Zimpapers Logo

VERY often, I find myself wondering why tobacco farmers under contract arrangements are scoring much better yields and profits than their counterparts under Command Agriculture.

And the answer that keeps popping at the back of my head is that the matter may be a result of the nature of extension services they are getting.

Contractors for tobacco do not only give inputs but deploy extension officers that start working with the farmers from the point they get the inputs, seed bed establishment, planting, fertiliser application, weed and pest management, reaping, curing and grading up to marketing so there is no chance of the farmer putting his foot on the pedal and going to sleep.

Their extension officers are fully equipped to make follow ups on every farmer under their programme, which eliminates chances of the farmer even abusing inputs or missing deadlines, which compromises the quality and yields at the end of the season.

Everywhere there are contracted farmers, there is always an extension officer visiting on a motor bike, which allows them to cover every farmer under their programme.

Tobacco is a commercial crop by its nature and the grower is always targeting to make a profit in the end and so is the contractor, so both parties have a common objective which, does not seem to be happening with Government’s programmes where the parties seem to seek each other just before the season starts and then wait for the end of the season to meet again.

Tobacco contractors have a very strong extension backup, which allows them to make sure the farmers produce effectively to repay the loans and remain with decent earnings and not in debt.

The farmers on the other hand are also producing quality tobacco per unit area or hectare, which allows them to pay off their loans and start preparations for the following season.

The situation at the Government’s command farming programme for crops such as soya beans and maize is different.

There are no dedicated extension officers to religiously make follow-ups on how the farmers are making use of the inputs they are getting.

Funding for the programmes is coming, CBZ bank and other partners supporting the programme and Government is depending on extension officers under the Ministry of Lands, Agriculture, Water and Rural Resettlement who are not adequately equipped to make follow-ups.

The officers in most cases do not have transport to make the required follow-ups while in some cases they depend on transport offered by farmers or organisations rolling out programmes in the communities, which compromises their effectiveness.

They sometimes have to fork out money from their own savings to visit farmers or go and attend special farming events.

It is a common occurrence for extension services to end up suffering if no ‘Good Samaritan’ comes by and offers the officers transport, which means that farmers will be going unsupervised and in the process do all sorts of things detrimental to production targets.

Some of the extension officers at times rely on proceeds from their own projects to supplement their earnings and are therefore not readily willing to use that to fund work programmes especially under the difficult economic conditions that have been afflicting the country for some time now.

Extension services for the Command Agriculture programme are lacking seriously in terms of effectiveness.

Now given such a background, it is a fact that some farmers may not be deploying all resources they are getting from Government to their fields and may be selling some of the inputs and applying very little, which in the end compromises the quality and quantity of the eventual yields.

Some even get seed from other sources and spread fertilisers and chemicals meant for the Command Agriculture to cover crops under their personal programmes, which has a negative effect on eventual yields.

Every beginning of the farming season there are farmers selling fertilisers cheaply, yet everybody knows that it is not easy to get the commodity on the regular market because of the prices, which makes logic for anyone to assume that they may be inputs from the Command Agriculture programme.

The unfortunate reality is that the money generated from the sale of the inputs is not used to support agricultural programmes but elsewhere or even spent on less important things like beer or other forms of pleasure.

The remaining quantities of inputs are later forced to cover hectarages that should have been covered by more resources, which later compromises the eventual yields and quality of the produce. This means that, for instance, where the farmer was supposed to apply 100kg of fertiliser, he ends up applying far less, which creates nutrient deficiancy for the plants.

This waters down the importance of the programme and will eventually cascade to what will happen at the end of the growing season when the farmers take their produce to the markets.

What is needed is a strong follow-up on the way the loaned inputs are used and then strong extension services to make sure the targeted results are achieved. Extension services for tobacco farmers are fluent and do not stop until both parties take what is rightfully theirs, which seals the deal and makes sure no one walks away with a bruised ego.

That is exactly what Government must do to make sure Command Agriculture programmes generate the much-needed yields culminating in good loan repayment rates.

Most farmers under the programme have adopted very relaxed attitudes and are therefore not really worried about the outcome of a season.

In a way they are abusing Government’s leniency as the custodian of all citizens.

The idea of a contract programme is to empower beneficiaries to produce competitively and be able to get some profit after selling and procuring inputs for a new season before finally going it alone.

Strict monitoring by extension officers also means farmers will not side-market produce and everything produced will be accounted for since it will be common knowledge that so much quantities were realised after harvesting and as such the same quantities will be expected to be sold.

This nips conflict in the bud because the farmer will not get room to look elsewhere for another market other than the one agreed on at the start of the season.