  70% of the five-year average (adjusted for inflation) Hard Red Winter import parity price from the United States and the Rand/US Dollar exchange, including the transport via Walvis Bay to Windhoek. This mutually agreed price was valid for wheat harvested in Namibia between 15 October 2004 and 31 January 2005. The Namibian wheat was graded according to the South African wheat grading rules, as adopted by SAFEX for wheat below 12% protein.

5.4 National Horticulture Development Initiative 5.4.1 Production For the 2005 production year, 33,666 t were harvested. This represents a 131% increase in horticulture production from 2004, partly driven by the NHDI, which has been promoting import substitution over the past three years. The Namibian market required 58,106 t of fruit and vegetables in 2005, so the local market was able to supply 57% of the volume demanded; but due to the relative low value of locally produced goods and exports, this figure represents only 20% of the value demanded in Namibia.

anual report 15

Figure 1: Relative volume produced locally (33,666 t)

Tomatoes 3% Sweet melons 3%

Butternuts 2%

Watermelons 5%

Cabbage 6% Carrots 2%

Other 5%

Pumpkins 2% Grapes 42%

Potatoes 9% Onions 14% Oranges 7%

Grapes remain the main horticultural produce grown in Namibia, accounting for 42% of the country’s production volume. They are followed by onions (14%), potatoes (9%), oranges (7%) and cabbage (6%). Despite the increase in local production, the number of producers declined by 22%, from 175 in 2004 to 136 in 2005. 5.4.2 Demand

anual report 16

Figure 2: Relative volume demanded (58,106 t)

O ther 17%

Apples 23%

T om atoes 4%

Banan as C arrots


3% Potato es O nions


13% O ranges 8%

Potatoes account for 28% of the total tonnage demanded on the local market, followed by apples (23%), onions (13%), oranges (8%), tomatoes (4%), bananas (4%), carrots (3%) and all other products (17%). Namibians consumed 88 g of formally marketed fresh produce a day in 2005, which is the equivalent of two-thirds of an apple. The World Health Organisation recommends at least five different fruits or vegetables a day. The average Australian consumes 813 g of fruit and vegetables a day, while the average American eats 324 g and the average European 372 g. Therefore, local consumption needs to grow fourfold in order to meet the recommended daily allowance of these foodstuffs. 5.4.3 Potential import substitution There is a stark difference between the volumes demanded and those produced locally, indicating a strong orientation towards external markets. Grapes and onions, for example, are harvested over only two to three months a year, but are in demand all year round. However, there is still much potential for further import substitution, particularly as regards carrots, grapefruit, onions, oranges, potatoes and tomatoes, which are undersupplied by the local market. The following table illustrates the growth potential for domestic supply: Table 5: The 2005 growth potential (tonnes) per product per month Month January February

Carrots 34.69 96.03

Grapefruit 1.20 0.01



147.40 259.14

84.50 51.62

anual report 17



148.18 208.10

69.22 78.75

Month March April May June July August September October November December Total

Carrots 213.37 144.79 111.97 63.66 141.38 232.69 42.27 101.68 114.61 147.84 1,444.98

Grapefruit -0.35 -0.70 -0.50 178.48 48.67 82.52 91.70 457.10 404.00 190.60 1,452.73

Onions 1,016.77 1,618.22 204.61 929.72 1,973.26 -565.76 -1,085.36 -1,626.56 -297.62 118.48 2,692.31

Oranges 81.54 -52.62 -119.69 831.20 -126.62 515.86 -11.72 477.50 365.42 163.26 2,260.25



741.22 622.13 341.31 1,216.90 2,654.92 1,488.63 343.14 1,231.32 1,809.32 2,249.97 13,055.14

88.69 76.99 56.61 120.69 207.41 126.29 111.23 167.47 283.61 260.01 1,646.97

Carrots are grown in Namibia, but the quantities are 1,445 t lower that the demand throughout the year. Therefore, there is still scope to increased local production of carrots by 1,445 t. Onions are also grown locally, mainly from August to November. During those four months, onions are oversupplied by local producers, but remain undersupplied by 2,692 t for the remainder of the year. Here, too, there is considerable scope to develop local supply of onions from December to July. Potatoes are the largest demand items and are mostly imported. Although a few local producers produce potatoes, they do so in very small quantities compared with the quantities demanded. Thus, there is scope for local supply of 13,055 t of potatoes, especially from June to December. 5.4.4 Staffing The NHDI was restructured in line with the recommendation of its evaluation to become financially self-sufficient in respect of levy collection. Its staff complement was reduced from nine full-time employees to just two. This was made possible by job consolidation and outsourcing, resulting in an estimated N$132,311 net savings in the 2006/7 financial year. 5.4.5 Market share promotion The Namibian market share promotion (MSP) system increases market access for local producers by controlling imports of fresh produce. All importers were required to procure at least 5% of their fresh produce requirements locally. This figure increased to 7.5% on 1 July 2005, 10% on 1 September 2005, and 12.5% on 1 January 2006. This initiative has increased the uptake of local produce, while providing consumers with fresher produce at a lower price. The following graph illustrates the progress of the MSP thus far:

anual report 18

Figure 3: Quarterly local purchases

Quarterly local purchases

25% 20% 15%

2004 2005



5% 0% 1




5.4.6 Overseer Body The OSB, established on 19 September 2005, was mandated to develop tender documents for the implementation of a national horticulture marketing infrastructure. The Overseer Body appointed Ernst & Young to develop the tender documents and requirements.

5.5 Master Agronomist competition Two Master Agronomists are selected each year from amongst the grain and horticulture producers nominated by various organisations such as farmers’ associations and agricultural consultants. Nominees willing to participate in this competition complete a questionnaire from which the finalists are selected. A multi-stakeholder selection team conducts personal interviews with each of the finalists on their farms. The two producers with the highest scores are selected as Master Agronomists. Mr Willie von Landsberg was selected the Irrigation Master Agronomist. Mr Von Landsberg is the Project Manager at the Etunda Irrigation Project, where white maize, wheat, bananas, watermelons and a number of other fruit and vegetables on a smaller scale are produced. The Dry-land Master Agronomist was Mr Peter Zensi of the Hamburg Farm, east of Otavi, where he farms grain. Mr Zensi produces white maize and “bloubuffel� grass, and planted an experimental crop of jatropha, a nut that can be pressed to produce bio-oil.

anual report 19



Pearl millet, also known by its local name, mahangu, is generally a subsistence dry-land cereal crop and the major staple food crop produced for a large number of people, especially in the north-central, Caprivi and Kavango Regions. This crop is highly adapted to low rainfall and the prevailing soil conditions in the NCRs and the Kavango. For many years, small-scale farmers have survived on the low yields generally obtained form mahangu. The farmers in the above-mentioned areas are amongst the very few populations in Africa that have successfully devised an integrated food storage system. Farmers store their grain in storage baskets made of wood strips for up to five years. Since Independence, farmers cooperatives, the Government and the NAB have been concerned about mahangu production and marketing in the communal areas. In March 1995, therefore, a Mahangu Task Team was set up, which resulted in the establishment of the Mahangu Marketing Intelligence Unit (MMIU), managed by the NAB on contract basis. The aim of this MMIU was to commercialise small-scale mahangu farmers in the NCRs and the Kavango to regulate and promote the market for this Namibian staple food. At a major three-day Mahangu Marketing Stakeholder Forum held in Ondangwa in June 2004, it was noted that the ‘mere’ promotional and facilitating role of the MMIU had, to some extent, reached a plateau. It was resolved that it was time to move further into market regulation. In order for mahangu farmers to enjoy the same benefits as those assumed by maize and wheat farmers, mahangu needed to be gazetted as a ‘controlled’ product, i.e. including mahangu flour. This was put to the Board, who in turn recommended to the Minister of Agriculture, Water and Forestry that mahangu be gazetted a controlled product – subject to finding practical solutions to a number of difficult challenges. MAWF in turn supported this thrust, and caused Cabinet to resolve in principle on 5 July 2005 that not only should mahangu become a controlled product, but also that N$1 million should be made available to the Board for a four-year trial period as financial support, until levies collected could cover the relevant operational expenses. Thus, a dedicated Mahangu Advisory Committee (MAC) to the Board was formed. In January 2006, the MAC was instrumental in transforming the MMIU into a Controlled Product Unit within the Board’s Secretariat. This Unit continued to perform certain essential former MMIU functions, as well as a good number of other functions that were vital in safeguarding the status of a controlled product. On 5 July 2005, Cabinet resolved that, in principle, mahangu should become a controlled crop under the Act. Mahangu will then also be marketed under the same conditions as white maize, i.e. within a closed-border period and using a floor price. All millers other than service millers who buy mahangu for the purpose of selling flour will be obliged to register with the NAB and pay a levy. Producers selling to millers will pay a levy deducted at the point of sale. On about 15 September each year, after the mahangu millers have bought their annual requirements and after a survey has determined how many farmers still need to market their produce, the NAB will issue an instruction to catering companies in the Regions where mahangu is consumed that

anual report 20

deals with the percentage of maize meal per week that should be substituted with mahangu flour. The said institutional caterers should then procure such mahangu flour from the registered mahangu millers. This ruling should ensure that all Namibian mahangu has a guaranteed market before the following marketing season. To ensure that this is possible, mahangu and maize need to be interchangeable for institutional caterers and the price of mahangu and maize grain should, therefore, be the same. The annual marketing agreement and floor-price mechanism will apply to both white maize and mahangu. Table 6: Mahangu production and price Crop Commercial Communal


Area planted (ha) 412 No information available

Harvested crop (t) 990 53,900

Price (N$/t) 1,672 1,685


Up until 1996, Namibia produced sunflower seed and oil. In 1995, control over sunflower seed and sunflower products was abolished in South Africa; on 1 September 1996, the deregulation of sunflower seed and oil was promulgated in Namibia (Government Gazette No. 1435). In addition, sunflower producers are no longer registered with the NAB, so the NAB no longer monitors the production and marketing processes of this crop. The NAB only keeps statistics on the production and marketing of controlled crops, i.e. white maize and wheat. Because producers of non-controlled crops are not obliged to furnish the NAB with information on production or marketing processes in terms of the Act, the NAB is not in a position to monitor these processes for such crops. The following figures were obtained from white maize and wheat producers who also plant other crops, and who are bound by law to provide these figures to the NAB: Table 7: Estimated production of other crops for the 2005/06 financial year Crop

Area planted (ha)



Harvested crop (t) 201

Groundnuts Lucerne Sorghum Sunflowers

213 – 989 47

47 – 4,357 33

anual report 21

Price (N$/t) 2,300 delivered in South Africa 3,500 – 800 2,500

8. BORDER CONTROL AND INSPECTION SERVICES Effective border control is maintained by way of cooperation with officials of the Meat Board of Namibia. The flow of agronomic products is controlled and monitored at the following border posts:  Southern border  Ariamsvlei  Noordoewer  Holweg  Klein Manasse  Oranjemund  Eastern border  Transkalahari  North-eastern border  Ngoma  Wenela  Muhembo  Katwi Twi  Northern border  Oshikango The northern border posts are still solely controlled by the Directorate of Customs and Excise within the Ministry of Finance. The importation of maize meal and wheaten flour is illegal. To control the Namibian borders effectively, the existing joint contract entered into between Agri Inspec (a forensic intelligence network company in South Africa) and Namibian companies was maintained. The Namibian companies who are signatories to this joint contract are the NAB, the Meat Board of Namibia, Pasta Polana, and Namibia Dairies. The NAB entered into an additional annual contract with Agri Inspec during the closed-border period, to prevent in importation of white maize until the domestic harvest is taken up.



The NAB renders support services mainly to MAWF. These services include chairing Steering Committee and Task Team meetings, and managing consultancies, projects, and their allocated funds.


anual report 22

9.2 Mahangu and sorghum Support services are rendered in respect of mahangu and sorghum in order to stimulate the production of and markets for these crops. The strategies by means of which this objective is to be achieved involve improved post-harvest technology, improved draught animal power technology, marketing information and facilitation, and generic promotion. The existing Mahangu and Sorghum Task Team (MSTT) was established in September 2001. 

The NNFU continues to promote a Mahangu Marketing Scheme in the NCRs. On the strength of this, the MSTT granted the Scheme additional funds for the 2006 marketing period. They have also requested professional external evaluation, focusing on how the system could be improved. A final report on the study on small-scale millers’ credit requirements was submitted during August 2005. The study concluded that due to the small-scale millers’ lack of a functional bookkeeping system, they would find it extremely difficult to access formal credit. Under the commercialisation of mahangu, conservation tillage means better yields, a lower workload, and improved soil structure over time. During the year under review, this initiative was incorporated into the Golden Valley Agricultural Research Trust Project, based in Zambia. During August and September 2005, the Post-harvest Team, which falls under MAWF, conducted a loss assessment study on mahangu and sorghum. The interesting preliminary findings that came to light will be further researched, and solutions will be proposed in the coming financial year. The idea of instituting a crop insurance and drought relief fund for communal farmers remains pending. Such an insurance and relief fund is intended to assist communal farmers that produce surplus crops to be marketed in becoming insurable against crop failure. MAWF Directors are very much in favour of supporting such a scheme, but a more formal decision by top management is still awaited.

The MSTT will remain focused on its development functions and will oversee the finances allocated to mahangu as a controlled crop. 9.2.1 National Agricultural Support Services Programme under the MSTT 

 

Marketing chain of grain improved: The first phase of the review on the mahangu grain standards was completed and accepted; the second phase was deferred to when mahangu became a controlled product. Since this is now likely, the conclusion and gazetting of mahangu grain and flour standards will be established. Collective mahangu marketing initiative supported: The NNFU printed various marketing extension materials that were distributed to farmers. Generic promotion of mahangu and flour: A radio campaign (soap opera) was run in five episodes towards the end of 2005 and was regarded as a great success. The aim was to encourage urban school children to consume more mahangu. Digital copies of the campaign were handed over to the Ministry of Education for possible use in schools. Improvement of small millers’ mahangu flour packaging: The Namibian Mahangu Millers and Producers Association (NMMPA) was sponsored in order for them to obtain professional help in the design and printing of logos to add value to mahangu flour packaging for the many millers who participated in this activity. Pilot implementation of information and training programme for small-scale

anual report 23

millers: Training sessions for hammer-mill operations were conducted in the northcentral, Caprivi and Kavango Regions, and the NMMPA reported on these sessions to the National Agricultural Support Services Programme (NASSP). Mahangu technology demonstrations conducted: The first phase, namely to develop a National Post-harvest Demonstration Unit (technical design), was completed. Construction plans for this Unit at the Rural Development Centre in Ongwediva were accepted during January 2005. A motivation was requested from the Rural Development Centre through MAWF to indicate whether the proposed Unit was still viable in terms of manpower availability, etc. In terms of the Centre’s sustainability, both MAWF and the Ministry of Regional and Local Government, Housing and Rural Development indicated they would take joint responsibility for this Unit. NASSP activities cease by the end of September 2006.

9.2.2 Final NASSP activities: September 2005–September 2006   

Rendering support to the activities of the Interim Seed Council: This includes support in respect of policy and bill formulation. Marketing chain of grain improved: The pilot initiative was reviewed, and further pilot infrastructure was established. Technical and financial efficiency of small-scale processors improved through technology tests, and research and development.

9.2.3 MMIU 

 

In general, activities carried out during this reporting period were in respect of mahangu grain and the market facilitation of mahangu flour by way of linking mahangu buyers and sellers, the collection and dissemination of market information regarding mahangu, facilitation of NMMPA activities, and promotion of the emerging mahangu milling industry. At the MSTT’s recommendation and on subsequent MAWF approval, the MMIU was officially dissolved. MMIU funds were depleted by 13 January 2006, leaving a liability of N$41,435 for the staff’s leave entitlements, which were covered by the NAB Mahangu (Levy) Fund. The agreement was that all MMIU assets and liabilities were to be transferred to the NAB Mahangu (Levy) Fund under the guidance of the Mahangu Advisory Committee. On 13 January 2006, the MMIU office was officially handed over to the new Mahangu Officer, Mr Lungameni Lucas, and the Assistant Mahangu Officer for Rundu and Caprivi, Mr Robert Mupiri.

9.2.4 The NASSP under the MMIU Close to N$87,504 of NASSP funds were used to purchase computers and furniture in order to improve the MMIU’s marketing information system, and staff received training in various software packages. 9.2.5 NAB Mahangu Fund 

The National Consultative Workshop on Mahangu issues held in June 2004 in Ongwediva resolved that mahangu should become a controlled product, gazetted under the Act. The NAB formally resolved in July 2004 that this should happen and formally submitted

anual report 24

their resolution to this effect to the Minister of Agriculture, Water and Forestry. The Ministry concurred and transferred budgetary support for the first year. Cabinet also granted approval for mahangu to be declared a controlled product (Cabinet Decision 13/05.07.05/002). In line with this, Cabinet authorised MAWF budgetary provision from a separate vote to implement this four-year pilot project. The NAB and MAWF, in their joint efforts to solve difficult challenges such as negotiating an agreement with Angola with regard to border control, are very close to concluding such an agreement. If mahangu imports from Angola could be controlled, mahangu production in Namibia could be promoted by way of a guaranteed market and by way of surplus production (producers that produce more than the traditional household needs) that could be sold to institutional caterers.

The membership of the Mahangu Advisory Committee comprises mahangu processors, mahangu producers, MAWF representatives, and technical advisors. It was agreed that a temporary inter-ministerial working group be constituted to finalise the issues regarding control of the Namibian/Angolan border and institutional catering companies. This working group, which included representatives from the Ministry of Trade and Industry, the Directorate of Customs and Excise in the Ministry of Finance, the Tender Board, the Ministry of Education, the Ministry of Health and Social Services, and the National Planning Commission, met in November 2005. Liaison amongst members is ongoing.

9.3 Processing of indigenous plants   

 

Research and development in respect of indigenous plant products are ongoing with regard to relevant species identified, and new species will be targeted. Eco-regional satellite centres were established to allow for improved contact with local stakeholders and producers. Contact with international indigenous plant buyers’ products is constantly sought. The IPTT focuses on translating the knowledge gained through its activities into bankable business opportunities for Namibians. Investigations into market opportunities for processed indigenous green leafy vegetables were launched and are in progress. A pilot cultivation scheme for the production of Hoodia is still ongoing.

9.3.1 The NASSP under the IPTT: Work plan activities that ended September 2005 

 

Devil’s claw is cultivated and value is added to production prior to export: The aim of this contract was to establish adequate nursery facilities at both the Ben Hur Rural Development Centre in the Omaheke Region and the Okondjatu Project in the Otjozondjupa Region. The facilities were successfully erected, seedlings were produced, and suitable areas to plant seedlings were identified. Technical support was rendered to the activities from the Indigenous Plant Resources. A contract was signed with the Centre for Research, Information and Action in Africa: Southern Africa – Development and Consulting (CRIAA SA–DC) for working capital to implement the activities for Phase 2 of the eco-regional satellite centres. Succulent Development Programme: A contract was entered into with a project coordinator. The contract ended in August 2005, but was extended to September 2006. Processing trials for indigenous leafy vegetables to enhance household income:

anual report 25

A contract was signed with CRIAA SA–DC for processing trials, analyses and market research of indigenous leafy vegetables. Their final report was submitted in mid-September 2005. 9.3.2 Useful Plants Development Project This Project develops useful indigenous wild plant resources into marketable products by way of research, conservation, extension services, and market development. 9.3.3 Contractual obligations  

Indigenous Vegetable Development Project: Phase 2 of this initiative is in progress and will be concluded in June 2006. Database for the National Botanical Research Institute (NBRI): An amount of N$100,000 was earmarked for the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR, South Africa) to maintain the NBRI’s Useful Plant Database. Marula Juice and Pulp Pilot Project (Phase 2): The first part of Phase 2 was implemented during the year under review, and samples were sent to a German distillery. It was learnt that marula was not very suitable for distilling purposes. A South African company that is interested in manufacturing marula extract for the flavourant and juice markets will most probably establish operations in Namibia in due course. An initial sample of marula pulp was sent to a Swedish university as well, to investigate its antioxidant properties.

9.4 Grain storage The objective of this initiative is to minimise losses on the three levels of grain storage, i.e. homestead level, community level, and Regional (central) storage level. A Steering Committee for the Caprivi Regional Integrated Storage Project (CRISP) was established in September 1998. 

A number of on-farm storage and community stores have been built in the Caprivi since this Project started in 1998. Three community stores were completed and a contract for the building of another four stores has just been signed. Cabinet instructed the building of modern storage facilities in the Kavango and Ohangwena Regions. A Technical Committee was formed to see how best silos could be set up in these Regions. This was followed by various actions and consultations with regional councillors and communities before making final recommendations to MAWF. Omauni was regarded as an ideal place to erect an additional shed that would serve as a central collection point, but Okongo was favoured for a 500-t capacity storage facility. The latter was subject to clear guidance from MAWF regarding their policy on multipurpose functions for such facilities. The new collection point would be managed by the communities themselves or by cooperatives.

9.5 Wild Silk Project This Project was established as a financially sustainable mechanism to remove Gonometa cocoons from pasture land to limit stock and game mortalities. The Wild Silk Steering Committee was established in September 2001.

anual report 26

 

This Project was later converted into a viable enterprise. Phase 5 has been completed and a proposal for Phase 6 is due by the service provider, CRIAA SA–DC. An extraordinary meeting took place on 27 June 2005, with potential managers and investors, for the continuation of the Wild Silk Company. They opted to source funding from Namdeb Diamond Corporation. Negotiations in this regard are still ongoing. The Company’s income, although currently small, basically comes from the sale of wild silk products. Internal discussions to hand over the Company to the Leonardville Village Council as proposed by MAWF are ongoing.

9.6 Cotton Promotion Campaign The objective of the Cotton Promotion Campaign is to stimulate small-scale cotton production in the communal areas. 

The Cotton Task Team (CTT) proposed a study to find suitable niche markets for high quality Namibian cotton. The Namibia Agronomy Producers Association (APA) pledged N$30,000 towards this study and the CTT currently awaits the go-ahead from MAWF. Due to subsidised world prices for cotton, South African cotton prices are concomitantly depressed too, therefore creating no incentive for Namibian producers to plant new cotton. Some producers are still harvesting ratoon cotton.

9.7 Agri Services Reform Programme This venture aimed to relieve MAWF personnel from commercial sector activities such as retailing seed and providing ploughing services, thus them to focus on their core functions. Based on a study conducted on future MAWF support interventions to agronomic mechanisation (tractors), a submission was made to MAWF on their proposed future approach.

9.8 Tractor Training Support Services Project 

  

A Task Team was approved, along with the institutions proposed to serve as members. Favourable consideration was given to having the TTSS Project be a long-term MAWF task, with formal training courses and ongoing backstopping for tractor owners and drivers. Courses on offer for the next two years will be outsourced to a consultant, and MAWF staff will then serve as understudies in order to provide future training to small-scale agronomic farmers. The Mashare Agricultural Development Institute is now the centre for tractor training services. The Agricultural Training Division designated a member of their staff, Mr Linus Tashiya, to act as the TTSS Coordinator. The TTSS Project has temporarily been put on hold, pending the Directorate of Agricultural Research and Training reaching internal agreement on budgeting and tendering procedures. At the time of compiling of this report, there had been no indication of an answer yet.

Meanwhile, MAWF granted permission to utilise some of the funds (N$90,266.25) for a consultancy to design an intervention package to stimulate seed retailing in the north-central

anual report 27

areas. A draft final report was submitted during December 2005 and a discussion session to comment on the report was held on 3 February 2006 with members of the Interim Seed Council.

9.9 Draught Animal Power Acceleration Project The DAPAP stimulates the use of draught animal power amongst small-scale farmers in an attempt to increase productivity and cope with labour shortages by way of community-based training, access to credit through partial loan guarantees, and the establishment of a DAPAP Task Team in November 2003. DAPAP funds have been with the NAB since 1998 as part of the Agri Services Reform Programme. The wheat donation from the United States, which was monetised, created an opportunity for the implementation of both the DAPAP and the Productivity Upliftment Micro-projects Project (PUMP). The DAPAP stimulates the use of draught animal power amongst small-scale farmers in an attempt to increase productivity and cope with labour shortages by way of community-based training, access to credit through partial loan guarantees, and the establishment of a DAPAP Task Team in November 2003. DAPAP funds have been with the NAB since 1998 as part of the Agri Services Reform Programme. The wheat donation from the United States, which was monetised, created an opportunity for the implementation of both the DAPAP and the Productivity Upliftment Micro-projects Project (PUMP).    

Second-round training was conducted, from which 840 farmers benefited. A total of 3,396 individuals were trained by decentralised farmer-to-farmer training. Some 671 vouchers were issued and a total of 604 of farmers claimed their implement and harness. More than 537 farmers attended voluntary unsubsidised training, which is partly a reflection of the demand on the ground. An animal-drawn, single-row ripper-planter, manufactured by HÄSST (a Zimbabwean company), was bought and tested. Unfortunately, the implement needs refinement.

9.10 Productivity Upliftment Micro-projects Project This Project promoted agricultural productivity amongst poorer farmers in Namibia by way of subsidising farming implements (animal-drawn cultivators, animal health kits, etc.) and ensuring training for the effective use thereof. The PUMP Steering Committee was established in May 2003 and the Project was concluded on 31 October 2005.    

The donor was satisfied with the results, especially with the regular reporting that was done. With the draught animal implement subsidies, 4,008 farmers were able to transform their farming methods from hand cultivation to simple draught animal mechanisation methods. A total of 191 animal health kits were provided to farmers. Training and demonstration equipment was purchased for the Directorate of Extension and Engineering Services (DEES) in MAWF.

anual report 28

9.11 San Draught Animal Power Acceleration Project A donation was received from MAWF’s Directorate of Rural Development to provide 193 sets of hand tools to the San in western Caprivi. Further funding might be forthcoming from the Ministry of Regional and Local Government, Housing and Rural Development.

9.12 Wheat funds The Unites States Government, under its 416(b) Programme, donated 20,000 t of wheat to the Namibian Government. The NAB was tasked to manage the monetisation of the wheat. Some 70% of the ensuing funds went to AIDS-related projects under the Ministry of Health and Social Services, while the remaining 30% went to agriculture-related projects to be implemented by the NAB. An amount of N$2 million was allocated to the Indigenous Plant Task Team, while the remainder went to PUMP and the Namibia Small Stock Development Project.

9.13 Conservation tillage A three-year pilot project was funded by the Swedish International Development Agency (Sida) to strengthen HIV/AIDS and food security mitigation mechanisms amongst smallholder farmers in Botswana, Lesotho, Namibia and Zambia. Various institutions such as the NAB, NNFU, MAWF and the Namibia Red Cross Society agreed to the project in principle. A Steering Committee, consisting of Government representatives from the DEES, the Directorate of Agricultural Research and Training, regional farmers’ representatives, and the Namibia Red Cross Society, was formed to oversee these activities. The Steering Committee planned to meet twice a year. 

  

The first Steering Committee meeting was held on 29 September 2005. It was also attended by the Zambian officials (Dr Steven Muliokela, the CEO, and Mr Kamwi Kabisa, the Project Manager). The meeting learned that Sida had cut the budget by 33%, and that it would then amount to approximately N$700,000 a year. The reduced budget meant this initiative could no longer cover all the Regions, so it was decided to focus only on the Omusati Region, in the hope that positive impacts could be carried over to other Regions through information-sharing. On 30 September 2005, a sub-grant agreement was signed between the Golden Valley Agricultural Research Trust (GVART), based in Zambia, and the NAB. The project was further subcontracted to the Namibia Resource Consultants (NRC) and the NNFU on 3 November 2005 to coordinate and manage all project activities. During mid-November until mid-December 2005, the project implementers were in the process of selecting 10 to 15 Master Farmers to train a number of other small-scale farmers within a period of three years. These (trained) farmers then in turn train a number of untrained farmers, creating a training pyramid.

anual report 29

10. NAMIBIAN GRAIN PROCESSORS’ ASSOCIATION The NGPA came into existence on 26 March 2002 with its main objective to promote the interests of the grain-processing industry. In terms of its Memorandum of Association, this body not only serves as a forum for consulting with stakeholders and addressing issues relating to the staple food processing industry, but also serves as a forum from which nominations for representation on the Agronomic Board are made. The NAB renders secretarial services to the NGPA on a cost-recovery basis. During the period under review, one annual general meeting, an extraordinary general meeting, and three Management Committee meetings were held. The members of the NGPA during this period were as follows: Mr Gert Coetzee Mr Christo Ellis Mr Kobus van Graan Rev. Ananias Iita Mr Willem Gagiano Mr Mauno Haindongo Mr HK Giersch Mr Ryno Mans Mr Schalk Oosthuizen Mr Werner Wallner Mr Kallie Grunschloss Mr Shiraz Bhamjee Mr Tulio Perreira Mr Loffie von Landsberg Mr Jan Cronjé Mr Willie von Landsberg

Namcorn Mills (Chairperson) Bokomo Namibia (Deputy Chairperson) Namib Mills Okahao Mills Makalani Mills Onawa Mills Oshona Mills Goal Maize African Maize Omaruru Mills Family Choice Kamunu Mills Wokesa Mills Shadi Irrigation Project Shitemo Mills Etunda Mills

The Management Committee of the NGPA comprises the following members: Mr Gert Coetzee Mr Schalk Oosthuizen Mr Christo Ellis Mr Kobus van Graan Rev. Ananias Iita

Namcorn Mills (Chairperson) African Maize (Deputy Chairperson) Bokomo Namibia Namib Mills Okahao Mills

The processors’ representative on the Board is the Chairman of the NGPA, Mr Gert Coetzee. Three other millers were also appointed to the Board as representatives of various other positions, namely –   

Mr Schalk Oosthuizen, as a representative of irrigation producers in the Kavango Region, in terms of section 4(1)(a) of the Act Mr Kobus van Graan, as the trade representative, and Rev. Ananias Iita, as an advisor to the Board in his capacity as Chairman of the NMMPA.

anual report 30

11. REGIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL TRADE RELATIONS The year under review was distinguished by directionless developments in regional and international trade conditions for Namibian agriculture in general, and also for products controlled by the NAB. Operationalisation of the Regional Integrated Sustainable Policy Development (RISPD) Plan of the Southern African Development Community (SADC) Secretariat, although quite ambitious and difficult to achieve in its objective of creative a SADC Free Trade Area (FTA) by 2008, poses some definite threats to the present sheltered market environment of agronomic crops. These protective measures currently in place in the Southern African Customs Union (SACU) Agreement enabled the moderate expansion of Namibian staple production, especially in maize and wheat, and its downstream products. The SADC Secretariat’s Directorate for Trade, Industry, Finance and Investment, under the able management of its Director, Mr Nokokure Murangi, has set up a regional integration timetable that foresees the establishment of a SADC FTA by 2008 and the establishment of a full-fledged customs union by 2010. No protective measures exist in the SADC Free Trade Agreement that the Namibian Agronomic Board currently administers in the SACU Agreement. However, SACU, negotiating as a bloc in the SADC Trade Negotiation Forums, has frontloaded its offer to the rest of the SADC member countries. By the end of 2006, tariff protection for Namibia will no longer exist for imports from non-SACU SADC member countries, with the exception of tariffs on some textile products. Internationally, the World trade Organisation’s Doha Development Agenda, which was supposed to bring some developmental aid instruments to least developed and developing countries, has virtually stalled while developed countries try to protect their agricultural trade interests without much concern for the originally perceived idea of development for poor countries. It is not clear what benefits the outcome of this round of negotiations will hold for the agronomic sector in Namibia. Furthermore, the renegotiation of the preferential Cotonou Agreement between African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries and the European Union – in which Namibia is participating under the SADC–Economic Partnership Agreement configuration – has been stalled through the absence of a properly defined negotiation platform: Namibia, as part of SACU, either has to negotiate as a SACU member country, or as a member of the artificial SADC–EPA configuration, comprising Angola, Botswana, Lesotho, Mozambique, Namibia, Swaziland and Tanzania, with South Africa as an observer. The Namibian offensive position in these negotiations will benefit Namibian agricultural exports of table grapes, beef and other horticultural speciality products. However, the required reciprocity in the (still to be negotiated) agreement may expose Namibia to the import of subsidised agricultural products – not only into Namibia, but also into the southern African region, where market diversion may have a detrimental effect on the development of Namibia’s agricultural sector.

anual report 31

11.1 The role of the Agricultural Trade Forum of Namibia The ATF has been operating as an association not for gain since November 2003. Over the past year, the Forum established itself as a platform that has proved successful in addressing all trade issues relating to the agricultural sector. This sector has decided to use the ATF as a single desk from which to address trade issues in its relations with and inputs to the line Ministries of Agriculture, Water and Forestry and the Ministry of Trade and Industry. In the year under review, the budget of the Trade Advisor was financed by the Marketing Boards, while the ATF’s operational budget was financed by member contributions. The ATF currently has 12 paid-up members, including the NNFU and the Namibia Agricultural Union as producer representatives.

11.2 Activities of the Agricultural Trade Forum The regular activities of the ATF included attendance at trade meetings, preparation of trade policy briefs, and general support to the trade negotiations conducted by MAWF and the Ministry of Trade and Industry. Six ordinary ATF meetings were held during the year, with briefing papers for ATF members and discussions of relevant trade issues. Requests by the agricultural sector regarding trade issues were partly resolved, and feedback was given to members on these issues. The ATF successfully held four public dialogue meetings on trade issues during the year. On average, more than 40 participants attended each of these breakfast meetings, including Members of Parliament, members of the Diplomatic Corps, Government officials, and members of the business community. The meetings were sponsored by the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung.

11.3 Involvement of the Agricultural Trade Forum in trade negotiations Against the above background, the ATF can clearly be seen to have an offensive as well as a defensive role to play in terms of the interests of Namibia’s agronomic sector. The declared objectives of the Namibian Government’s Second National Development Plan and its Vision 2030 foresee development of the rural areas through enhanced agricultural production, unhampered by the sector’s exposure to market fluctuations in respect of agronomic products and subsidised food imports. SACU is the main supplier of additional staples to Namibia, and trade with SACU member states is of great importance for Namibia’s national food security. However, the country’s fledging agronomic value chain cannot be unconditionally exposed to the liberalised market conditions in other SACU member countries if such exposure will undermine the developmental efforts of the Namibian Government, producers, and processors of agronomic crops and products. Examples of these developmental efforts in public–private partnership are the Green Scheme operations already in place in northern Namibia. These projects will not be economically feasible if they are exposed to the vagaries of international commodity markets without the cushioning effect of protective measures implemented by the NAB. Thus, it is one of the ATF’s most important functions to maintain the present status quo as regards the partial protective measures in place that have, for example, allowed maize production to grow with an annual percentage of 15% over the last few years. Also, and in cooperation with its SACU partners, Namibia, with the help of the ATF, has to guard against the possible importation of subsidised or cheaper agronomic products under the various trade agreements that are currently under negotiation by Namibia as a SACU member state, or by other trading constellations such

anual report 32

as the SADC–EPA. To this end, the ATF constantly consults with its stakeholders and prepares negotiation positions and proposals to the line Ministries involved, namely MAWF, the Ministry of Trade and Industry, and the Directorate of Customs and Excise in the Ministry of Finance. These positions have been developed in consultation with all partners in the agricultural value chain, and thus carry the necessary weight in the ATF’s submissions to the institutional sector.

11.4 Informing stakeholders Another very important function of the ATF is to inform the agronomic value chain about possible opportunities and threats resulting from trade negotiations either concluded or in progress. Namibia cannot negotiate any trade measures or agreements in isolation. Due to the provisions of the 2002 SACU Agreement, Namibia is part and parcel of SACU trade negotiations – negotiations that are not always driven by the needs of Namibia alone and that may, under certain circumstances, even be detrimental to Namibia’s development goals. Regular scheduled and unscheduled meetings are held with ATF stakeholders, while information is also shared by way of position papers on trade issues. The Ministry of Trade and Industry selected the ATF as a member of the National Trade Forum. The ATF currently chairs the Agricultural Trade Committee of this newly instituted public–private sector forum.

11.5 Conclusion: A word of thanks Excellent relationships were maintained between the ATF and MAWF as well as with the Ministry of Trade and Industry, as the lead Ministry in all trade-related issues. Here, grateful thanks are extended to the Director of International Trade in the Ministry of Trade and Industry, Ms A Mwanyangapo, and its Deputy Director, Mr W Nekwiyu, for taking on board the concerns and aspirations of agricultural trade in international negotiations. A special word of thanks is extended to Mr B Rothkegel, Director of Planning in MAWF. Without their constant attention to the needs of the agronomic industry in a liberalised trade environment, further development of this important sector in Namibia will not be possible.

anual report 33


anual report 34

anual report  
anual report  

como hacer un reporte