Day / May 31, 2012

by Mike Poverello

WHO Tobacco Proposal – Threatened farmers slam ‘outreagous recommendations’

FTW Online recently reported that representatives of hundreds of thousands of African tobacco farmers are gathering at the International Tobacco Growers Association Africa Regional Meeting this week to discuss what they see as outrageous recommendations being developed by international regulators that they believe would destroy their livelihoods.

Farmer leaders attending the meeting from Kenya, Malawi, South Africa, Tanzania, Zambia, and Zimbabwe will focus on the recommendations provided by the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) working group on Articles 17 & 18. The FCTC originally recommended that governments of these countries should help tobacco farmers find viable economic alternative crops, assuming that tobacco demand will decline.

Very little research on alternative, economically viable crops has been undertaken and as the group recognizes, any future research will require lengthy time trials. “However, the FCTC has now put forward unreasonable and absurd measures to phase out tobacco production, without offering the vast African farming community any viable fall-back solutions,” the farmers claim.

Numerous countries, such as Malawi, Zimbabwe, Zambia and Tanzania now face the prospect of seeing millions of jobs lost and a huge decline in the export of tobacco. Tobacco cultivation is critical for the economy in these countries and one of the few agricultural activities to have remained buoyant during the recent worldwide economic crisis. The latest guidelines drafted by bureaucrats in Geneva threaten to undo that for no clear benefit.

“These guidelines are just plain wrong whichever way you look at them. Nobody has explained to me how banning some cigarette products and ignoring others will have any benefit for people’s health,” said Roger Quarles, President of the International Tobacco Growers Association (ITGA). “It will just be a disaster for those growers who grow leaf for traditional blended products.” The ITGA represents more than thirty million tobacco growers across Africa, Asia, Europe, North America and South America. “We call on governments all over the world to support growers by adopting a common sense approach and discarding these irrational and potentially economically devastating guidelines.”

The Case of Malawi

The association says switching from tobacco in Malawi to other crops is unrealistic as it would require huge investments, pointing out that tobacco is by far cheaper to produce and benefits more people than most of the next best alternatives. “For example, investment required for a farmer in Malawi to grow two hectares of flowers is equivalent to the investment required to grow 1 000 hectares of burley tobacco. The difference is that 1 000 hectares of burley tobacco provides a livelihood for 500 farmers. So, given that the average farmer in Malawi only has two hectares at his disposal, switching to flowers is simply unrealistic”.

ITGA says one crop that has been recognised as being more profitable than tobacco in Malawi and other tobacco-growing countries is paprika. But the association says world demand for paprika is only 120 000 tonnes. “A single country like Zimbabwe could cope with this demand but the result would be overproduction of paprika and the impact on exiting paprika growers would be catastrophic,” it says. The association also argues that a farmer that grows burley tobacco cannot switch to Virginia tobacco because Virginia tobacco has an industrial curing process requiring huge investment and needs a much greater area than burley “in order to be profitable.”

Tobacco is Malawi’s most important cash crop, accounting for nearly 60 percent of total export earnings and makes up 13 percent of the country’s gross domestic product (GDP). It is also the single largest employer, with more than two million people directly or indirectly relying on the crop. With such an influence, paralysing the industry could cripple the economy in a way that may take the country decades to recover. Sources: FTW Online, TIMSA, and Buisness Wire.

 Related articles
by Mike Poverello

X-Ray Security Screening – Technologies & Global Market Outlook

Over the next five years, Homeland Security Research Corporation analysts forecast a growth at a CAGR of 10% of the global X-ray screening market, led by a dramatic expansion of the Chinese civil aviation (two out of three new airport projects are in mainland China) and internal security funding. Other key markets are terror-troubled India and the replacement market of the US and Europe.

Despite years of cutting edge weapon and explosives screening technologies RDT&E, there is no competitive modality on the horizon which challenges the cost-performance of 2D X-ray screening technologies. The global X-ray security screening market (including systems sales, service, and upgrades) is forecast to grow from $1.2 billion in 2011 to $1.9 billion by 2016.

The new report is the most comprehensive review of the multibillion dollar global X-ray security screening market available today. It analyses and forecasts the market by application, by geography and by business transaction. The report, segmented into 50 submarkets, offers for each submarket 2010-2011 data and 2012-2016 forecasts and analysis. In more than 300 pages, 90 tables and 150 figures, the report analyses and projects the 2012-2016 market and technologies from several perspectives, including:

  • Market forecast by application: Air cargo, Airport-cabin baggage, Secured facilities, Postal items, Supply chain cargo and People screening AIT
  • National and regional markets
  • X-Ray Technologies: conventional, backscatter, multi-view, coherent and dual energy x-ray
  • Systems sales, post warranty service and upgrade markets
  • Competitive environment: 16 leading vendors and their products
  • Market analysis: e.g., market drivers & inhibitors, SWOT analysis
  • Business environment: e.g., competitive analysis
  • Current and pipeline technologies

Source: Homeland Security Research Corporation

by Mike Poverello

SEZ – Lessons for South Africa from international evidence and local experience

A bold paradigm shift in South Africa’s economic policy is required to ensure the success of the country’s new special economic zones (SEZs) programme, according to Centre for Development and Enterprise (CDE) executive director Ann Bernstein.At the launch of the new CDE report on SEZs, she explained that South Africa’s current economy favoured skill and capital-intensive industry, which was not making the cut in terms of job creation.

“South Africa needs to create the right kind of environment for the emergence of businesses that can employ large numbers of unskilled people. That is what we should use the SEZs to do.“This will require bold leadership and engagement with the difficult choices on labour costs and flexibility that must be made. The alternative is to waste resources and energy yet again on a policy that fails,” Bernstein urged.

The report, titled ‘Special Economic Zones: Lessons for South Africa from international evidence and local experience’ suggested that South Africa should establish at least two large SEZs that were focused on low-skill, labour-intensive industries such as the clothing and textile sectors and enable them to compete globally. “Without reform, the only way South African companies can compete with Chinese, Vietnamese and Indian companies is by mechanisation, which results in fewer people being employed, and a greater reliance on skills,” Bernstein pointed out. “International evidence shows that the most successful SEZs were public–private partnerships,” Bernstein noted. Further, the report showed, as recognised by government, that South Africa’s industrial development zones (IDZs) that include Coega, East London and Richards Bay, had largely failed to boost economic growth, create jobs, promote industrialisation or accelerate exports.

Bernstein attributed this to the lack of a clear definition for what these zones should entail, as well as a strategy for attracting investors. “The IDZs are basically just industrial parks – it’s no wonder they have not been successful in attracting new investors and creating jobs.” Although the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) had spent R5.3-billion on developing these zones, the vast majority of the 33 000 jobs created were short-term construction jobs, with only 5 000 permanent jobs created.

Bernstein said countries such as China, Costa Rica, Mauritius and Latin America countries could be viewed as benchmarks for South Africa in terms of IDZs. Rising costs in Asia, especially China, where labour-intensive firms were looking for new regional locations, were creating opportunities for IDZs in South Africa. The CDE argued that South Africa should seize the opportunity to compete for a sizable portion of the jobs that could sprout from this.

“A bold new SEZ strategy could become a platform for new companies and new investors that use unskilled labour rather than machines,” Bernstein indicated. “South Africa’s new SEZ programme needs to be a presidential priority. The DTI needs to be fully supported by all other departments of government. Unless the whole of government gets behind the effort, we’re not going to see the kind of investor uptake that would actually make a difference,” CDE research and programme director Antony Altbeker said. Trade and Industry Minister Rob Davies is set to table the draft SEZ Bill in Parliament later this year, while Finance Minister Pravin Gordhan announced that R2.3-billion would be allocated to the establishment of SEZs were in the 2012/13 Budget.

However, the CDE’s report warned that the Bill provided no clarity about what would differentiate SEZs from industrial parks, its envisaged governance arrangements for SEZs was confusing and said the role of the private sector was unclear. Source: Engineering News

Related articles