The Sunday Mail
The tale of Israel and Zimbabwe’s agricultural circumstances is scandalous,what the former needs and desperately does not have – land – is what the latter has in abundance; and what Zimbabwe desperately seeks and doesn’t have -agricultural sophistication and technology – is what abounds in Israel.
More land needs to be put under irrigation
Established in 1948, Israel has a total land area of 21 000 square kilometres, of which just 4 100 square kilometres, or 20 percent, is arable.
Over half the country is arid or semi-arid, and much of Israel is hilly.
Zimbabwe, whose land area is more than 390 000 square kilometres, has redistributed more than 12,1 million hectares – representing 31 percent of the country’s prime agricultural land – to more than 277 000 indigenous households.
But what Israel lacks in terms of land, it has compensated for in terms of innovation, particularly in new agro-technologies.
In 2010, the Middle Eastern country’s fresh and processed agricultural exports rose to US$2,1 billion, representing 4,2 percent of that country’s total exports.
But it also exported agricultural inputs such as technologies and services worth US$2,87 billion.
However, Zimbabwe’s agricultural exports came in at US$534 million during the same period despite growing by 35,6 percent.
Such a huge discrepancy clearly underlines the folly of relying mainly on rain-fed agriculture.
Although it is encouraging that Government recently released US$15 million to pay part of the US$29 million debt owed to farmers for grain deliveries and input suppliers are ready for the 2015/2016 summer cropping season, the spectre of unpredictable rainfall patterns always linger.
It is quite absurd that the country has to shell out more than US$18,5 million to import 70 000 tonnes of maize that are needed to compensate for the 40 percent decline in maize production this year, while at the same time struggling to pay a similar amount for grain deliveries from farmers who might soon be preparing for the forthcoming cropping season.
Put simply, the money is being used to pay farmers in the region that were able to produce surplus grain.
This obviously prompts a rethink of our local production models and technological innovations.
One of the most valuable lessons from the success story of Israel’s agriculture is not limited to its farmer’s responsiveness and willingness to introduce innovations,
know-how and technological transfers, but to the cooperation among farmers, research and development experts, extension advisers and agro-technology companies.
In essence, Israel’s agricultural sector in now being treated as an excellent laboratory for the development of new agro-technologies, which are then disseminated around the world.
Just as Israel has managed to successfully employ intensive production in order to overcome the scarcity of water, Zimbabwe also desperately needs to increase its yields per hectare in order promote sustainable crop production.
There is also critical need to change the current subsistence production model to agri-business where fresh food production, especially in the rural areas, is leveraged to generate activity in food processing and packaging, industrial projects and agro-tourism.
There are various world experiences that show how incredible value can be unlocked from the agricultural value chain.
But in an increasingly competitive world where demand for quality agricultural products is high throughout the various seasons, the value of agro-technology and innovation cannot be overemphasised.
And Zimbabwe seems to fall short of this critical component in 21st century agriculture.
In the mid-term fiscal policy review, Finance Minister Mr Patrick Chinamasa intimated that there was need for drought proofing for the country to meet its seasonal production targets.
Advanced economies have been able to muster this concept very well through state-of-the-art irrigation technologies such as air-assisted sprayers, labour and energy saving systems, sophisticated sensors, greenhouse equipment, packaging systems and management software.
So sophisticated has agriculture become that there are now special sensors that have been developed to record and monitor plant growth rate and determine growing needs.
The use of these sensors results in significant savings in water and fertilisers, while improving production and quality.
There are also harvesting systems for crops such as onions, potatoes, sweet potatoes, watermelons, peanuts, and chili peppers.
Similarly special systems and methods for post-harvest operations such as separation of clods and stones from potatoes, weighing and sorting have since been developed.
Well, it is therefore unsurprising that over 80 percent of irrigated areas in Israel use micro-irrigation systems, while the remainder employ overhead systems, such as sprinkler or mechanised systems.
Soluble and liquid fertilisers have naturally been developed to suit these systems.
In essence, the equipment shed of the ordinary 21st century farmer now resembles a sci-fi equipment hangar.
For the farmer, technology has been able to reduce costs and increase yields.
Government needs to actively promote an ecosystem among research institutions, vocational training institutes, extension workers and the agro-industry in order to develop a vibrant agricultural industry that is underpinned by a modern farmer.
Yes, in the interim it might be ideal to import critical equipment from as far as Brazil as we develop our own internal capacities, but a sustainable agricultural industry will depend on locally-cultivated technologies that are sensitive to local needs.
This will make agriculture viable.
There is still debate that the 99-year leases given to local farmers are not ideal for sustainable agricultural financing, but interestingly over 80 percent of Israel’s agriculture is based on cooperative communities (the kibbutz and the Moshav) that live on nationally owned land under a long-term renewable 49-year leases.
Kibbutz (from the Hebrew word for “group”) is a rural community generally comprising several hundred inhabitants involved in co-operative production ranging from 300 to 700ha each; the major economic activities are agricultural production, industry, agro-tourism and services.
So, it is arguable that the local agricultural industry needs extensive remodelling.
It’s time we put our money where our mouth is.
If agriculture is our trump card, then we have every reason to go for broke to ensure that were put it on a sustainable growth past.
Feedback: [email protected]
