Improving Institutional Capacity:

Strengthening Farmer Organizations in the OIC Member Countries

ZNFU by the Swedish International Development Agency (SIDA) was largely positive, citing

significant membership growth and frequent, successful advocacy: “The level of [advocacy]

activity has been high particularly at the HQ level, where a number of successes have proven

the effectiveness of the function.” SIDA also cited generally successful service provision (chiefly

in terms of credit access, with marketing support being less successful), noting that “a major

motivation for small scale farmers, particularly the women farmers to be members of ZNFU

through the DFAs is the access to services. The satisfaction among members for the services

that they receive is high and has increased.”

112

One key area of success for the ZNFU has been in avoiding the racial politics that plague many

Southern African farmers’ unions and creating an open, inclusive membership base. ZNFU is

the only apex organization in the country, and its membership includes both small-scale and

emerging-commercial black farmers and large-scale white farmers; there is no offshoot

“white” farmers’ union, as there is in countries like Zimbabwe. ZNFU Districts where large

numbers of white farmers are headed by a black elected representative, and the converse, are

both common and unremarkable in the eyes of ZNFU members. ZNFU is also becoming

increasingly gender-inclusive, with a female Deputy Director and female representatives

elected across several districts.

ZNFU has also been successful in providing services to farmers that the Zambian Government

does not administer or does not administer efficiently. These services include basic knowledge

transfer – crop estimates, production handbooks, and value chain studies, etc. – as well as

input support. For instance, the Zambian government input support program, which focuses

on free fertilizer distribution, has been marred by late deliveries, inconsistent quality,

unsuitable fertilizer types for soil conditions, and politicization of access. As a result, industry

participants report significant farmer dissatisfaction and overall inefficacy. In response, the

ZNFU has in the past several years piloted its own input support program, focusing on

subsidized credit access rather than free delivery, and expanded the program to cover all types

of inputs using a more flexible electronic voucher program. This Lima Credit Scheme has been

generally regarded as successful (albeit still expensive, given the requirement of a 50% down

payment) and continues to grow.

These successes, however, do not imply the absence of challenges. One main challenge for the

ZNFU is in the area of government policy, specifically in ensuring that farmers’ interests are

counted alongside those of urban consumers and downstream industry participants. Small-

scale farmers in Zambia continuously struggle with the low price of maize, due in part to long-

time government involvement in the market through export bans and purchases at low prices

fixed by the Food Reserve Agency. While such actions are partially in response to food security

concerns, industry participants say there is a political benefit to ensuring low-cost maize is

available to urban voters, which drives maize policy. Similar political advantages accrue from

taxing large-scale farmers, who face significant taxes on electricity, fuel, and other inputs that

hamper their cost-competitiveness. The ZNFU has made some headway against these taxes and

interventions through ongoing dialogue with the government but the policy environment is

still unsettled.

The ZNFU’s other challenges include (i) financial sustainability, given the high (although

declining) portion of income that comes from international donors, and, according to the

112

Chipeta, Sanne et al, “External Review of Core Support under Joint Financial Agreement to Zambia National Farmers

Union”, SIDA, July 2012.