southern africa food security change lab phase one synthesis document 12 march 2010 (1)

7/27/2019 Southern Africa Food Security Change Lab Phase One Synthesis Document 12 March 2010 (1)

1/52

TOWARDS A FOOD SECURE SOUTHERN AFRICA

Perspectives from the Field

A working document synthesizing interviews with key stakeholders in the food system

12 March 2010

Prepared by Reos with input from Ralph Hamann of UCT Graduate School of Business and

Milla McLachlan Stellenbosch University.


2/52

Towards a Food Secure Southern Africa 2

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3

INTRODUCTION 5

1. THE CURRENT FOOD SYSTEM 6

1.1 .THE CURRENT FOOD SYSTEM: SYSTEM PLAYERS 6

1.1.1POOR CONSUMERS

1.1.2RETAILERS

1.1.3MANUFACTURERS

1.1.4FARMERS

1.1.5FARM WORKERS

1.1.6INPUT PROVIDERS

1.1.7 THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT

1.1.8 ACADEMIA

1.2 THE CURRENT FOOD SYSTEM:STRAINED AND STRETCHED 32

1.3 THE CURRENT FOOD SYSTEM:SEEDS OF CHANGE 37

2. THE WAY FORWARD 41

2.1PLACES AND SPACES OF POSSIBILITY

2.2THE PARADIGM SHIFT

2.3THE VALUE CHAIN APPROACH

3. WE MAKE THE PATH BY WALKING IT 51

3.1FINDING PLACES TO LEVERAGE MEANINGFUL CHANGE3.2SEEING MORE OF THE SYSTEM

3.3TAKING ACTION

APPENDIX 1: LIST OF INTERVIEWEES SEPARATE


3/52


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This synthesis report is a key outcome of phase 1 in a year-long change lab process

focused on identifying opportunities for addressing food insecurity in South and southern

Africa. It is a working document intended to highlight issues raised in 21 interviews with keyrole-players in government, business and civil society. (See appendix 1 for a list of

interviewees.)

The writers of this report have highlighted a range of issues, including those that representareas of agreement and convergence among interviewees, as well as those where there

is some disagreement. Strongly emphasized opinions by one or just a few interviewees are

also represented. The purpose of the report is therefore NOT to report on consensus about

the most popular opinions, but instead to bring attention to issues the various players

interviewed felt strongly about.

This report aims to achieve a few things: firstly, to help all stakeholders in the food securitysystem see the issues as a whole the system that spans production through to

consumption. Secondly, the report aims to identify the areas that need attention. And

thirdly, the report highlights areas where players have energy to contribute collectively.

This report only mirrors the views of the 21 interviewees. No additional information is

included. Even though these interviewees represent a broad spectrum of the food security

system, there are gaps. Also, most of the interviewees are from South Africa and while

they considered and addressed regional issues, they view them from a South African

perspective. To broaden the information available, we have added a press review on

food security from January to December 2009, as well as a high-level desk review.

An Overview of the Synthesis Report

This report is divided into three main sections. The first section looks in some detail at what

interviewees said about the current reality of the food system, the second section explores

what was said about future options, and the third section looks into what choices need to

be made and where to start.

In the Current Reality section, all of the players who in some way influence food security

are outlined, as identified by interviewees. The interviewees had much to say about the

role players spanning the entire value chain: farmers and farm workers, input providers

(seed, fertilizer, transport, water and land), manufacturers, retailers, and finally consumers.The role of the state came up frequently in different forms. Regulation issues were

highlighted, both on the agricultural side (emerging farmers) and consumer side (food

quality and safety). Related to this, competition policy was an emotive topic raised by

many. The role of research was mentioned as a contributing factor to innovation and

validation of better food security processes. Social partners such as the Food Bank and

GAIN were referenced repeatedly as important umbrella organisations helping to reduce

food insecurity. This section also includes a systems overview of food security what

interviewees had to say about the overall strains and stretches of the existing system. It isinteresting to note that many of the interviewees suggest that the players at the two ends

of the value chain (farmers/farm workers and consumers) are increasingly the most

vulnerable to forces beyond their control that influence food security. Some intervieweesquestioned whether a more local/regional focus was necessary to address food insecurity,

rather than the existent global, open market, approach. This was a contested issue. The


4/52


move into Africa by mostly retailers also provoked some comment about its implications

for food security in southern Africa, positive or negative. To wrap up this section,

interviewees highlighted a range of initiatives, which are already in progress and

improving the situation.

The second section of the report looks at future paths what respondents said about

where we are heading, and would like to head. There were two main views emerging. The

first supported a more incremental approach to better food security, which made use of

existing systems and policies. The second advocated for the entire food system to be

changed in some way, either through government policy and regulation, or for example,growing the idea of livelihood farming by connecting many more people to the

possibilities of growing their own food and distributing excess through new channels such

as cooperatives. Sometimes, the same person expressed aspects of both views.

The final section of the synthesis report motivates for the approach of making the path

while walking it. After reviewing the interviews and how they reveal the system of food

security, the authors have observed that there are parts of the value chain that are

becoming increasingly vulnerable farmers and consumers in particular. Creating a more

sustainable food system one that works for everyone will require a better

understanding of how consumers (particularly low income consumers) and farmers

(including farm workers) experience the system. Only then can we work together to

create the kind of system we want. Part of a collaborative exercise would need to look athow we can improve this reality. Firstly, by taking Learning Journeys to see this reality

firsthand, and secondly by identifying where opportunities exist to change it. Participants

will have the opportunity to share this experience with other players in different sectors of

the value chain, thus expanding relationships and broadening peoples awareness of

what it is like to see the food security reality from multiple perspectives. From these

learning and sharing opportunities, participants will establish what particular issue or

problem they would like to tackle together.

The intention from here on is that the process follows the needs and interests of the

participants involved, and the design of the project is therefore being kept as flexible as

possible to enable you to have the impact in the system that you can and want to have.


5/52


6/52


1. THE CURRENT SYSTEM

This section looks at the food system as it currently is, in three ways. Firstly, it considers the

major players in the system, as described and viewed by interviewees, secondly it looks in

overview at the big issues and trends that interviewees drew attention to, which were

largely, although not exclusively, issues of concern. And finally, the section ends bylooking at the seeds of change: activities and initiatives already happening in the system

that are sources of inspiration and focus for future action.

1.1 THE CURRENT SYSTEM: SYSTEM PLAYERS

Interviewees spoke in depth about most of the players in the food system. The views

expressed are presented here beginning with consumers, moving through the system to

producers, and finishing with government and academia who play a more diffused role

across the system. NGOs were not discussed at any length, but their role emerges in a

number of the issues, such as welfare responses and working with subsistence farmers,

later in the document.

1.1.1POOR CONSUMERS

Several interviewees felt that in recent years in the sub-region of Southern Africa, poor

consumers have become worse off, and this reality is unlikely to change. There are

different opinions about direct support to alleviate immediate needs.

ACCESS

One researcher underlined that,

relatively, food in South Africa is goodvalue.

If you are looking at bread, we

have the second cheapestbread in the world, compared toEgypt (the cheapest), theyre

getting a lot of support. If you

look at protein, poultry, especially

broilers we used 16kg per

capita in 1996 to 32kg today

that tells you that distributionchannels and production are

becoming more efficient.

But a more consistent message emergedabout it remaining out of reach for the

poor.

Our food is relatively affordable.The problem is that most people

cant afford it, as they dont earn

enough.

In SA and many other parts of

southern Africa, the food issue is

a price issue. Its not because it

isnt available.

If we produce enough food,

there will be enough to eat, butthe problem for SA is where

access to that food is a huge


7/52


problem

And that creating jobs is key to improving

peoples access to food.

We shouldnt blame the food

prices; we need to create jobs.

Food security is an

unemployment issue..

When it comes to quality, one industry

player mentioned that were relativelywell off

We have good quality food for a

developing country.

But again theres concern about the

quality of food the poor can afford.

What comes up for me is the

quality of food issue: people

must know when they are eating

junk. They are forced to buy

cheap junk, which is essentially

very value free and they land up

very unhealthy. Theyre forced to

increasingly give up old forms of

good nutrition.

How do we make sure that wehave quality food that is of

value? South Africa is not a poor

country, but we still have people

who go hungry.

A couple of retailers mentioned this as a

significant concern

The additives issue is based on

work we do within the business.

All of our permanent staff go

through regular tests .. we

realized that our staff were eating

rubbish, and the nutritionists said

that these foods could be

replaced with more healthy

ingredients.

Retailers also spoke about the difficulties

and knock on effects of their taking

action on quality issues.

The people at the bottom of the

consumer market are suffering

the most .(on) food qualityfor example, tartrazine inconcentrates is alive and well in

LSM 2-4. You wont find these in

LSM 7-10 you can (remove

tartrazine) and have no impact

on the cost but.as soon as

we try to introduce food of a

better quality, we lose customers

to the independent wholesalers.

How do we protect our market

share and get these guys to dothe right thing? It needs sensible


8/52


legislation by government.

Theres a particular

supplier.a product the

emerging market loves.. Our

guys went into the factory

..(wanted to) close it down from

a hygiene point of view. Its one of

the biggest selling lines in (a

competitors business). So nowwhat do we do? Do we say, well

were not going to take that

product..? So they got an

opposition to (shutting it

down)... its taken us a year to

get him up to standard so that

we can now start taking it.

And one spoke about the potential

downside of the Consumer Protection

Act.

The whole thing interacts in our

lives in our lives its all about

price and availability and price is

a function of supply anddemand, and the food safety

issue kills the small guy, which

limits our options on supply.

A lone voice mentioned the priorities

implicit in producing for export and the

impact of that on local childrens health.

Weve been wanting to produce

for export even though its not

fetching a return.. at the

expense of food crops, fisheries

and livestock.. we produce

mango, bananas etc. to conform

to EuroGAP to supply

European children and let ours

eat the mycotoxins in lower

standard foodkids in farm

villages eat ground nuts with

200ppm of mycotoxins per day.

Its a big hurdle to cross.

WELFARE RESPONSES

Interviewees gave their views on three types of welfare response: the Food Bank, which

distributes surplus food donated by manufacturers and retailers, Social Grants provided by

the government, and donor funded food gardening projects.

A few see subsidized support to food

gardens offering a good alternative.

..its about making a little bit of

land available, its teaching the

skills, its merely giving them a

little bit of a start in life whetherits the seeds whatever it is - get


9/52


them involved there. I have seen

such passion in the food gardens

that weve put up, its incredible.

Home gardeners are using their

own land, that can feed a

family of 4 or 5, all year round

with all their vegetable

requirements.

While some are skeptical about the

sustainability and impact of food

gardens.

We see lots of little vegetable

gardens but dont really know

what contribution they make to

food provisioning, how

sustainable they are and whether

skills are being transferred.

Others frustrated that gardens arent

enough.

Food gardens are a part of it, but

weve been relegated there by

peoples mentalities in

government, and international

agencies.

One commented on the problem of the

poor spend their food money with large

retailers and not local suppliers.

Social grants they leak out of

the communities whereas they

could be a major source of

support for local economies, I

mean that transfer of income is

massive and it adds to the

demand for food.

Another wanted them tied to behaviour

change and productivity.

Social grants should be used to

reward positive behaviour and

funds should be used to acquire

resources for productivity.

While the Food Bank was loved by one. Were very involved with the food

bank and we just think its

brilliant: they provided a real

business solution. We give themall of our obsolete stock todistribute previously wed be

donating good stock and just

destroying all of the old stock. We

can track it to make sure that

were doing the right thing first.

We decided to stop there

because we wanted to move

away from the mentality of hand

out

And not by another. Bringing waste food back into


10/52


feed people, if thats used as a

tool to undermine family farming,

thats a problem thats

effectively what it is:

unconsciously not consciously.

1.1.2RETAILERS

Although retailers have been criticised by a number of interviewees for making too muchprofit, and affecting local supply chains, they are also faced with a number of constraints

highlighted below. The fact that most of South Africas big retailers have an increasing

and major presence in neighbouring countries imply that these issues are also relevant for

the sub-region.

SECURING SUPPLY

Retailers expressed repeated concern

about their ability to secure supplies.

We have been asking suppliers of

dry groceries for assurances that

they have ongoing supply. It is a

consistent theme that these

manufacturers are finding iteasier to import than procure

locally.

Its almost become a business

requirement. The C.E.O. says,

youve got to risk, were not sure

we can actually secure supply.

Weve already experienced

problems in our business.

(x retailer) wants to create viable

black farmers and is pushing

government at the highest level.

This is a big concern for retailers.

Will they maintain their supplies?

If you start backing the big horses

and the big horses havent got,staple food youve got aproblem. We obviously try to

keep an open channel with the

supply markets outside of South

Africa ..to supply and meet

consumer demand on basic

foodstuffsby constantly looking

at new markets and international

pricing when it comes to staple

foods.


11/52


COLLABORATION NEEDS AND INTERESTS

Collaboration is a consistent theme that

comes up for retailers when addressing

food security.

Problem number one is getting all

the role players collaborating.

It is easy to point fingers at the

retailers, they would benefit from

a forum where they can discuss

the reality.

We must reach agreement on

where we can collaborate vs.

compete. We are still, to a

large extent, trying to go at it

alone.

And the current Competition Commission

activity makes some hesitant

Sadly one of the impacts of the

competition investigations is that

those retailers that worked

together on issues of mutual

interest, crime for example, or BEEcredentials, are a little reluctant

to talk to each other.

I attended an event last year

.apparently most of the

corporates that were intended to

be there at the last minute

declined because they felt that

the Competition board would

see it as collusion.

Or they state their competitive

boundaries clearly

Operational efficiency is a clear

place to work (to improve food

prices). But there isnt a retailer in

the country that will collaborate

on this issue. Its our source of

competitive advantage.

And there are places where people feelit could happen to the benefit of

allwaste

parts of waste, like crates forbread. At the moment, no one

pays deposit for crates, and they

go missing all the time. There is an

industry that steals these crates

and makes hangers, which are

sold on the street. This will surely

impact the cost of bread.

Logistics. In my view, the biggest effort

needs to be on logistics.


12/52


Packaging. Were looking at the packaging

issue: its non-competitive. If you

go to Nestle and say your baby

formula is hopelessly over-

packaged .Its a benefit that

will be experienced across the

supply chain, and its to our

benefit.

And philanthropy. The other area where we thinkthere needs to be better

collaboration is in hunger relief

efforts. its a disparate focus.

Some acknowledge that collaboration

and self-regulation will only get you so far.

We cant do the pretty stuff that

adds cost to the supply chain.

They can do that in North

America, they can do that in

Europe.when it is something

that is so important, and it has to

increase cost, then

regulate.there are areas wherewe need to be promoting

regulation this was a big aha for

us.

Beyond the industry, there is work to be

done on building trust.

As a whole, we are a shy

organization, partly because

were modest and partly

because you get nailed. Were

business people, and happy to

engage in a constructive way.

But quite frankly there are some

civil society elements that are too

radical, they hijack the process

and use it for other agendas.

Although others have appetite to get into

the ring

(We) want to meet with labour

Cosatu and Solidarity, and the

Department of Trade andIndustryin the same room, and(get their) views on food security.

Lets agree on a study, and its

scopewho should conduct this

studysomeone we can all have

confidence in. We will abide by

the outcomes...we criticise each

other on the basis of this

document. Ill pay for that study.

Who needs to be in that room?

And another asked for focus. If its a single-issue initiative, then


13/52


we would be interested. If we

start adding in a whole lot of

stuff, then it becomes clumsy and

not enough happens.

1.1.2MANUFACTURERS

Most comments about and from manufacturers centred on the power they wield in thesystem and how that is harnessed for good or ill.

Collusion was a concern for some when

considering the manufacturing sector.

Processors thats still a highly

concentrated marketfor

example you have a few poultry

firms that are breeding and

some of them dont supply

parent stock on the open market,

some have started and you are

restricted to buying day old

chicks the allegation is that

they are tying ..day old chicks tothe feedyou cant buy feed on

the open market discounts

disappear.

It must lie in vertical integration (x

manufacturer) produces, buys,

got silos, got millers youve got

this massive vertical integration

chain, who knows what happens

in that? I suspectas the price

of your commodity falls, they are

lagging the fall with the actual

processed product.

There is also a history in that

industry of price collusion,

bullying and so on. I would

venture that perhaps noteverything that should havecome out has come out yet.

But like the retailers, there is willingness to

find the places where collaboration can

work

We need to partner with direct

competitors for peasto say, lets

do this together where we have

an initiative to grow peas or

whatever, or tomatoes where

we have an off take agreement

thats going to satisfy all of our

involvements and have oneincredible impact.


14/52


I think you need to start with

creating those links - that

sense of knowing who is actually

in the sector, knowing whos in

the industry, whos up for the

game, whos willing to partner,

whos has the right set of tools

and skills that compliment your

needs.

waar kan ons mekaar se hande

vat om te voorkom dat elkeen sy

eie potjie probeer kook (where

can we join hands so we dont all

just cook our own food)

1.1.3FARMERS

As with poor consumers, farmers are mostly also perceived to be more vulnerable nowthan in the past. The impression about farming amongst many is that it takes years of hard

work for very little return, and relies on generations of knowledge and capital to make

farming successful.

HARD WORK AND NO MONEY LESS FARMING HAPPENING

The declining numbers of farmers is a

serious worry to some interviewees

Commercial farmers have come

down over the past 15 years from

60 000 to 37 000 and 20%

produce 80% of the food.

At some point pre-1996 we had

about 30,000 dairy farmers now

there are 3000 because the price

they get for their output is not

right. Most have left the industry

or substituted dairy for game

farming. Land under cultivationhas gone down.

In 1994 we had 60,000

commercial farming units, now

we have 45,000 driven by

economies of scale and

increasing capital

intensity. Farmers are under

significant pressure, so even if

these well resourced producers

cannot make it, how can weexpect small producers to make


15/52


it?

Along with its implications for agricultures

contribution to the economy

In the past agriculture was 4% of

GDP now its down to 2.9% and it

will decline more.

There is just maintenance

investment. There has been no

growth in 8 9 years. The trends

are that we import more eachyear, even though we are still a

net exporter. But exports are

growing more slowly than

imports. It is not a catastrophe -

yet.

Some noted how farmers were trying to

respond

Many farmers are export

oriented, not making much profit,

struggling because input costs

are so high. Land is lying fallow,

water is a problem, there is not

enough planning were notproactive enough.

Most farmers are now directly

moving to trading with retailers.

And one made a surprising suggestion If we could grow our own, the

farmers would be under less

pressure. One farmer said to me,

if you ran a hug-a-farmer

campaign, you would do more

good than all these other efforts.

Farmers feel unsupported,

frightened, its a bad place to

be. Farmers wouldnt then chase

volume and prices, and farm

properly.

Meanwhile older patterns continue todrive a lack of interest in agricultureamong the younger black population

who many are hoping will step in

Youth dont have an interest inagriculture because theeducation system has projected

agriculture as a career for

people without ambition.

The youngest people in our

village who are farming are 40ish,

if anyone younger is going to a

farm theyve been pushed. A lot

of people of my age are less

interested. We need to addressthis.


16/52


THE MISSING MIDDLE THE NEED FOR MORE DIVERSITY IN PRODUCTION

South Africans involved in food production often work at opposite ends of the agricultural

scale: commercial farming at one end and subsistence farming at the other. Donor

subsidized subsistence farming overlaps with the food gardening mentioned in the

consumer section. The interviews reflected a number of comments and suggestions to

encourage different scales of agriculture.

Interviewees shared that there are

opportunities to diversify the scale and

type of agriculture and increase the

proportion of South Africans involved in

producing food.

We must support subsistence

farming AND commercial

farming, as they both contribute

to food security.

Smaller-scale livelihood farming is an

important area of innovation.

My core issue, is that.. small scale

micro farming in the rural and

urban context is one of the

fundamental cornerstones of a

food security strategy, and ifthats not there its not a real

Food Security strategy, its not

human.

A few (have) grown their

subsistence farming into large

enterprises if you go to

Lichtenburg, you will see on the

two sides of the road the two

sides of South African agriculture:

white green fields, etc. On

the other side, youll see lots that

under-utilised but also pockets of

large farms that the villagers

themselves decided to farm

together.

(Communities) think sendingproduce to the market is rocketscience, only when we talk to

them, do they realize that its not.

They dont understand how price

changes work.

Currently 50-60 out of 3000 that

we work with are livelihood

farmers, of 3000, we can

generate a few hundred in the

livelihood level, but thesubsistence level itself doesnt


17/52


have to be denigrated.

More recently, significant effort by

government and others has been

invested in food gardening projects.

Interviewees agree that they cannot

compensate for declines in commercial

agriculture.

Since food security is an

outcome, food gardens arent

enough if a commercial farmer

is not producing enough his

workers arent earning enough, if

the commercial farmer is not

producing, there will be no food,

period.

Our work suggests that the policy

response to focus on small

production models or self-

sufficiency doesnt work. The

starter pack approach during

the 2008 crisis is nonsense the

most marginalized are not in a

position to farm.

Not enough is known about the spread of

different scales of farming across rural,urban and peri-urban landscapes.

In terms of policy .. we see a

missing middle. The Departmentof Agriculture supports large

commercial farmers and the

Department of Land Affairs

supports land claimants who

struggle to farm but there are a

large number of small farmers,

about 120,000, especially in peri-

urban areas that fall between

these two groups and who dont

receive support, especially since

the collapse of extension services

(particularly in former

homelands).

Farming ability is also a product of inter-

generational knowledge, and making it a

sustainable option is a lengthy process.

A lot of small-scale farmers

were left with the land, they

dont know how to work with the

finance side, or how to plant, butthey really want to becomefarmers You dont start farming

from tomorrow theres a lot of

stuff around it iIf you want to

get land and get rich youre

making a mistake.

There are different understandings of

smaller-scale farming, so there is a risk

that focused effort could be difficult.

People talk about it but confuse it

with commercial. Its semi-

commercial, but its based on

the subsistence lifestyle, this is theversion of land based livelihood,


18/52


50% subsistence, 50%

commercial, plenty of money

and an abundance of food.

The racial profile of commercial farmers

remains skewed. Many interviewees

expressed an opinion about issues of

legacy and change, and they continue

to evoke powerful emotions.

If you understand..our.. story after

the discovery of mining it was

based on destroying black

peoples independent economic

survival and farming skills and

when we are doing our landrestitution programmes we are

not taking that into account it

is equivalent to recreating a

peasantry that was destroyed

over a period of a hundred years.

And we need more access to

markets especially for small

farmers because its very difficult

for them, because we are sitting

with very mature markets.

As an emerging farmer, my level

of farm management is low.., so I

default on the loan I got to buy

the land from the white farmer,

so the land is repossessed and it

ends up being sold back to the

white farmer, and all thats

happened is the government has

spent some money.

I think that the agricultural policy

of the state has not resulted in

the kind of change that was

hoped for . bringing in new

players along the value chain, its

not that the state has not done

anything but ..it leaves the

individual players to negotiate ontheir own.

NAFU and Agriculture SA are

talking, but no one is representing

small black farmers.

There are mixed messages in agriculture

about cooperatives as a form of

increasing efficiencies of scale.

The problem is that agriculture

needs scale, which is why

cooperatives work. But

cooperatives are a form of

collusion. There is a provision..that collusion is ok if it benefits


19/52


the industry as a whole.

THE ENTERPRISE DEVELOPMENT CHALLENGE

Enterprise Development is a business

imperative for some. In the food security

domain, enterprise development was

most mentioned in the form of emerging

farmers (supply side).

Where is the supply is coming

from? Growing the emerging

farmer base is important. No one

has figured this out. Due to lack

of incentives, resources, skills etc.

One retailer made a particular point

about growing the emerging farmer-

base.

Your psyche in the emerging

market community is youve got

to be part of that community,

you need to support that

community: so its employment.

We often buy off local farmers.

And others see it as an opportunity to

give back.

So enterprise development has

been another very interesting

space and thats been about

where as a business can we

impact on small enterprises that isaligned to our business and

benefits our businesses at the

same time can benefit

communities.

But theres a sense that money is not

being well spent.

Theres lots of capital flying

around but it is all not being

pulled together efficiently at the

moment, were really wracking

our brains trying very hard to look

at a substantial program to work

with emerging farmers.

Some interviewees felt strongly that it was

not the way to go to address food

security.

Enterprise development is

incompatible with the notion of

low-cost production. We need to

be careful that we dont put

too much into one initiative andovercomplicate things. Thisnormally creates a

middlemanthey frequently

dont pay suppliers on time...

they add a mark up. A micro

miller cant produce in the same

way as a Tiger Brands can.

A few business players mentioned the

need to partner, including with public

sector agencies and to have the latterfocus on this issue.

Just think of the potential if we

partnered with other

organizations. The critical thing inthat space is the Development


20/52


Bank or other partner work with

you.. they provide .. funds that

we dont havefor setup and

startupaccess to the

community, local municipalities,

local NGOs who can actually

make these things happen on

the ground and then .. the

resource to actually put

somebody in place to make ithappen.

Getting emerging farmers going

needs to be on the scorecard for

Provincial Premiers, how many

there are, what value they

create at the moment there is

no accountability for results.

A retailer highlights the limitations of

supporting small-scale farmers.

Many of us have found in

enterprise development, we

dont have the skills to helppeople. Were retailers, and are

not farmers or manufacturers.

There are many lessons to be learned

when engaging in enterprise

development from a community

engagement point of view.

The other thing is actually

understanding how communities

work. because there are so

many cooks... There are the

community councilors, the local

municipalities, a local

Department of Agriculture or who

have a vested interest ..thats got

to clash.

One of the biggest lessons is

social mobilisation you cannot

move into a big community and

go and do things and walk away,

theres a process involved mobilise them, get theirperspective, know their culture

and rituals.

A number of interviewees spoke about

the failure of land reform and the lack of

post-settlement plans, and how this

failure has destroyed new agricultural

enterprises.

.A poor community moves in

with no skills, or knowledge ..

dont invest in making the land

more productive and you find

them squabbling because their

expectations are not met,

disagreeing about what to do(for example some of them


21/52


harvesting mangos and selling

them direct to the public). The

land has gone to a community

and not a family: there are

different agendas.

A focus on farming alone is not enough,

there also needs to be a focus on

enterprise development up the supply

chain.

To make it work you need to not

only think about making the

farmers farm, but also about

distribution and support measuresbecause if they dont have that

they will farm but they wont

have the income.

One of the things weve seen is

were trying to treat the

emerging farmers as if they are

businesses rather than farmers or

growerswere find theyre not

business people, theyre farmers

and sometimes their farming skills

are also quite inadequate.

A retailer spoke of what it will take to

support local suppliers.

That local supply hasnt got the

volume and they are not

sophisticated enough to supply

our supply chain anyway.

Theres such a high standard to

enter into that market that the

hurdle is quite high. So I want to

..make it easier for them to get

into (us).

It will take time to change

agriculture. We need to build

skills. Its a combination of small

margins, hard work and science.

And there are still no guarantees. We think we can take people like

me from the urban areas, turnthem quickly into farmingentrepreneurs and theyll make it.

That story for me, has not worked.

1.1.3FARM WORKERS

Farm workers are seen as those with least

opportunities and prospects.

On the farms people are earning

income but there is no skills

transfer going on generations ofpeople are growing up without


22/52


skills.

When I see a farm worker being

a farm worker is unlucky, you

couldnt be anything else.

And while some try to make a difference,

their efforts dont reap much reward.

We have a commitment,

fundamentally to what we

believe we owe the country, to

support the development of atransformed food supply chain

but were getting stuck with all

the issues in that sector.

We found that this (initiative) was

being driven by retailers seeking

to launder their supply chain, but

the costs and risks of these

private regulations were borne

by the producers and in the end

the farm workers didnt benefit

much due to a resulting increasein casualisation. The trade

unionists werent able to

understand these complexities.

And significant immigration issues linger in

the background.

Illegal labour is a big problem. 4-7

million people are here illegally,

and farmers employ them. We

need to take a regional

approach to this. Its especially

happening with seasonal fruit

picking.

1.1.6INPUT PROVIDERS

There was reference to a lot of key inputs as factors, which influence food security.

Although accessibility of some inputs was mentioned, the major issue was rising costs. We

didnt speak to suppliers, so the views expressed here come from people further up thechain who feel the impact of its use, one way or another.

FERTILISER

Where it was mentioned, fertilizer was

seen as a significant problem from a

price perspective across the region.

We cant have inexpensive

fertiliser here, despite the fact we

make it here.

Fertiliser we realized that there

was a cartel for maize farmers:fertilisers are a major input cost


23/52


per hectare around 60 70%.

Or from a use perspective We actually make enough

fertilizer in this country but were

importing 60% of demand -

people are using massive

amounts

There is a huge risk of over

fertilising and ruining our soil.

Or from a logistical perspective Half of all fertiliser in Africa is for

free and the large majority of

farmers are basically organic

because they are not accessing

that fertilizer because to get a

bag of fertilizer to a farmer in

Africa is harder than anywhere

else.

And one lone voice raised a concern

about rock phosphate,that no one is

paying attention to

There is a rock phosphate

shortage in the world and no

agriculture without it. Its anotherhidden resource only China is

concerned about rock

phosphate it is hanging on to its

own and mining it elsewhere.

Africa is running the deposits

down.. the only people who

have studied it and know why it is

the key to Food Security are the

Chinese. And Africa just exports it.

They dont think it has a value its

just given away.

SEED

None of the seed companies were

interviewed, yet the issue of seed, and

the impact of GMOs came up

One of the issues which we dont

deal with but I think is major, is

supply of seed.GM is a reality South Africa produces about 60%

GM maize, which is not an issue;

you wont grow horns from it.

And some see benefits In South Africa GM has helped,

we produce 3 tons per hector

compared to Zimbabwe which

has the potential to produce 10

tons per hector or Tanzania

which is the most fertile place in

the world.


24/52


(re. GM seed) Older people are

interested in the quality they see

from buying the new seed, in

terms of the size of the product

and the resistance to a number

of diseases.

But others dont think it offers any

improvements

if you want Food Security among

the peasant farming movement,

they cant be reliant ongenetically modified or

hybridised seeds, which

degenerate, cant be safe,

theres plenty of open pollinated

seed that does the same job,

produces maybe a bit less but

the quality is so superior.

While there are concerns about who is in

control of seed

If I havent got my seed I cant

sow ask the farmer if he doesnt

want to pay that price for the

seed, what are his options?

In the 80s and 90s, there were

many new hybrids locally

researched. Not anymore, now it

is the big multinationals like

Monsanto, which is risky as we

only account for 1% of their

business globally.

TRANSPORT

The price of transport was an issue for a

few players across the chain, citing the

shift from rail to road as a factor.

Transporting stuff out of the silos

has also got very expensive 90%

of grain was moved by rails in

early 1990s, and now its mostly

road which is 30% more

expensive and it destroys theroads.

But some see problems with a return to

rail

Rail has the pilferage problem

its the cheapest mode of

transport but we cant use it

because not a lot of your

produce will see the other side.

Breakagethey steal from our

own trucks while theyre traveling

up. Its not big.

Rail will never work, people want


25/52


to own part of it, they can do

that with trucks, not rail. We

wont go for that.

While acknowledging the difficulties and

costs of using roads

Road infrastructure were not

only talking Africa (also in South

Africa). If you just take the road

between Bloemfontein and

Gaborone, a truck can break an

axle on it.

And calling on the government to

reconsider its policy on fuel.

If you are only looking at the fuel

levies transport is making a

huge part 90% of the consumers

basket, the government is taking

a lot of money from this sector via

levies. That is adding up to an

inefficiency in terms of the sector.

WATER

For some the water issue is becoming

urgent and is part of the impetus for

moving into new parts of Africa

In Mpumalanga, the coal-mines

are contaminating major

agricultural land and rivers. ..Its

going into the food. Quality of

water is a problem more than

quantity. Agriculture uses 60% of

water.The South East and

Western Cape are running out of

water and with climate change

will become even drier. Weve

been saved by the Lesotho

Highlands Water Scheme. How

can we bring the Zambezi south?

Time is critical.

We are going to have a massive

water supply problem in this

country in the next three to fiveyears time... So we have tounlock that potential in Sub-

Saharan Africa.

Others see different actions required. If you are going to label

anything, label water. This is far

more of a crisis. There are wine

farmers planting bamboo for

carbon labeling, when these

plants attract rats, suck up water.

Waste for example, is a massive


26/52


problem (in polluting). Packaging

needs to reduce for water supply.

LAND

Some expressed an overall sense that

there is less to go around.

Im making people aware of the

statistics about loss of productive

land.

A set of drivers contributes to land risk. If we are at risk of our land 1. In

bad soil management 2.

Increasingly in foreign hands, and

3. That land reform processes are

not supporting emerging farmers,

then we really are creating a

crisis. The writing is on the wall.

Government is clearly trying to do

something, but with unintended

consequences.

There are huge problems. The

government has spent R30 billion,

and they paid overinflated prices

for land and now cant afford todeliver.

And a lack of clarity about the situation. We need to do a land reform

audit who owns what.

Some are taking clear action so that their

needs are met.

Youve got to keep them

(government) on side because

there are a lot of farms and there

are a lot of claims on land. I think

if you come to them and make

them look good. They perhaps

make the land available, you

cant do it without land. I think

thats the critical part.

Although others dont see it as being a

problem

No: school land, municipal land,

marginal land, it (small scale

farming) doesnt need land youneed to own yourself.

ENERGY

The demands of the modern cold chain

have brought the cost of energy usage

into sharp relief

Energy is going to be a huge

issue for cold storage dependent

businesses.

The cost is becoming prohibitive,

in the old days farmers didnt usea lot of electricity planted


27/52


cabbage, put in a truck, take to

market now weve got cold

chain and its got to be washed

and chilled all of a sudden

these extra costs in the chain.

But some dont see it as a place with

collaboration potential because of

competitiveness issues.

Just look at energy efficiencies.

Clearly our retailers need to

manage energy better with

increasing costs. However, we willnever collaborate there.

1.1.7 GOVERNMENT

What is the role of government in securing food? This role is changing, Moreover, many

civil society and corporate players express ambivalence about governments role.

Should it, for example, provide more regulation to the food industry or less? This confusion

and ambivalence tends to harden the polarity for example, between commercial and

small farming.

There is a sense among some

interviewees that the state has let go

of its responsibility. The introduction of

the Rural Development Department has

increased, rather than addressed,

confusion about roles and about the

connection between those roles

I dont think we have a common

voice/purpose/mission as the

government institutions whether it

be govt funding institutions or the

government regulatory institutions

and ourselves, we do talk but

theres nothing that has forced us

to see each others impact.

No one is taking decisions in the

Department of Agriculture.

Everyone is scared with the new

restructuring and the dynamics in

the ANC. Certain systems are

working, and others arent.

And the government needs to balance

different imperatives.

Theres always a tension between

industrial policy and competitionpolicy from an IP perspectivewell want to support the entrance

of (emerging farmers/agents etc)

going forward for them to have

sufficient economies of scale we

may have to allow them to act

anti-competitively.

A retailer highlighted that there are

some positive and mutually beneficial

relationships.

Government in various forms: DTI,

BEE commission are continuously

working with us .trying to assist usin any way to really improve our


28/52


ability to make a difference in

terms of transformation.

Next month weve got an exciting

meeting with senior officials of

government around what their

idea of a well-managed farm

would look like.

At the same time, some intervieweesreport real frustration about accessing

their partners in government

departments.

We dont get to the rightstakeholders in government, we

dont know who they are, we

dont have the resources to invest

in building those relationships.

The new government departments

of rural development and land

reform are not coming to the

party. When are we going to get

an audience?

Maize forum has summits,government does not pitch or they

send a junior guy who cant make

any decisions.

We are part of a ministerial task

team that developed a strategic

plan for agriculture together with

NAFU and business. There is still

a ministerial task team but we

havent met, and how are we

going to engage on this plan?

The quality of communication matters

to many players in the field.

There is a lack of trust between

agriculture and the government.

Farmers decide its better to focus

on the export market than to focus

on the local market.

There is also a view that its moreeffective to create a conducive

environment to talk and work together.

We need a more engagingenvironment. If government wants

to ensure citizens dont get a raw

deal, then government needs to

engage with the industry players.

You are not going to achieve

anything by investigation and

talking about it in the press.

The Competition Commission has

created a lot of fear. People arereluctant to talk to each other. Its


29/52


a costly exercise for us, we need

lawyers present at all of our

meetings. This stifles creativity and

innovation.

While there are complaints about

declining investment in infrastructure or

a lack of extension services there is

also a plea for a better funded, more

integrated and aligned governmentapproach.

The Department of Agriculture

(food security) is trans-disciplinary

but other politicians dont see that,

so we are relegated to doing food

gardens.

Government is not investing

adequately in agriculture in

general big or small.

Including a return to subsidies We are concerned that there

doesnt seem to be as much

support for agriculture as there

once was. There used to be more

generalist subsidies.

A lot of white farmers wereestablished by subsidies that were

provided by the Nationalist

government, thats what the

government needs to do.

I would like to see lots more money

flowing from government to

farmers in form of subsidies. Some

kind of revolving funding for

conversion. More extension

services for farmers, and

enforcement. A ton of green

scorpions making sure the

practices are changing.

There were a few comments about the

need for a more systemic overview to

be held by government.

We didnt have an agency that

was about having a systemic view

about this economy, the PlanningCommission, the EconomicDevelopment ministry are new

opportunities.

The National Planning Commission

needs to manage this problem

from the top, as there are so many

interconnected issues to address.

There are strong opinions about what

government should do, especially onthe subject of regulation.

Government needs to create an

enabling environment, regulatethe sector and provide


30/52


infrastructure.

Until you raise the benchmark with

better regulatory standards, you

are going to continue to get

people who distribute food, which

they shouldnt be distributing.

Either regulate everything or

nothing; you cant regulate halfthe distribution chain and not the

other half.

There is cause for judicious state

regulation. Private regulation isnt

really working the effective

implementation of existing

national legislation would

probably go further.

There is a need to investigate collusion

across the supply chain, and not onlywithin sectors.

I think the inquiries of the

Competition Commission are illadvised, because they need to

.look at a particular product in

whole supply chain.

New legislation is positive, but capacity

to implement is a problem.

The Consumer Protection Act is an

act which is advancing consumer

rights... I think its a beautiful piece

of legislation.... The government

would prefer the industry to self-

regulate on this issue. They will form

a consumer commission where

consumers can complain.

But..would not have the capacity

to take care of this.

We have some of the best food

laws in the world, but our capacity

to regulate is limited.

For one, this comes down to

Government leaving the sector to it

Government sees us as a sector

that looks after itself.

1.1.8 ACADEMIA

Voices from different parts of the system

wanted a reversal of the trend of

declining investment in research related

to food, and agriculture in particular.

Food is a sensitive issue and is

often political, it needs to be

driven more by academic

research.If I were minister of agriculture I


31/52


would put more focus on

research.

Im worried about (the lack of)

science and research and

bringing in new technology.

Some acknowledged that deregulation

has led to under- or skewed investment.

Theres been an accumulation of

skill and knowledge through the

years, and then the researchsupport through the infrastructure

but that has been curtailed

because you thought that with

deregulation that things like R and

D would be done by the firms and

thats not happening.

Although one or two noted that

academics and business dont always

communicate enough

the rift between agricultural

people and NGOs

/academics.the gulf that exists is

not because there isnt

transparency, but there isntcommunication Academics like to

do the research and dont

engage with business.

And that research has been used in

unhelpful ways at times.

Everyone uses his or her own

backyard researchers. You are not

entitled to your own facts, but you

are entitled to your own opinion.

Others focused more on their own

organizational needs for research

support

Wed need a good academic-

oriented R and D teams to

document everything (about this

process), like put it into a full

curriculum. We need to have

academic and scientific peer

review then people will start to

take it (this project) seriously.

We should use university studentsmore, to do research on questions

around Food Security we

(business) are not geared to (or

rewarded by shareholders for)

doing research.

Its clear that, with such a broad range of players who contribute in some way to food

security, collaboration and collective action will require significant effort. The interests

vary, and the perspectives are often at opposite ends of the spectrum. The positiveimpulse is that everyone without fail has recognized that food insecurity is on the rise in


32/52


Southern Africa, and that each player has a role to play in reversing this trend.


33/52


1.2. THE CURRENT FOOD SYSTEM, STRAINED AND STRETCHED

Those who considered the system as a whole, noticed significant imbalances. They

commented on the consumers and farmers sitting towards the ends of the chain, were

least powerful overall and price takers relative to the concentrated business sectors in

the system. There were also concerns about the social, economic and environmental

implications of deregulation and current patterns of economic activity and planning.

The system that works well is designed to

meet middle class needs.

When you work with big

businesses, they have growing

plans of 3 to 5 years. that feeds the

average Mrs. Constantia, Mrs.

Benmore and thats whathappens.

The dynamic we havent grasped

is the divide between the formal

and the informal.

A few felt that the process of

deregulation undertaken a decade ago

was not well thought through and we are

paying the price for that now.

I think for the first 10 years of this

economy we were obsessed with

following global rules. (about

deregulation/subsidies etc.)

Of course, in the last 10 years, the

food market has undergonetremendous change and most of it

was market led the government

just said, leave it to the markets.

But I think there have been certainthings that could have been

handled better.

The take away for me in food (and

telecoms) is that unless you have a

strong regulator the outcomes that

you are looking for, may not

necessarily emerge. Weve

replaced a government monopoly

with an oligopoly as have with

telecoms. Im feeling that we hadblind faith and we didnt do our

homework and understand the

nature of the agricultural markets

before we deregulated. But after

deregulation there was not

enough supervision, regulation,

enough facilitative role of the state

to improve food security and to

create a fairly egalitarian society.

Deregulation went ahead in an adhoc manner without food security


34/52

Towards a Food Secure South Africa 34

considerations.

Since deregulation, more power has

concentrated with large players in the

chain.

The bigger players have replaced

government as the regulator in the

way that they utilise their power.

And there is insufficient competition to

make that work well.

The concept of competition is not

working. We need to create more

competition.

On the consumption end Because there are 4 retailers,

people dont have much of a

choice.

For a population of 45m people

we only have one (dedicated)

national fruit and vegetable

retailer that only happens in this

country, we must have more

retailers we need more

competent businessmen, there is

no competition at all.

On the distribution, some of

retailers are making a huge

amount of money.

(In Khayelitsha) The philosophy (of

a retailer) was to hoover the

money out of the townships.

And the production end We know on the input side that the

market is highly concentrated,

whether youre talking about seed

or about fertiliser Monsanto and

a few others control seed.

This leaves the farmers in a relatively

weak position.

A lot of the big farms, big volume

market. Its all controlled by big

business. Theyve got their bigfarmers that are farming for them.Fruit and Veg City maybe buy off

the market. The farmers have got

to go and plan that works to their

needs.

Without a strong facilitator local

government or some state agent,

an individual farmer doesnt have

negotiating power vis a vis a

Woolworths for example, and foodis going through those chains.


35/52


36/52


weak relative to retailers.

We are sitting on a time bomb

where 4-5m people are subsidizing

all the rest, we are creating a

community that is living off social

grants because there are no

opportunities. People want jobs

but theres nowhere to look.

The consumer is quiet. Research

shows that the label came first

(when retailers think about

improving standards) and the

consumer came after.

And the dependency on big business

value chains impacts poor communities.

The people who are living in

townships or who live in the more

rural (areas). Im not sure that

theres a self-sufficiency culture

there. I think they are too

dependent on the value chains ofbig business.

Rural. If you dont have a supply chain of

food that is locally driven it leaks

out of the communities back to

the formal sector or to formal retail

theyve moved big time to the

townships and rural communities

are worse off because they have

to use that money to travel to

town and buy food but if you

were to promote local production

they could use that money there.

The retailers contributed to the de-

agrarianisation of these areas as

they were able to provide

products for cheap without the riskassociated with production, due toeconomies of scale, etcThey

also generally did not source many

products locally. This process had

pros and cons. It was beneficial for

pensioners, due to access to

cheaper products, but bad for the

local economy, due to demise of

local production and rents being

exported.

and urban Ironically the rural market eats


37/52


more sustainably. Its much more in

the urban environment.

Theres going to be all kinds of

threats .oil peak, rising oil prices,

water resources, nutrient flows,

food supplies, basic materials etc,

and so their argument is this is

becoming a really major issue is

the kind of resource flows intocities..I cant really see a future

for cities if they are dependent on

long distance value chains the

future of cities is going to be more

and more dependent on urban

agriculture.

While government policy and focus

reflect the divides.

Most often rural areas are not seen

as a site of development in and of

itself but as a supplier of food to

the urban areas, so ..were just

extracting the rents from the ruralareas to support very big urban

populations and we dont have a

model of developing the rural

areas.

Theyre (Department of Rural

Development) still seeing

development as agriculturally

based why not set up processing

plants, why not look at the

economy around it if they can

grasp that concept it will take off. I

dont think they do right now.

The country consists of

Johannesburg and the ports: that

[perception is] the problem and if

you are looking at the DTI theyvesunk a lot of money basicallyreinforcing that pattern.

The Department of Agricultures

role with the commercial sector

its about permits, collecting

information, creating reports,

transport etc. Subsistence and

smallholder farmers are at the

forefront for Department of

Agriculture that reflects thedualistic nature of the sector.


38/52


1.3 THE CURRENT FOOD SYSTEM, SEEDS OF CHANGE

Within the food security system in Southern Africa, interviewees highlighted a number of

innovative solutions already up and running to help reduce food insecurity outside of their

normal business practice. There is a sense from many that if some of these ideas were

shared or brought to scale, the problem could be more significantly addressed.

Economic Development Initiative

successes linking farmers to supply chains

Weve had some success in the

KZN area, with supporting a co-opof women farmers, amadumbies

in the Beaufort West areas

hydroponics growing of herbs and

spinach, getting emerging farmers

into our supply chain.

Post-settlement support project in

the Brits area is working... Theyhave started giving loans to 12-15

farmers of R400 000, and that

amount has moved to R90million,

involving thousands of farmers.

Wool farmers are doing well to

establish black commercial

farmers.

There are attempts, for example in

the Eastern Cape ASGISA EC,trying to support local farmers,

even vineyards in the Western

Cape, there are some successes.

And so Ive seen some of those in

maize farming, sunflower..theres

also some success with

Motswenyane) whos supplying

Pick n Pay with oranges for their

juice ..

Would I consider the Paprika storya success story? Yes, its surviveda year, it has successfully

produced 68 days of paprika for

us. Its provided employment for

218 people in a community that

didnt have much employment at

all.

Commercial farmers willing to help In the areas where weve got

involved there is huge willingness

to help (from commercial farmers)but its uncoordinated. ..we had

a wonderful experience in


39/52


Limpopo expecting farmers to be

locked in their ways and them

really coming forward. Farmers

want to help, but want to know

how.

Knowledge bases for market linkages We have the market economic

research centre we have a

specific focus area on linking

farmers to markets, theres a lot ofresearch done.

And for improving soil Soil quality is not a problem

weve got the technical solutions

I can turn a wasteland into a lush

little garden weve got

technology, knowledge, doing it

cheaply, its all there.

Some places where interviewees felt

work with small farmers was paying off.

Muyexe, Limpopo. We are seeing

communities planting. In the

Eastern Cape they haveSiyazondla household garden

programme... Jacobsdaal in the

Free State has veggie tunnels. Its

small but its happening. A lot

has happened in the last 2 years.

The farmers themselves also with

some professional support run the

pack shed, run the whole

operation. We employ some of

the farmers as field workers and

trainers to run the system, so in

effect were a voluntary co-

operative, weve created our own

market at mostly school

communities.

There are already pockets aroundPort St Johns where people arerunning livelihood level farms, and

cash, because they are smart

enough to have taken on the

discipline of commercial mixed in

with subsistence, you dont need

new land for that.

People and places where more

environmentally sustainable possibilities

are being explored successfully.

ZZ2 is a good example of a

company that has the intellectual

and financial resources to gobeyond retarded collapse to


40/52


restoration restoring the means

to sustain their own business but

an ecosystem when you restore it,

it goes beyond the boundaries.

ETH Swiss university is already

manufacturing fertilizer from

sewage exporting it

transforming urine thats where

the nutrients are not in the feces.

Weve got potato project in the

Sandveld. Its funded by Potatoes

SA, they are trying to implement

better farming practices, so now

they are having first crop

sustainable potatoes farmers

have voluntarily done. The

irrigation of potatoes is enormous,

and influenced the fresh water

supply in local communities.

Retailers are already working in some of

the areas they identified as having

potential food safety, quality and

packaging.

We have a food safety initiative.

We collaborate around how to

make things easier for all our

members to benefit. For example,

we are starting a project where

we create a big database to

audit/test the food.

We now have a new strategy

called market of the future

following industry trends globally

to improve food quality and safety

and to improve the environment

at our premises.

For our packaging we have a

partnership with NAMPAK

recyclers are formally employedto collect and take it to theirfacility on the premises where they

collect each day. ..1% of our

produce goes to waste.

And some businesses are picking

up on the international trend

towards local food.

We have a strong focus in the

foods area to do more regional

sourcing. The model with one

supplier, and distribute all around

the country, were beginning to

say thats not the most efficient,but thats in its infancy, the


41/52


regionalization of supply.

We are driving a local sustainable

sourcing thing, probably more

from a B.E.E. perspective than

from a food security perspective.

And finally some innovation at the

distribution end

We are trying to develop a project

to deliver hampers to corporate

employees to support a healthy

lifestyle 5 a day.

Warwick Junction amazing

creating initiative, under threat, by

the Durban city, to build an

infrastructure in middle of the city

to sell food to people next to

the station now they want to puta mall up yet where it is whatmakes it interesting the city and

local operators who have

collaborated to make it happen

sourcing food on daily basis to

feed the working class! Where is

that food coming from?


42/52


2. THE WAY FORWARD

When looking into the future, interviewees expressed different approaches to changing

the system of food security. There were proposals that involvede changing paradigms

radically rethinking how the system could and should operate and others that tinkered

with the existing reality to a greater or lesser extent. Some people tended more to onecamp or the other, and some spoke of both.

The purpose of highlighting these two paths is not to choose either/or when deciding what

to focus on, but rather to recognize that they exist strongly as possibilities for people in the

food security system, and need to be worked with at the same time across the initiatives

participants of the future change lab would want to pioneer.

2.1 PLACES AND SPACES OF POSSIBILITY

Many interviewees talked about places that they thought were interesting to consider forfuture action to support better food security.

Some interviewees wanted to see a

more deliberative and interactive

relationship between research and

practice.

Maybe we need to commission

some masters and PhD students to

put together great big operations

research, modeling of alternatives

triple bottom line.

What we can do is to aggregate

the knowledge were getting

back to the relevant departmentsfor example, what happened with

the fisheries policy.

.. including academics and

private sectors, people who run

the wholesale markets, who have

a sense of procurement and flows,

and also have in the room the

ecologists, people who have a

sense of soils and ecosystem

services and environment andstitch together understanding of

existing flows, what are

alternatives, what are the

intervention points.

Including spreading models through

academic institutions.

It (model of livelihood farming)

could almost be franchised, it

needs a bit more academic level

support to break it into bits and set

it up so it can be like a tick box

system do that, that will happen,so it could be picked up like that


43/52


and replicated in cities all around

SA, from an urban point of view,

wherever there are people with

money to buy fresh natural grown

vegetables, therell be the

potential to set up the whole

system including the marketing

end in the urban areas.

Improved collaboration is necessary anddesirable and some feel strongly that this

needs to be defined carefully in terms of

specific issue areas and opportunities.

Not long ago, government waslooking at opening government

shops. Rather lets do something

jointly and utilize existing

infrastructure, its a better use or

resources.

We know what a basket looks like

for poor people. Lets take some

stuff out, and put it to a tender

process. What is government

maize? Im not sure what the

mechanism is. All the retailershave it, and in areas where there

is maximum food insecurity, lets

price these together. We need to

achieve scale by giving one or 2

manufacturers an opportunity to

reach massive scale. We need a

3rdparty like government to

allocate the tender.

Improving payment conditions for

enterprise development

There are other ways we can help

in transformation. The easiest way

for retailers is better terms for black

suppliers. They battle with cash

flow. So pay them on invoice,

which is not a difficult thing to do.

Its far more helpful in terms of

transforming the economy.

Packaging came up a few times, andthere are clear ideas which reduce price

of packaging, and ultimately the food.

This is a lever in the supply chainwhere we can cut costs. There are

cheaper alternatives. That is in

everyones interests. Its in the

environmentalists interests, its in

the retailers interests better

logistics, its in the consumers

interests because they are getting

a cheaper price.

A drive to improve nutrition and labeling. We want to improve healthbenefits. Move away from cheap


44/52


and nasty additives.This is a

place we could make an impact.

This will be an impact on private

labels we create which have less

packaging, are healthier, and

where thats evident to people

because of labeling.

New food baskets focusing on a

particular group of foods in a particulararea.

The whole idea is that you cant

eat pap alone you need toidentify within the locale what can

be eaten with it so that pap

consumption can keep going up.

We need to think about what

could be the selling point for them

(industry players), the most

interesting areas.

In coastal areas there could be a

project around snoek engage

the wheat people they need to

eat fish and bread together butthey also need fruit and greens

there can be some way of adding

things for a nutritious food basket

and to increase understanding.

Bringing urban agriculture and rural

processing solutions more to the fore for

regionally based food systems.

The model of the last 200 years is

under strain based on

centralised production in certain

areas moving goods over long

distances I think we need to

experiment with urban food

gardens, and thats not something

I think is on anyones agenda.

We need to elevate urban

agriculture to a higher status

shorten the supply chain. The

status is that urban people dontwant to eat out of their garden.We need to get to a point where

your status is not defined by car in

the driveway, but NO car in the

driveway.

Creating economic development in rural

areas.

How can we develop the rural

areas as viable economic entities

and not just as suppliers of raw

materials and putting some low

scale processing there as well?


45/52


A couple of suggestions focused on the

need to reconsider co-operative

approaches to increase the bargaining

power of farmers.

They are looking at other

agricultural initiatives in the Eastern

Cape as well so that they would

be part of many, theyre looking

at co-operative parties theyre

very reliant on corporates to help

them with this. They very much on

the mindset that you cant just go

and grow paprika, you actually

need your market first.

Farmers can sell together and buy

some inputs together.

As well as creating alternative supply

chains to support them

The Food Bank could help create

some co-ordination for example,

take 5 farms, and look at what

could be done to collaborate to

make things happen on a larger

scale.

Theres a way of supporting localfarmers. You buy the product

upfront, and for the rest of the

season, you get that farmers

crop. This system is not going to

supply the retailers. We are trying

to encourage people to shorten

the supply chain. Get to know the

farmer. You are investing directly

and reaping the rewards.

Ideas to make farming more

environmentally sustainably

So ZZ2 should own all the sewage

plants Theres an added income

we cant run it (sewage systems)

from the tax base anymore. They

(should go) into the water and

energy business nutrients out, sell

water back to municipality

closing the loop.

developing sustainable farming

manuals. .Now the food industry

wants to do this. They are to house

all regulation in one sustainable

farm manual. Now we are starting

the same process with the diary

industry.

Finally a few suggestions thought

education was needed, to raiseemerging business awareness of the

To demonstrate that people eat

every day and that this sector iswhere the money is: last year


46/52


opportunities in the sector. people talked about a recession

but we didnt see it here, we had

record sales. We are trying to

make the youth more aware so

that theyll be interested and the

information will trickle down.

To get more people back into farming Where we used to produce food,

we arent any more that goes

back to education, if you putthose people back on those farms

to start producing then thats the

one king pin.

And to doing it well. The technical solutions are not the

problem .actually it comes

down to basic good husbandry its

just reconnecting to that with a

new consciousness.

2.2PARADIGM SHIFT -FOOD ECONOMY/FOOD COMMUNITY

For some, a fundamental change in the way we interact with food seems necessary. For

them we have become too disconnected from how it gets produced and from

understanding the earths resources that enable us to eat. They want to see us eating

different foods, buying food in different ways and going back to basics to produce.

A few interviewees talked about

change needed at the cultural level to

make more significant shifts that they

saw were needed for the food system to

get back on track although they knew

these ideas were not the mainstream.

Their thinking implied changes in the

food economy too.

I think companies embe

southern africa food security change lab phase one synthesis document 12 march 2010 (1)

Documents