agricultural council of tanzania (act) - Business Insightz Home

AGRICULTURAL COUNCIL OF TANZANIA (ACT)

ADDRESSING THE CHALLNGES OF COUNTERFEIT AGRICULTURAL INPUTS

IN MBOZI DISTRICT

RESEARCH REPORT

Submitted by

Centre for Policy Research and Advocacy (CPRA) University of Dar es Salaam Business School (UDBS)

April 2016

1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acronyms and Abbreviations .......................................................................................... 2

0. Executive Summary .................................................................................................... 3

1. Introduction .................................................................................................................. 8

2. Issue and Concern of Stakeholders .............................................................................. 9

3. Objectives of the Study .............................................................................................. 10

4. Methodology .............................................................................................................. 10

5. Market for counterfeit agricultural inputs in Mbozi district ...................................... 12

6. Current conditions in counterfeit agricultural inputs in the district ........................... 13

7. The magnitude and impact of counterfeit agricultural inputs in Mbozi district ........ 14

8. Opportunity for dialogue ............................................................................................ 21

References ...................................................................................................................... 23

Annexes.......................................................................................................................... 24

Annex 1:List of Interviewees ......................................................................................... 24

Annex 2:Transcribed Interviews (In Kiswahili) ............................................................ 25

2

Acronyms and Abbreviations

ACT Agricultural Council of Tanzania

ADP Mbozi Agricultural Development Programme Mbozi Trust Fund

BEST-D BEST-Dialogue (formerly known as BEST-AC)

BRN Big Results Now

CPRA Centre for Policy Research and Advocacy

CTI Confederation of Tanzania Industries

DRC Democratic Republic of Congo

GDP Gross Domestic Product

KAM Kenya Association of Manufacturers

NAIC National Artificial Insemination Centre

NAIVS National Agricultural Input Voucher Scheme

NGO Non-Governmental Organization

SAGCOT Southern Agricultural Growth Corridor of Tanzania

TBS Tanzania Bureau of Standards

TOSCI Tanzania Official Seed Certification Institute

UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization

3

Executive Summary

0.1 Overview and Rationale of the study

Agriculture is composed of a majority of smallholder farmers in Tanzania and it remains the

mainstay of the economy, employing a significant workforce. The sector is however plagued

by low productivity, partly owing to poor access, distribution and low use of agro-inputs by

farmers. Supposedly, the sale of counterfeit agricultural inputs is one of the major problems

affecting the most vulnerable segments of the population in the country. Despite the efforts to

invest in and modernize the sector, farmers still encounter counterfeit inputs, particulary

fertilizers, hybrid seeds and agro-chemicals being sold at low prices. Although a wide

spectrum of agricultural sector actors seem to be aware of this issue, its intensity has not yet

been documented. Hence, the study in Mbozi is a result of an initiative to fill that gap.

This report presents research findings on the causes and effects of counterfeit agricultural

inputs in Mbozi district. It validates the issue based on the views of the key stakeholders that

were interviewed in October 2015. In particular, the report focuses on the genesis of the

problem and the reasons that make smallholder farmers in Mbozi district use counterfeit

inputs. It quantifies the impact of counterfeit inputs on the economic wellbeing of the farmers

and Mbozi district. The report also identifies key actors and documents their views. In the

final analysis, it suggests an appropriate strategy to be used to achieve the intended policy

change.

The report offers findings based on both primary and secondary sources of data and

information. The study utilized a 5-step advocacy model as promoted by BEST-Dialogue to

pin down the issue at hand. Its major findings and recommendations are expected to support

the dialogue on agricultural and food policies, especially to address the agricultural fake

inputs problem in Tanzania. This project is implemented by the Centre for Policy Research

and Advocacy (CPRA) in collaboration with the Agricultural Council of Tanzania (ACT).

0.2 Major findings

(i) Unscrupulous manufacturers and/or traders, farmers and government officials are

either directly or indirectly associated with the counterfeiting of agricultural inputs.

As a consequence, farmers fall prey to such counterfeits in the form of fake seeds

being sold at low prices, either outside trading centres or in shops scattered around

many trading centres, counterfeit and/or diluted pesticide sold in recycled packaging,

or counterfeit and fake fertilizers sold in many shops also scattered around

many trading centres. (i) Counterfeiting is particularly prevalent when the demand for agricultural inputs is at

its peak. In Mbozi, counterfeiting activities were reported to have been at their peak

in 2012/2013 following the government’s promise to purchase agricultural products,

which led to the high demand for agricultural inputs at that time. (ii) Maize seeds are the inputs most targeted by counterfeiters, followed by fertilizers

and then agro-chemicals. This ranking could be attributed to the fact that hybrid

seeds are needed for both subsistence and commercial farming. Fertilizers came

second because nowadays they seem to be the agricultural inputs without which farming in

Mbozi district will hardly succeed. Agro-chemicals are mainly used for animal husbandry. (iii) It is believed that 60 percent of chemicals and 20-30 percent of seeds sold in several

outlets are not genuine. Since the majority of farmers cannot differentiate between

4

genuine and counterfeit products, they innocently buy fake products. This partly

accounts for why farmers’ yields are still low despite government efforts to increase

them. (iv) Due to the use of counterfeit agro-inputs, productivity of maize declined from 25

bags to 8 bags per acre during the 2012 /2013 season. The district council levies TShs.

1,000/- on each bag of maize (and beans), and so the decline in productivity of maize from

25 bags to 8 bags implies that the district lost TShs. 17,000/- per acre in that year. We

still need to find out the number of commercial farmers and the average number of acres

they use for maize in order to establish the total loss in this respect. (v) Counterfeit agricultural inputs discourage smallholder farmers’ endeavours to

fight poverty. They have large families and depend on agricultural yields to meet

family needs such as food, health and school fees. (vi) The study identified three major categories of key actors. The first category consists

of the manufacturers and/or main suppliers of agricultural inputs to local retailers.

The second category consists of government officials, namely district council –

department of agriculture, the police force and the ministry of agriculture. The

ministry of agriculture is outside Mbozi but was reported to be an active actor through

the Big Results Now (BRN) initiative. The third category consists of the users or farmers

themselves and the local community as a whole.

In line with the specific objectives of this research, various issues were identified and are

summarized in Section 6. All key informants agree and it was confirmed during the

validation meeting that:

(i) There is an acute problem of counterfeit products in the district.

(ii) The problem adversely affects the economic wellbeing of the district.

(iii) The problem reached a peak in the period 2012 - 2014.

(iv) There is willingness to look for ways to resolve the problem.

Table 1 below summarizes the challenges attributed to different groups in dealing with the

problem of counterfeit agricultural inputs in Mbozi district.

Table 1: The main challenges faced by different groups in dealing with the agro-inputs

counterfeit problem

Group Challenges

Farmers

Illiteracy – Most of them find it difficult to differentiate between

genuine and fake products because they cannot read properly or

differentiate between different colours that look very close to each

other.

Poverty – They would go for cheaper products even when they are

suspicious of the quality because they cannot afford to buy

expensive products.

Ignorance – Improper usage of inputs

Manufacturers

and/or Traders

Unscrupulous and untrustworthy manufacturers and/or traders who

want to make huge profits.

Inadequacy of the rules and regulations and the lack of efficient

machinery to pin down offenders.

Supply of cheaper products from neighbouring countries that forces

5

traders to look for alternative products to protect their market share.

Government

Poor monitoring and evaluation procedures.

Corruption amongst government officials that makes it difficult to

pin down offenders.

Lack of sufficient Government staff to track down unscrupulous

traders/manufactuers.

No studies have been conducted to establish the type of inputs that

are needed by different villages, wards and divisions. Because the

district’s areas are different in terms of topography, soil type,

rainfall, etc., the “one-type-fits-all” strategy is unsuitable.

0.3 Key Reccommendations

Based on the study findings, a number of recommendations for specific actions are made.

The changes needed to the improve the situation and the actors responsible are presented in

Table 2.

Table 2: Desired change for various group categories

Factor Change needed Actor

1

Improve Mbozi

Farmers' situation and

perceptions

Strengthen farmer organizations

Implement strategies with

stakeholders improving farmers'

access to agro-inputs information,

training and products

Farmers Associations,

ADP-Mbozi,

District Agriculture

Office

2

Increase seed

production in Mbozi

District

Strengthen private/public

partnerships for production,

distribution and promotion.

Government support for private

sector, e.g. ensuring financial

systems are in place to support

appropriately located seed-

processing facilities.


ADP-Mbozi,


Office, Seed producers

3 Improve agro-input

distribution network

Strengthen the capacity of

stockists/distributors, making

input supply chains more efficient

and equitable through reducing

transaction/marketing costs and

securing a better policy

environment (e.g.

improving roads and incentives

e.g. tax relief), improving access

to credit (e.g. through supply

chain/inventory credit) and

improving coordination.

“Honest broker” negotiating with

farmers, stockists and suppliers to

provide quality inputs in

appropriate sized packaging,



Office,

Traders/Manufacturers,

Agriculture Extension

Officers

6

promotion and training to

improve efficiency at farm level.

4 Crop prices

Improve access to agricultural

market information, including use

of ICT down to village level.


ADP-Mbozi,


Office, Traders

5 Institutional issues

Promote links with the informal

sector which is important


ADP-Mbozi,


Office, Traders

6 Capacity of

stakeholders

Capacity strengthening needs

have been identified

Strong capacity strengthening

component in future interventions


ADP-Mbozi,


Office, Traders,

Agriculture Extension

Officers

More specifically, the actions to be taken by the various stakeholders are presented in Table

3.

Table 3: Specific Actions to be taken by the different actors

Action to be Taken Responsibility

1

Prepare a directory of agro-inputs stockists

The list should contain the name of the

owner/business, address, type of inputs dealt

with and area served

District Agriculture Development

Officer; District Trade Oficer;

Farmers Associations

2 Instruct manufacturers to package the agro-

inputs in small affordable quatinties District Executive Officer

3

Organize at least one training seminar per ward

per annum for the proper usage of agro-inputs by

farmers


Officer and selected business

people

4 Conduct impromptu checks on agro-inputs

stocks in stockists’ shops

District council in collaboration

with other anonymousindividuals.

5

Use demonstrations and demonstration plots in

every division to teach farmers how to

effectively administer agro-inputs


Officer and selected business

people.

6 Establish farmer research groups in every village ADP Mbozi/District council &

Vilage Executive Officers

7 Ensure farmer research group members train

others Established research groups

8

Based on their track record, select a few

distributors and selling points of agricultural

inputs

District executive officer

District agriculture department

Traders

Smallholder farmers

7

9 Introduce monthly reports on the status of

counterfeiting activities in the district


Ward executive officers

Police force

Selcted representatives of

smallholder farmers

10 Validate monthly reports in 9 above at village

level using research groups


Ward executive officers

Smallholder farmers

11 Write success stories from other districts/regions

and countries



8

1. Introduction

It is generally accepted that the application of genuine agro inputs contributes to agricultural

development and food security and thus positively contributes to the economic development

of any agriculture-dependent nation. In Tanzania, at least 75 percent of the entire population

depends on small-scale farming, making agriculture play a prominent role in the

improvement of social, economic and cultural lives in the country. Agriculture is one of the

leading sectors in Tanzania, accounting for 24 percent of the GDP, 30 percent of total exports

and 65 percent of raw materials for Tanzanian industries. The major crops include cereals on

61 percent of Tanzania’s total planted area, followed by roots and tubers, 14 percent, pulses,

12 percent, and oil seeds, 7 percent, while the main exported cash crops are coffee, tea,

cotton, cashews, raw tobacco, sisal and spices1. This means that agriculture provides a

critical lifeline for many rural Tanzanians, and so a threat to the integrity of agricultural input

supplies is tantamount to a threat to the heart of the country. To underscore the importance of

this sector, one of the major objectives of Tanzania’s Vision 2025 is to increase the incomes

and improve the livelihoods of rural farmers as well as to ensure food and nutrition security.

Tanzania is endowed with fertile arable land, diverse climatic zones and plenty of natural

water sources throughout the country that have enabled the agricultural sector to play a key

role in reducing poverty since independence. However, according to the United Nations

Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), so far only 24 percent of about

44 million hectares of land have been utilized. These areas are being mainly cultivated by

smallholder farmers, whose farm sizes range between 0.9 and 3.0 hectares using rustic

methods, leaving only 10 percent of the arable land cultivated by tractors.

The main obstacles that hinder the development of the agricultural sector include but are not

limited to:

i. Poor access, distribution and low and/or poor use of agro inputs by farmers;

ii. Under-investment in productivity-enhancing technologies including agricultural

mechanization;

iii. Limited access to financing for uptake of technologies;

iv. Unreliable rainfall in some regions; and

v. Limited use of available water sources for irrigated agriculture.

To overcome those problems the Tanzanian government has constantly been promoting a

policy environment with incentives in the agricultural sector. For instance, in 2008 the

National Agricultural Input Voucher Scheme (NAIVS), which is a market-smart input

subsidy programme, was introduced in response to the sharp rise in global grain and fertilizer

prices in 2007 and 2008. The main aim of the programme was to raise maize and rice

production, and thus preserve Tanzania’s household and national food security. In a similar

vein, in 2009 the Kilimo Kwanza (agriculture first) initiative, which is regarded as a central

pillar in achieving the country’s Vision 2025 to become a middle-income country, was also

introduced. The Kilimo Kwanza Policy was initiated, amongst other strategies, to help

farmers in the country to progress from subsistence to commercial farming. In order to

achieve that it is expected that the sales of the beneficiary agro-dealers will rise by 200

percent, verifiable agro-input products in the market will also increase to 200 percent and

land under improved ways of quality fertilizer use will go up to 44,000 hectares. In 2010 the

Southern Agricultural Growth Corridor of Tanzania (SAGCOT), an agricultural partnership

1 http://www.tanzaniainvest.com as accessed on 24.11.2015

http://www.tanzaniainvest.com/

9

designed to improve agricultural productivity, food security and livelihoods in Tanzania, was

initiated. Also, in 2015 the Tanzania Agriculture Development Bank was established by the

government of Tanzania specifically to assist the government in implementing its policies

and strategies relating to the agricultural sector.

Despite all these efforts, the sale of counterfeit agricultural inputs remains a major problem

that affects some of the most vulnerable segments of the population in the country. The

current study in Mbozi district was motivated by the common anecdotes of farmers’ bad

experience of fertilizer, seeds and agro-chemicals being sold at low prices. Either in the form

of fake seeds, fertilizers or diluted and/or fake pesticides being sold at low prices, farmers

(either unsuspecting or by design) fall prey to these counterfeit products each year. Although

a wide spectrum of agriculture sector actors was aware of the issue, none had tested how

widespread it is. Moreover, the causes and effects of using them have not yet been explicitly

established. In response to that void, the Agricultural Council of Tanzania (ACT) decided to

target this issue to find out what could be done by analyzing the causes and effects of

counterfeit agricultural inputs in Mbozi District. This study is a result of that initiative.

2. Issue and Concern of Stakeholders

Research undertaken by Match Maker Associates Limited (2012) reveals the wide usage of

counterfeit agro-inputs across Tanzania. To counter counterfeits, the country at the moment

relies on the Merchandize Marks Act, the Penal Code, Fair Competition Act, Tanzania Food

Drugs and Cosmetics Act, Standards (TBS) Act, and Intellectual Property laws (The Trade

and Service Marks Act, Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Act and the Patents Act) and

Seed Act 2003. According to CTI there is a lack of harmonisation and the proper

coordination of various laws and regulatory authorities that enforce these laws. “There is an

urgent need to review these laws and prepare an effective legal framework that will clearly

address the problem of counterfeit and sub-standard goods”.

According to CTI, the flooding of counterfeit products ino the country continues to be a

major threat to industries in Tanzania. CTI’s report (The Citizen Newspaper, Thursday

November 15, 2012) estimates that Tanzania could be losing between 15 to 25 percent of the

total domestic revenue due to counterfeit products. This means that, if total government

domestic revenue was Tshs 6.7 trillion in 2011/2012, the subsequent loss in government

revenue due to counterfeit products stood well over Sh1 trillion. “The government can lose

revenue in different ways. For example, the tendency of consumers to lose confidence in

products they once bought and found fake has led to a decline in aggregate demand for the

genuine products, thus affecting government earnings,” says part of the CTI report (The

Citizen Newspaper, Thursday November 15, 2012).

In Mbozi district, the vast majority of fertilizer samples are allegedly sub-standard.

Additionally, very few of the allegedly improved seeds show much success in producing a

large amount of crops. In short, the agricultural inputs sold at retail level in several areas in

Mbozi are claimed to be counterfeit or to have at least deteriorated to the point that they seem

so. Hence, the critical question that begs an answer in this regard is: What are the major

causes and effects of using counterfeit agricultural inputs in Mbozi district? Ideally, investing

in agro-inputs (pesticides, fertilizers and seeds) is intended to yield a good return but the

farmers end up frustrated because they invest a lot and yet their yield remains poor. Several

stakeholders in the agricultural sector in Mbozi district are aware of the problem but

10

surprisingly there are no clear explanations with regard to not only how widespread the

problem is but also what its main causes and effects are.

3. Objectives of the Study

Generally, the study sought to investigate the causes and effects of counterfeit agricultural

inputs in Mbozi district by gaining an understanding of the problem and validating the issue

based on the views of the key stakeholders. Specifically, the study enabled us to:

i. Establish the genesis of the problem and identify the reasons that make smallholder

farmers in Mbozi district use counterfeit inputs;

ii. Quantify the impact of counterfeit inputs on the economic wellbeing of the farmers

and Mbozi district;

iii. Identify key actors and justify the change desired; and

iv. Suggest an appropriate strategy to be used to achieve the intended policy change.

4. Methodology

Choosing the appropriate methodology for a study is said to be one of the most important

decisions that researchers make. It is, however, recognised that despite its importance this

task is complex and has to be undertaken with due care and diligence while also recognising

the limitations that might make some approaches more appropriate than others. Given the

need for a trade-off between the most appropriate method and resource limitations imposed

by circumstances, researchers are always advised to go for the most practical design that does

not compromise the credibility of the study (Bowen and Wiersema, 1999). This study was

designed based on the type of limitations that were identified by the previous research

dealing with smallholder farmers as well as resource limitations. Previous research identified

difficulties in accessing data, the non-existence of credible quantifiable data and the absence

of reliable sampling frames as some of the major constraints facing researchers in issues

relating to smallholder farmers. Also because of the remoteness of some geographical

locations and communication difficulties encountered, most previous research in rural areas

has been criticised for relying on conveniently picked urban and peri-urban centres as

sources of data. As a result most of the samples used in such studies have been found to be

too small, limited in geographical coverage and using cross-sectional rather than longitudinal

data (Luthans, Stajkkovic and Ibrayeva, 2000).

Realising those limitations this research was aimed at minimising their effects while

acknowledging that it would be too ambitious to try and entirely remove all of them in the

course of just one piece of research. Within the resources available this research tried to

address the sampling and data availability criticisms that have been levied at similar previous

research. However, the current study was not significantly different from other mainstream

studies in this area.

The study focused on fertilizers, seeds and agro-chemicals in order to improve the

understanding and awareness of how large the problem of counterfeiting is and the effects it

has on the local government, businesses, farmers and consumers in Mbozi district. To that

end the study utilised both secondary and primary sources of data and information. Previous

studies on the issue were reviewed, as well as key documents from the Agricultural Council

of Tanzania (ACT) and published scholarly work on the topic. From the literature review, the

consultants came up with an appropriate checklist that guided the study. Primary data were

mainly collected from information-rich members of the desired population, who were

selected purposively to generate thick data and an in-depth analysis was done. Eleven face-

11

to-face interviews were conducted (19th – 22nd October 2015) with the selected key

informants in Mbozi district. The number of respondents was determined based on data

saturation, i.e. when additional data collected provided few, if any, new insights.

The interviews lasted between 20 and 60 minutes depending on the information each

interviewee had (in this report the names have been disguised to hide the interviewees’

identity). These were coupled with a transect walk in selected selling points to witness how

business took place. The interviews were conducted in Kiswahili and recorded, and were

translated and transcribed later to ensure that no important information was lost in the course

of the discussions. In essence, the study utilized the 5-step advocacy model promoted by

BEST-D (Figure 1).

The intended deliverables of the study are one position paper, policy briefs, fact sheets and

journal publications, whose information is expected to be disseminated through community

radio, sensitization meetings, brochures/fliers and dialogues. Since the first stage of the

BEST–ACT approach had already been done by ACT members, this study focused on the

second stage of gaining an understanding and validating the issue based on the views of the

main stakeholders in Mbozi district, which will eventually lead to the third and fourth stages.

Figure 1: The 5-Step Approach

The process started with ACT and Best-D inviting the CPRA of the University of Dar es

Salaam Business School to participate in a workshop organized for the various stakeholders

in the agriculture sector from different districts in the country. During the workshop the

participants were asked to brainstorm and itemize the main challenges they face in their

districts. Participants from Mbozi District prioritized the proliferation of counterfeit agro-

inputs as the main problem they face. It was estimated that Mbozi district loses about 50

percent of the expected farm produce due to counterfeits. After this workshop, the ACT and

CPRA representatives met several times to chart the modality for undertaking a study to

determine the magnitude of the problem in Mbozi district. Various types of literature were

reviewed (e.g. Match Maker Associates, 2012; Shao and Edward, 2014; Githii, et al, 2014;

Ashour, et al., 2015; de Boef, Pierson and Kim, 2014) to validate the existence of the

problem before embarking on data collection in the field. Under the guidance of two

researchers from CPRA and one resource person from ACT a validation meeting was held in

Mbozi district on 3rd March 2016 with representatives of the major stakeholders. These

stakeholders comprised government officials stationed in Mbozi District, distributors/traders

of agro-inputs and farmers. In the discussions the participants were required to respond to the

following issues which the preliminary findings had observed: (a) the major reasons why

farmers in Mbozi district use counterfeit agricultural inputs, (b) the major actors, (c) the

extent to which counterfeit agricultural inputs affect the economy and welfare of the people

in Mbozi district, (d) the extent to which the counterfeits are a constraint on the economy of

Identify

Issues

Understand

Issues

Influence

policy

makers

Develop

responses &

proposals Follow up

12

the district and the country as a whole, (e) what could be done to get rid of the problem, and

(f) whether there is room for dialogue between the different stakeholders to alleviate this

problem. Each group had its own perspective on the questions raised. The outputs of the

validation workshop confirmed the preliminary findings of the study in that the participants

agreed with all of the conclusions that the study had previously drawn regarding the

counterfeit agri-input problem in Mbozi district. A summary of the observations by the

different stakeholders is presented as annex 3.

5. Market for counterfeit agricultural inputs in Mbozi district

Mbozi district is located in the south-western part of Mbeya region, between latitudes 80 and

90 12’ south of the Equator and longitudes 320 7’ 30” and 330 2’ 0” East of the Greenwich

Meridian. It shares borders with Mbeya district in the east, Ileje district to the south, Momba

district to the west and Chunya district to the north. Mbozi district is divided into 4 divisions,

I township authority, 17 Wards, 109 villages and 600 hamlets. Before Mbeya region was

divided into two separate regions (Mbeya and Songwe) and before Mbozi district was

divided into two districts (Mbozi and Momba), Mbozi was among the largest districts in

Mbeya region. It is bestowed with beautiful scenery of the rift valley and wonderful

undulating terrain. Moreover, its position, easy accessibility, an abundant amount of land,

diverse natural resources, and clement weather make it attractive for investment. The district

has a number of opportunities for investment, which give it an advantage over the rest of the

region as well as the country as a whole.

The existence of roads, a reliable railway, a nearby airport, national telecommunication links,

internet facilities, reliable water supply, power from the national grid, a good climatic and

topography make Mbozi a favourable and strategic location for investment. Opting for Mbozi

can extend the market of the business into Zambia, the Democratic Republic of Congo

(DRC), Malawi, Botswana, Zimbabwe and South Africa. The district has committed itself to

facilitating and expediting the process involved in investment, including the acquisition of

land, licensing and assisting with negotiations, if needed. Vwawa as the administrative centre

also supports economic activities. The main areas of investment identified for local and

foreign investors are crop production, agro-processing, livestock keeping, tourism and

mining.

There is growing concern that the majority of agro-inputs on the market in Mbozi district are

counterfeit. It is believed that 60 percent of chemicals and 20-30 percent of seeds sold in

several outlets are not genuine. Since the majority of farmers cannot differentiate between

genuine and counterfeit products, they innocently buy fake products. This partly accounts for

why farmers’ yields are still low despite government efforts to increase them. This has also

discouraged many farmers thus affecting their livelihood. The question is, in order to protect

these farmers, how can one prevent counterfeit agro-inputs from flooding the market?

Counterfeits are usually imitations of another well-known product with the intention of

deceiving the customer. Some counterfeit products are sold at prices equivalent to the

genuine products, while others are extremely cheap. For example, Mr John Mamboleo (not

his real name) bought two packets of herbicide and used them to spray weeds in preparation

for the new season, but the wild plants did not dry up. “I bought the herbicide from a shop at

Mulowo trading centre after the dealer assured me that it was a genuine herbicide I had asked

for,” Mr Mamboleo lamented, “I applied the herbicide to the weeds, but they did not dry up

as expected. I sprayed them a second time using a higher dosage, but again it did not work.

13

Fake agricultural inputs on the market will compromise the sector’s productivity thus

keeping farmers in chronic poverty since the agriculture sector is the source of income for

most of Tanzania’s population”.

6. Current condition of counterfeit agricultural inputs in the district

Smallholder farmers fall prey to unscrupulous businessmen in the form of fake seeds being

sold for low prices either outside trading centres or in shops scattered around the district,

counterfeit and/or diluted pesticide sold in recycled packaging, or counterfeit fertilizers sold

in many shops also scattered around many trading centres. Estimates put the prevalence of

fake seeds, for example, in Tanzania at between 30 and 40 percent of the total local supply.

Counterfeit agricultural inputs appear to be the norm in the local retail markets surveyed,

particularly when the demand for such inputs is at its peak. In Mbozi distrtict, counterfeiting

activities were reported to have been at their peak in 2012/2013 following the government’s

promise to purchase all agricultural products, resulting in a great demand for agricultural

inputs at that time. While the adoption of modern inputs of average quality is unprofitable,

the rate of return using genuine fertilizers, hybrid seeds and agro-chemicals is purportedly

substantial. Maize seeds were reported as the inputs most targeted by counterfeiters, followed

by fertilizers and then agro-chemicals. This could be attributed to the fact that hybrid seeds

are needed for both subsistence and commercial farming. Fertilizers come second because of

the continuous degradation of the soil, making it unprofitable to farm without using them.

Agro-chemicals are mainly used for animal husbandry which, although significant, is not as

pronounced as the other two activities in the district.

Hassan Seif is an agricultural extension officer in charge of products at Mbozi district

council. Mr Seif explained how sophisticated the counterfeiters have become. “It is never

easy to purchase genuine agricultural inputs, especially hybrid seeds; basically smallholder

farmers rely on fate as they lack expertise and the system is too sophisticated for them.” Mr.

Seif insists that hybrid seeds are more prone to counterfeiting than all the other agricultural

inputs. At times the culprits paint locally produced maize grains in a colour that looks like

genuine hybrid seeds or simply pack them in branded packets in a way that even agricultural

experts cannot easily differentiate them from the genuine ones. As regards fertilizers, besides

repackaging and reducing the weight of the contents in the packages the counterfeiters also

mix fertilizers with locally mined salt or sand which they sell to unsuspecting farmers.

Sometimes other unscrupulous traders grind black stones obtained from river beds and

package them to be sold as genuine fertilizer. The farmers realise that they have been conned

later on after sowing the seeds as they do not geminate and, unfortunately, at that time they

have no way of offsetting their losses. On a positive note it was noted that counterfeiting

started to decline a bit in the second half of 2013 due to unannounced ambushes that the

district council started organising in collaboration with the police force.

In a similar vein, Maria Godfrey, an agro-inputs entrepreneur and agriculture extension

officer at Mbozi district council lamented that “given family responsibilities, it is almost

impossible for smallholder farmers in Mbozi district to farm without industrial fertilizers.

They have large families and depend on agricultural yields to meet family needs such as

food, health expenses and school fees. Besides, agriculture is one of the main sources of

revenue for Mbozi district council. Although the district council has tried hard to deal with

the problem pertaining to the counterfeiting of agricultural inputs, one cannot guarantee that

this problem has subsided. If anything, it might have got worse”.

14

The results of this study have established that the quality of retail agri-inputs plays an

important role in determining the welfare of smallholder farmers in Mbozi district. The

quality of life and economic wellbeing tend to decrease with an increase in demand for agro-

inputs, which increases the incidence of fake ones in the market. It is also apparent that fake

agro-inputs often contain dangerous compounds that contaminate ground water, and poison

consumers. A perverse twist to this development is the misrepresentation of banned

chemicals as organic farm chemicals, thus compromising the district’s environmental

protection and ecological goals.

7. The magnitude and impact of counterfeit agricultural inputs in Mbozi district

Mbozi distric has arable land of about 255,300 km2 accounting for about 75 percent of the

entire land mass. Mbozi is one of the largest producers in the southern highlands zone2,

producing about 176,000 tons annually. This provides food security for community members

and the country as whole and some maize is sold to nearby countries. Food security and the

income of farmers is heavily dependent on the productivity and sustainability of maize-based

cropping systems. According to the 2012 population census, Mbozi district had a population

of 446,339 with a growth rate of 2.8 percent.

During 2014’s harvest season Mr John Maendeleo was in despair. His entire crop of maize

perished after he had used fertilizers and seeds that he came to realize later were fake. He lost

his main source of livelihood in terms of food and income for the family because maize is

used for both subsistence and as a cash crop. The ACT cannot help Mr Maendeleo with his

maize, but the information that he gave us, along with that from other interviewees (Box 1),

will allow ACT to understand the problem and be in a better position to advise farmers like

him on how to avoid buying fake products in the future – and where they can go for redress.

Box 1: Estimated loss of district revenue due to counterfeit inputs

Due to the use of counterfeit agro-inputs, productivity of maize declined from 25 bags to 8

bags per acre during 2012/2013. The disctict council levies TShs. 1,000/- on each bag of

maize (and beans), so the decline in productivity of maize from 25 bags to 8 bags implies

that the district lost TShs. 17,000/- per acre in that year.

For several years prior to 2012 Mr Stephen Mwambasa and Mr and Mrs Green Kabeleke, all

retired civil servants, were relatively successful coffee, dairy, poultry and pig farmers in

Mbozi district. Since 2012, however, they have seen a reversal of their fortunes, suffering a

sudden dip in production. For example, Mr and Mrs Kabeleke’s poultry farming suffered

innumerable losses. Whereas previously they could achieve a laying rate as high as 96

percent in birds aged between 33 and 44 weeks, they have recorded between 65-70 percent

since 2012. Mr and Mrs Kabeleke blame their woes on the proliferation of counterfeit feeds

and other agro-inputs in the market. “Since 2012 our chicks have kept on dying even when

we had vaccinated them at the right age using the right dosage, implying that the feeds,

pesticides and medicines do not contain enough of the nutrients required for the birds” says

Mr Kabeleke. Mr Mwambasa blames the government for counterfeit farm inputs, saying it

2 The Southern Highlands zone covers 28 percent of the total land area of Tanzania and accounts for almost 50

percent of the national maize production.

15

lacks staff to track down unscrupulous traders. According to Mr Mwambasa, this aspect,

coupled with unpredictable weather, has resulted in farmers not only having little to feed

their families but it also discourages people from engaging in commercial farming.

It was established that to a great extent the vast majority of the fertilizers used in Mbozi

district are either fake or sub-standard, thereby undermining the government’s policy of

“Kilimo Kwanza”. The agricultural inputs sold at retail level in the district are often fake or

have deteriorated to the point that they no longer serve their purpose. This suggests that a

better standard of surveillance is needed and an increased focus on rooting out fakes by

enforcing the requisite standards. “The Ministry is aware of the problem and we have started

tracking down the culprits. However the challenge the government has is the shortage of

agro-input inspectors to carry out countrywide inspections of all the agro-input dealers,” said

Mr. Hassan Seif, the District Agricultural Officer in charge of crops.

7. Summary, Conclusion and Recommendations

The major focus of this study was to understand, validate and quantify the problem of

counterfeit agro-inputs in Mbozi district. In summary the following points have been

established:

a) Understanding and validating the sale of counterfeits agro-inputs products in Mbozi

district based on the views of the various stakeholders.

The study identified different stakeholders concerned with the agro-inputs counterfeit

problem in Mbozi district. These can be categorized into two major groups. The first

category consists of the manufacturers and/or main suppliers of agricultural inputs to local

retailers. The brands are diverse and comprise both national and international brands. The

study identified the following dominant brands in each brand group. The major brands of

seed hybrids are: Pannar quality, Meru seed, Sidco, Deckalb, Tanseed and Seed crop; the

major brands of fertilizers are: DAP, Minjingu, YARA and TSP; and the major brands of

agro-chemicals are: Positive international, Sura International, Bajuta International, Twiga

Industry, Kenfeeders, Supergrow and Sinjeta.

The second category consists of the farmers themselves, the District Council (department of

agriculture), the police force, the ministry of agriculture, and the local community as a whole.

The ministry of agriculture’s headquarters are outside Mbozi district but was reported to be

an active actor through the Big Results Now (BRN) initiative. The research findings provide

mixed views relating to the culprits of the counterfeiting problem. Depending on who is

giving their views the culprits are big businesses, small business operators, farmers, corrupt

government officials, the police and the manufacturers.

The common denominator in all these groups is that the sale of counterfeit agricultural inputs

is a problem that affects some if not all of the most vulnerable segments of the population.

They also agree that the application of genuine agro-inputs contributes to agricultural

development and food security and thus positively contributes to national economic

development and that smallholder farming provides a critical lifeline for many rural

Tanzanians. Thus, it is agreed by all that a threat to the integrity of agricultural input supplies

is certainly a threat to the very heart of the country’s economy.

b) Establishing the genesis of the problem and identifying the reasons why smallholder

farmers in Mbozi use counterfeit inputs

16

The major source of agricultural inputs used by smallholder farmers in Mbozi district is Dar

es Salaam, which the neighbouring countries of Malawi and Zambia use as an inlet for

similar products. Drawing on the preceding discussion, we deduce that distribution channels

of counterfeit agricultural inputs are heterogeneous. The process is so complex that it

discourages the adoption of modern farming methods by smallholder farmers in Mbozi

district. Retail-level agricultural inputs are purchased in small outlets in various locations,

mainly in Mlowo and Tunduma townships. Prior testing of the quality of agricultural inputs

at district level is impossible because there are no relevant laboratories. Counterfeit

agricultural inputs are distributed in the form of expired and/or mixed fertilizers, repackaging

of seeds and dilution of agro-chemicals.

From the views of all these groups it is apparent that resolving this problem is a challenge as

the different groups of stakeholders see the source of the problem differently (see Table 1).

Table 1: Challenges faced by the different groups of stakeholders in resolving the problem

Group Challenges

Farmers

Illiteracy – Most of them find it difficult to differentiate between

genuine and fake products because they cannot read properly or

differentiate between different colours that look very close to

each other

Poverty – They would go for cheaper products even when they

are suspicious of the quality because they cannot afford to buy

expensive products.

Ignorance – Improper usage of inputs

Traders

Unscrupulous and untrustworthy traders who want to make

abnormally high profits

Inadequacy of the rules and regulations and inefficient machinery

to pin down offenders

Supply of cheaper products from neighbouring countries that

force traders to look for alternative products to protect their

market share

Government

Poor monitoring and evaluation procedures

Corruption amongst government officials that makes it difficult to

pin down offenders

Lack of sufficient Government staff to track down unscrupulous

traders

No proper study has been conducted to establish the exact need

relating to the type of inputs that are required by different

villages, wards and divisions. Although it is one district there is

are significant differences in terms of topography, soil type,

rainfall, etc. The “one-type-fits all strategy is ineffective.

c) Quantifying the impact of counterfeit inputs on the economic wellbeing of farmers

and Mbozi district

17

The impact of counterfeit agro-input products in Mbozi district is severe and it affects not

only the socio-economic fabric of society but also the economic wellbeing of the district

(Table 2). With declining agro-outputs several groups in the district are adversely affected:

Table 2: The impact of counterfeit inputs

Group Effects

Central and local government

authorities Loss of tax revenue

Loss of trust of smallholder farmers

Smallholder farmers

Loss of income

Children failing to go to school

Increased malnutrition amongst children

Traders Loss of income

Loss of trust of their customers

It has been established that tackling the issue of counterfeit agricultural inputs requires a

balanced and comprehensive approach. There is a need to bring together seed companies,

agro-dealers, manufacturers, service providers, small-scale farmers and government officials

to discuss the problem and how to resolve it. It is important that everyone understands the

issues involved. Both sellers and buyers must be aware of what to look out for and what the

consequences are if they are found guilty of the offence. Farmers must also be educated. For

example, experiencing non-germinating seeds does not necessarily mean that the seeds were

counterfeit, as seeds do not germinate for a variety of reasons, including improper use and

unfavourable weather conditions. The government should take the lead in importing

agricultural inputs in bulk and then sign a memorandum of understanding with the private

sector to help with their distribution.

The findings from our interviews reveal that the major factors that contribute to smallholder

farmers using fake agro-inputs are:

Packaging: Some farmers cannot afford to purchase inputs that are packed in large

containers and so they end up buying smaller containers containing counterfeit

products.

Farmers' situation and perceptions: Many smallholder farmers have lost confidence

in the formal agro-inputs distribution system because of their experience of acquiring

inappropriate varieties and fake seeds and fertilizers, and because of their high price.

Low certified seed production: The quantity of seeds produced has been far below

demand giving an opportunity for scrupulous traders to flood the market with fake

seeds.

Poor agro-inputs distribution networks: Most input stockists are clustered in urban

areas, making farmers' access to inputs difficult, forcing them to depend on traders,

some of whom are untrustworthy.

Weak infrastructure: The feeder road system is poor, particularly during the rainy

season, making input delivery difficult and input prices frequently higher than farmers

can afford.

Low crop prices: Farmers get unattractive prices from the sale of surplus.

No tough sanctions for non-compliant firms: Although some cases are known to

have been prosecuted, it is common knowledge that the culprits are not dealt with

18

severely and in most cases they are not even caught. This can only make the general

public desperate.

High prices of genuine inputs: Smallholder farmers cannot afford to buy genuine

agro-inputs due to their high price.

Lack of follow-ups by government officials: Low capacity in terms of numbers

makes it difficult for government officials to adequately monitor the system. There is

also an acute shortage of laboratories to analyse agro-inputs.

Mistrust (lack of trustworthiness): This is mainly a result of moral decadence in the

community, making stakeholders lose trust in each other.

Social capital/social ties among smallholder farmers: In this regard, purchasing farm

inputs on credit and/or barter trade leads to customers not obtaining receipts for their

purchases, which makes it difficult to sue each other.

Multiple suppliers and/or distributors: This makes it difficult to apprehend the

untrustworthy agro-inputs traders.

d) Recommendations for overcoming the factors making smallholder farmers use fake

agro-inputs. As a result of this study, the following recommendations are made which

emanate from the lessons learnt (Box 2).

Box 2: Summary of recommendations based on key findings

Create awareness of the outputs among end users (for instance, through seminars, field

shows, leaflets, brochures and exchange visits)

Demonstrate the effectiveness of the output: "seeing is believing” concept

Make the output (seed) available within or close to the village, and provide timely

delivery, affordable price, true seeds (not fake)

Provide convenient packaging of agro-inputs, e.g. in 0.5, 1.0, 2.0 kg packs for seeds

Ensure the availability of a ready market for the surplus at a fair but profitable price

Create appropriate linkages with agricultural extension officers who work very closely

with farmers in the villages

Work with NGOs to build the capacity of farmers and to assist in the dissemination of

the outputs in their target areas

Provide leaflets, brochures, posters (at no cost initially) in the local language to create

awareness and understanding of the technology.

We subsequently elaborate on the above recommendations by analyzing the change desired

by each specific group category (Table 3) and more specifically, we recommend that

appropriate actions are taken by various stakeholders (Table 4).

Table 3: Change desired by the various group categories

Factor Change needed Actor

1

Improve Mbozi farmers'

situation and

perceptions

Strengthen farmer organizations

Implement strategies with

stakeholders for improving farmers'

Farmers

Associations,

ADP-Mbozi,

19

access to agro-inputs information,

training and products

District

Agriculture

Office

2

Increase seed

production capacity in

Mbozi District

Strengthen private/public partnership

strategies for production, distribution

and promotion.

Government support for private

sector, e.g. ensuring financial

systems are in place to support

appropriately located seed-

processing facilities.

Farmers

Associations,

ADP-Mbozi,

District

Agriculture

Office, Seed

producers

3 Improve agro-input

distribution network

Strengthen the capacity of stockists/

distributors, making input supply

chains more efficient and equitable

through reducing

transaction/marketing costs, securing

a better policy environment (e.g.

improving roads and incentives, e.g.

tax relief), improving access to

credit (e.g. through supply

chain/inventory credit) and

improving coordination.

“Honest broker” negotiating with

farmers, stockists and suppliers to

provide quality inputs in appropriate

sized packaging, promotion and

training to improve efficiency at

farm level.

Farmers

Associations,

ADP-Mbozi,

District

Agriculture

Office, Traders,

Agriculture

Extension

Officers

4 Crop prices Improve access to agricultural

market information, including the

use of ICT up to village level.

Farmers

Associations,

ADP-Mbozi,

District

Agriculture

Office, Traders

5 Institutional issues Promote links with the informal

sector as this is important

Farmers

Associations,

ADP-Mbozi,

District

Agriculture

Office, Traders

6 Capacity of

stakeholders

Capacity strengthening needs have

been identified

Strong capacity strengthening

component in future inventions

Farmers

Associations,

ADP-Mbozi,

District

Agriculture

Office, Traders,

Agriculture

Extension

20

Officers

Table 4: Specific recommendations

Action to be Taken Responsibility

1

Prepare a directory of agro-inputs stockists

The list should contain the name of

owner/business, address, type of inputs dealt

with and area served


Officer

2 Instruct manufacturers to package agro-inputs in

affordable small quatinties The District Executive Officer

3

Organize at least one training seminar per ward

per annum for farmers on the proper usage of

agro-inputs


Officer and Ward Executive

Officer

4 Conduct impromptu checks on agro-inputs

stocks in stockists’ shops


Officer

5

Use demonstrations and demonstration plots in

every division to teach farmers how to

effectively administer agro-inputs


Officer

6 Establish farmer research groups in every village ADP Mbozi & Village Executive

Officers

7 Ensure farmer research group members train

others Established research groups

8

Based on their track record, unanimously select a

few distributors and selling points of agricultural

inputs

District Executive Officer


Traders

Smallholder farmers

9 Introduce monthly reports on the status of

counterfeiting activities in the district


Ward Executive Officers

Police force

Selected representatives of

smallholder farmers

10 Validate monthly reports in 9 above at village

level using research groups


Ward Executive Officers

Smallholder farmers

11 Write about success stories from other

districts/regions and countries



21

8. Opportunity for dialogue

All is not lost. There is an opportunity for dialogue which may lead to the different

stakeholders agreeing on the way forward in order to overcome this problem. The

participants in the dialogue are presented in figure 2 below

Figure 2: The Stakeholders to participate in the Dialogue

The study dealt with different stakeholders in the agro-inputs sector in Mbozi district. All the

groups agree on the following issues:

There is an acute problem of counterfeit products in the district.

The problem adversely affects the economic wellbeing of the district.

The problem reached a peak in the period between 2012 and 2014.

There is a willingness to look for ways to resolve the problem.

On the other hand there is disagreement on the genesis of the problem and the people

responsible.

The farmers blame:

o The traders for being greedy and untrustworthy who cheat unsuspecting or

ignorant customers.

o The government and other responsible authorities for turning a blind eye.

o The agro-inputs distribution network for not being efficient enough to ensure

that fake products do not pass through it.

o The market for underpaying them for their products, thus keeping them poor

and unable to buy genuine agro-inputs.

The traders blame the following:

o The farmers for being ignorant and failing to use the inputs correctly even

when they are genuine

22

o The farmers, because of poverty, for being prepared to compromise on quality

and buy fake inputs

o Manufacturers for supplying fake products to the market

o The government for failing to adequately oversee the distribution networks

o Some traders for being greedy and untrustworthy

The government officials blame the following:

o An inefficient system that is cumbersome to oversee;

o Not having enough officials to adequately follow up the supply chain of agro-

inputs in the district;

o The farmers for not being prepared to report any infringement of the quality of

agro-inputs because of nepotism, ignorance or just being negligent;

o The farmers for being prepared to compromise on quality and buy fake inputs;

o The traders and large-scale manufacturers for supplying fake products to the

market

It was evident from the discussions that the traders think or pretend to think that the problem

now is not as acute as it used to be. This could be because they are the main culprits and thus

do not want to expose themselves to more scrutiny and the introduction of sterner measures

to control the vice. On the other hand, the impression you get from the farmers and

government officials is that the problem is still acute and the malpractice is still rampant.

Although the various stakeholders agree that the problem exists, they do not agree on its

magnitude, and so there is an opportunity to arrange a dialogue among various stakeholders

to deliberate on how the problem can be resolved amicably. It was agreed that resolving the

problem is in the best interests of each group, who said that they are willing to sit down

together and look for ways to resolve the problem. It is apparent that the farmers, experts in

farmers’ associations, traders and government officials have never sat down together to

brainstorm to arrive at a solution to the problem. This has resulted in each group of

stakeholders blaming the other groups as the source of the problem and not understanding the

challenges faced by them. With this attitude the problem can never be resolved. Thus there is

a great need for ACT and CPRA to facilitate a dialogue among different stakeholders where

they can amicably discuss the problem, agree on how to tackle it and how they can influence

the policies which either directly or indirectly contribute to the existence of the problem.

23

References

ARI Uyole/ NRI (2003), Situation analysis of maize growers in the Southern Highlands of

Tanzania with particular emphasis on access to and management of seed. ARI-Uyole,

Mbeya, Tanzania.

Ashour, M., l. Billings, Gilligan, D., and n. Karachiwalla (2015) Uganda FTF E-Verification

– Imapct Evaluation Study; International Food Policy Research Institute

Bowen, H.P. and M.F. Wiersema (1999), “Matching Method to Paradigm in Strategy

Research: Limitations of Cross-Sectional Analysis and Some Methodological

Alternatives”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol 20, Number 7, July, pp. 625 – 636

Brophy, C. (2014); Working together to stop fake Agricultural Products in Uganda; Access

to Information.

De Boef, W., B. Pierson, and D. Kim (2014), Counterfeiting in African Agriculture Inputs –

Challenges and Solutions. Research Readout; Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

Githii, S., S. Maina, J.N. Kamau, and M.M. Njau (2014); An Analysis of Dynamics that Lead

to Counterfeit purchasing behaviour of ICT Products Among Youths; IOSR-Journal

of Business Management, Vol 16 Issue 8, (August), pp. 21 – 29).

Lamboll, R., Nsemwa, L.T.H. and Stathers, T. (2006), Survey of service providers to get

feedback on influence of DIFID CPP/CPHP on improved capacity, effectiveness and

morale.

Luthans, F., A.D. Stajkovic and E. Ibrayeva (2000), “Environmental and Psychological

Challenges Facing Entrepreneurial Development in Transitional Economies”, Journal

of World Business, Vol 35, Number 1, pp. 95 – 110

Match Maker Associates Limited (2012); Distribution, Access and Application of

Agricultural Inputs. Consultancy Report for ACT

Melinda Smale and Thom Jayne (2003), Maize in eastern and southern Africa: seeds of

success in retrospect. EPTD Discussion paper No. 97 IRPRI Washington DC, USA.

Mwita, Sosthenes (2008); Counterfeit and sub-standard inputs. Daily News; Sunday,

December 28, 2008

Shao, Deo and Stephen Edward (2014); Combating Fake Agro-Inputs Products in Tanzania

using Mobile Phones; International Journal of Computer Applications (0975 –8887)

Volume 97–No.17, July 2014

Stathers, T., Lyimo, N., Lamboll, R., Temu, A. and Gibson, R. (2004), Improving Maize

Seed Systems to Meet Farmers' Needs in the Southern Highlands of Tanzania: Report

of a Stakeholder Workshop on 29th - 31st July in Iringa, Tanzania. Working Paper for

DFID project R8220. ARI-Uyole, Mbeya, Tanzania.

Stathers, T., Nsemwa, L.T.H., Gondwe, B., and Lamboll, R. (2006), A survey of farmers and

stockists' access to and demand for information on maize, training and products in the

Southern Highlands of Tanzania. ARI Uyole, Mbeya, Tanzania. pp 150 + ix.

Veneranda Sumila (2012); The flooding of counterfeit products in the country continues to

be a major threat. The Citizen Newspaper, Thursday, 15 November

24

Annexes

Annex 1: List of Interviewees

1. Mr Victor El Nshau – Chief Executive Officer of ADP – Mbozi.

2. Mnyiha Associates – Sole distributors of Yara Fertilizers in Mbozi, Ileje, Momba,

Tukuyu, Chunya, Sumbawanga and Mwanza districts

3. Engineer Oscar Mvanda – General Manager, Mbozi Coffee Curing Company (MCCCo)

4. Mr Richard Karonga – Trader at Mulowo Business Centre

5. Mr Lema Victor Thomas – Trader at Mulowo Business Centre

6. Ms Zainab Mwajabu – Trader at Mulowo Business Centre; Farmer; District Extension

Officer; Head of an NGO that deals with farming and selling agro-inputs.

7. Mr Martin Chadulaga – TFA Shop Manager, Vwawa

8. Mr David Mwalusaka – Farmer and Chairperson of Mbozi Dairy Keepers Association

9. Mr Boaz Sadock – Official, Mbozi Dairy Keepers Association

10. Mr Petro Ndundu – District Agricultural Officer (Crop production)

11. Ms Asha Iddi – District Cooperative Officer

12. Mr Haji Hamis Ibrahim – District Executive Officer, Vwawa; Also acted as Ward

Executive Officer for Iyula Ward

13. Mr Julius Mwampashe – Farmer at Isangu Village

14. Mr Kabuje – Farmer and livestock keeper at Isangu Village; Active Member of Mbozi

Dairy Keepers Association

15. Mrs Kabuje – Farmer and livestock keeper at Isangu Village; Member of the Board of

ADP – Mbozi.

25

Annex 2: Transcribed Interviews (In Kiswahili)

1. UNYIHA ASSOCIATES

Mnaelewa nini kuhusu pembejeo fake: Mbegu, mbolea, mawada, nk.

Shughuli za Mnyiha Associates: Uuzaji wa pembejeo za kilimo kwa maana ya mbolea za

YARA, mbegu za mahindi, madawa ya kilimo, na mafiko ya kuhifadhia nafaka bila kuweka

dawa. Tunanunua pia kahawa na mahindi na kuya-process kuwa unga wa mahindi. Kahawa

inanunuliwa na kuuzwa Moshi.

Mnyiha Associates ilianzishwa mwaka 2006 na ni kampuni ya mtu binafsi yenye

shareholders. Mmiliki ni mmoja lakini kuna shareholders watano (wana familia) na wote ni

wenyeji wa Mbozi. Kwa upande wa Mbozi kampuni ina wafanyakazi wapatao 24. Kampuni

inamiliki pia shule na huko kuwa waajiriwa wengine.

Tangia mwanzo mpaka mwaka 2011/2012 kampuni ilikuwa inahusika na kuuza mbolea za

aina mbalimbali. Kilichopelekea kufikia hatua ya kuuza mbolea za aina moja (yaani mbolea

za YARA) ni hilo suala la uchakachuaji. Unapokuwa unahusika na uuzaji wa mbolea kutoka

kwa wazalishaji tofautitofauti uaminifu unakuwa ni mdogo/hamna. Unapouza mbolea kutoka

kwa kampuni moja uliyochagua kufanya nayo biashara inawezekana mkulima akakuelewa

vizuri zaidi. Kwa sababu anajua wazi kuwa atakapopata matatizo baada ya kununua mbolea

hiyo inakuwa ni rahisi kumfuata yule aliyekuuzia. Hilo ndilo lilitufanya kuanzia mwaka 2014

kupambana na mbolea zilizochakachuliwa.

Mwaka 2013 tatizo la uchakachuaji lilikuwa kubwa sana hasa mbolea. Baadhi ya wafanya

biashara ambao sio waaaminifu walifikia hatua ya kutumia mifuko tunayotumia sisi ya

YARA na kuweka mbolea ambayo sio ya YARA. Sisi ndio wakala pekee wa YARA hapa

Mbozi hivyo tuliweza kuiona hiyo mbolea iliyochakachuliwa sokoni. Unapokiona kitu

ambacho ni tofauti ambacho hakijatoka kwako tayari tukawahusisha wale wahusika

wenyewe ambao ni YARA kampuni ya ki-Norway na iko Dar es Salaam. Ni kati ya

makampuni makubwa ya usambazaji na uuzaji wa mbolea nchini. Wanauza mbolea za aina

mbali mbali kwa maana ya mbolea za kahawa, mbolea za pamba, mahindi, vitunguu, n.k. Ni

kampuni ya pili kwa ukubwa duniani ya uzalishaji wa mbolea.

Awali tulikuwa tukifuata mbolea Dar na kuzileta Mbeya, kwa sasa YARA wana-deport yao

kubwa Mbeya, Njombe, Mwanza, nk tangia 2014. Mnyiha ni wauzaji pekee (sole distributors

/agents) wa mbolea ya YARA Mbozi, Ireje, Momba, Tukuyu, Sumbawanga, Mwanza,

Chunya na Mbinga. Matumizi ya mbolea Mwanza si makubwa sana, hivyo YARA aliamua

kwenda maeneo mengine zaidi ya Mbozi na mzoefu ambaye ni Mnyia.

Wakulima: Tatizo kwa mkulima ni kubwa na hapa Mbozi wamepata hasara kubwa sana.

Kwa mfano mbolea ya DAP ilikuwa na rangi nyeusi, wakulima vijijini walitambua mbolea

ya DAP ni nyeusi na ni bora. Wachakachuaji nao wakagundua hili wakaenda kwenye kingo

za mito, kuna mawe meusi wanasaga wanachukuwa mbolea na kuchanganya na hayo mawe.

Katika promotion Mnyia waligundua hilo tatizo. Kampuni hii kwa kushirikiana na kampuni

ya YARA tulijitahidi sana kutoa elimu namna ya kuweza kuzitambua mbolea halisi kwa

kubadilisha mifuko mara kwa mara na kuwatumia mawakala kutoa taarifa hiyo haraka

kuhusu hayo mabadiliko. Lakini pia tukaendelea kutoa mbolea katika viwango tofauti tofauti

(kilo tano, kumi na kubadilisha nyuzi za kushonea namna ya kushona na kutoka taarifa za

mabadiliko haraka sana). Taarifa zilitolewa kwa kufanya kazi karibu na wananchi kupitia

26

minada yote inayofanyika Mbozi kuna ratiba pia za kuzunguka vijijnini na kufanya mikutano

na wa kulima. Lakini pia kuna vikundi mbalimbali vya wakulima kama vile saccoss ambavyo

pia tunafanya navyo kazi katika maeneo yetu yote. Radio pia hutumika kutoa elimu mapema.

Taarifa ikitufikia kutoka YARA tunaifikisha haraka kwa wakulima na kuwapatia elimu.

DAP ni aina ya mbolea ambayo imekuwa affected sana wakati wa uchakachuaji.

Ushukaji wa mauzo kufuatia uchakachuaji waweza kukadiliwa kwa asilimia ngapi?

Tulipokuwa tukizunguka kwenye mikutano, kati ya watu kumi ambao ungeweza kuwauliza

ulinunua mbolea? Watu wawili mpaka watatu (20% - 30%) wanaweza wakawa walipata

tatizo hili.

Kwa nini walinunua?

Kinachomfanya mkulima aingie mkenge ni bei. Kuna tofauti kubwa sana ya bei, genuine

74,000/- per 50 kg, fake 56/- mpaka 60/- hawashushi sana ili mkulima asishtuke.

Tunawashauri wakulima wanunue mbolea kwa watu wanaowafahamu maana wengine

wanaibuka kipindi uhitaji wa mbolea unapokuwa juu sana na si wamakala. Ni watu

wanaopita kwenye informal channels of distribution. Lakini pia uelewa wa wakulima ni

mdogo sana wananunua mbolea bila kudadisi. Vijijini kuna selling points. Wauzaji wadogo

(mawakala) tunawapa bei ya jumla ili anapopeleka vijijini (e.g. Itaka) ghalama inakuwa sawa

na ile ya Mbozi mjini kwa Unyiha associates.

Halimashauri walishugulikia sana suala la mbolea fake na kufungua kesi kadha wa kadha

japokuwa hatuwezi ongelea sana swala la kesi. Kufunguliwa kesi na halimashauri

kulipelekea uchakachuaji kupungua sana mwaka 2014/2015. Habari ya kesi YARA

wanaweza kuliongelea zaidi, Mnyia associates hawakuhusishwa zaidi.

Halmashauri pia waliweza kuzunguka na polisi kwenye maduka kutambua wauzaji wa

pembejeo fake. Kwa mfano, mwaka 2012 wachakachuaji waliweza penyeza tani 900 za

mbolea fake. Mnyiha wanajitahidi kushirikiana na halimashauri ili kulinda biashara yao

maana kualibika kwa shughuli za kilimo zinapelekea kifo cha biashara ya mbolea halali pia.

Hivyo tunajitahidi kushirikiana na maafisa kilimo. Tunapopata tatizo, lazima kuripoti hasa

huku mipakani kwenye changamo nyingi sana.

Hata hivyo utaratibu wa sasa hautoshi. Serikali inapaswa kuongeza jitihada kwa kutoa elimu

kwa watumiaji. Serikali yaweza kuzisaidia pia taasisi zinazotoa huduma za pembejeo kwa

kuwezesha pesa kwa kutoa pesa za semina. Maafisa wa serikali hawawezi kufanya kazi ya

utambuzi wa mbolea iliyochakachuliwa bila kushirikiana na makampuni yanayosambaza

hiyo mbolea. Serikali inapaswa kupima viwango vya ubora huko Dar es Salaam. Brand

zinazochakachuliwa ni zile zinazofahamika sana na kuuzwa sana sokoni. Mbegu zinazouzwa

na Mnyia highland seed, pannar seed, sidco, deckalb, Tanseed. Tatizi kubwa kuhusiana

nauchakachuaji wa mbegu liko kwenye mahindi.

27

MBOZI COFFEE CURING CO. LTD

Interview with the general manager _ Osca B. Muanda

Biashara kubwa ya kiwanda hiki ni kufanya ubanguaji wa kahawa kisha tunafanya grading

ya kisha tunachukuwa sampuli zake na kuzipeleka kwenye mnada Moshi kule kahawa

inakuwa auctioned through samples lakini kahawa yote inakuwa hapa kwenye maghala yetu.

Kwa maana hiyo sisi tunaanzia katikati kwa maana tunafanya shughuli ya ubanguaji na

warehousing.

Tangia kilipojengwa mwaka 1986 na kuanza kazi 1989. Wakati huo wote kilikuwa

kinamilikiwa na Serikali. Ilipofika mwaka 1995 baada ya worldtrade libearalisation serikali

iligawa hisa kwa vyama vikuu vya ushirika. Vyama vikuu vya ushirika ndivyo vilikuwa

vinatumia huduma hii ya ushirika hata kabla ya mwaka huo wa 1995. Kabla ya kiwanda hiki

kahawa zote zilikuwa zinakusanywa na vyama vya ushirika na kwenda kubanguliwa Moshi,

Tisco. Kwahiyo utajua ni kwa kiasi gani mkulima kahawa yake ilikuwa inachukuwa muda

mrefu mpaka ya kuuzwa. Unaikoboa msimu huu na kuiuza msimu mwingine. Unapoikoboa

msimu mwingine kiutaalamu tunaiita old crop na value yake inakuwa inashuka. Ili

kupunguza hiyo chain ndio serikali iliamua kujenga hivi viwanda. Kwa upande wa huku

kusini tunacho hiki hapa cha Mbozi pamoja na kile cha Mbinga. Vyote vilikuwa na equal

capacity na vyote vilikuwa vinamilikiwa na serikali mpaka 1995.

Hii kampuni ilikuwa na hisa za moja kwa moja kutoka serikalini. Mwaka 1995 vyama vyote

vilivyokuwa vinamiliki ushirika na kuuza kahawa kupitia ushirikia huo vilikuwa vinakatwa

percent kadhaa kwenye mauzo yao ili kujenga viwanda hivi. Kwahiyo katika kugawa hisa

serikali ilidhaminisha mchango wa vile vyama vikagawia km hisa za kujenga hivi viwanda.

Cooperatives zilipewa asilimia 68.27 na asilimia 31.13 ilibakia serikalini. Hata composition

ya board inazingatia mchango huo. Wajumbe wa board watano wanatoka kwenye vyama vya

ushirika na wawili wanatoka serikalini akiwemo mkurugenzi wa wilaya ya Mbozi na

mkurugenzi wa board ya kahawa ndio wanaosimamia hisa za serikali.

Vyama vyote vya ushirika vya Tanzania vinavyozalisha kahawa vipatavyo 23 vinashiriki

katika ownership. Vyama vyenye hisa kuanzia asilimia kumi lazima viwe na mkurugenzi wa

bodi. Vyenye asilimia pungufu ya kumi vinatoa mjumbe kwa mzunguko. Vyama vilivyo na

asilimia pungufu ya tano vinajigroup na kutoa mjumbe mmoja kwa mzunguko. Kiwanda

kilijengwa kukoboa tani elfu 21 (design capacity) kwa mwaka. Hata hivyo uzalishaji

haujawahi kufikia tani hizo kwa mkoa mzima. Msimu 1992/93 ndio tuliweza kufikia tani elfu

12 na 68 kwa mkoa wa Mbeya. Tangia kijengwe kinaoperate undercapacity. Kwa sasa

uzalishaji wa kahawa umeshuka lakini viwanda vya ukoboaji vimeongezeka kutoka kimoja

kufikia vitatu. Mbozi, CMS/lima na kingine kiko Mbeya mjini kinaitwa city coffee. Organic

coffee (itmuiayo organic fertilizer) na ingonic coffee

Uzalishaji unashulka either mashamba yamezeeka au ughali wa inputs (especially fertilizers)

na demoralised na bei offered in the world market. Wanaachana na kahawa na kujikita

kwenye shughuli nyingine/mazao mengine. Utafiti inabidi ufanywe kuusiana na urejeshaji

wa nutrients, kwa mfano kwa eka moja inawezekana kilichokuwaelinalied na kilichowa

replenished unazeza kuta viko ni tofauti. Kwa kahawa issue kubwa ni mbolea na madawa.

Kuna ufake kwa vitu hivi.

Kwenye vikao vya wadau wa kahawa tunashiriki na katika vikao hivyo kulikuwepo na

malalamiko ya mbolea fake kabla ya misimu miwili iliyopita kwa kuwa hakuwepo msambazi

28

mkubwa wa kahawa aliyekuwa wamefanya utafiti, YARA walifanya research na msambazaji

wao Mnyia ambao na wao wanakwenda kwa wakulima na kufanya soil analysis na kutambua

aina ya mbolea ya kutumia na kuwaonyesha pahala pa kupata mbolea sahihi kwa maeneo

husika. Hii inawasaidia wakulima kujua chanzo cha tatizo maana wanajua mbolea

wanayiitumia imetoka wapi tofauti na awali tulipokuwa na usambazaji/uuzaji holela.

Kwahiyo, mkulima asipopata matokeo mazuri inawezeka ikawa mkulima

hajatumia/hajafuata maelekezo sahihi au ujatumia mbegu sahihi. Inawezeka kuna

uchakachuaji ila inawezekana pia kuna kutofuata utaratibu sahihi. Na muda wa application

inawezekana pia ikawa ni shida kwa wakulima wetu.

Kwenye kahawa watu wanatumia seedlings kuna vituo vya kuzalisha mbegu. Kuna bustani

kwa ajili ya kuotesha miche na kuzigawa kwa wakulkima na huko hakuna uchakuaji maana

seedlings zinatengenezwa na wataalamu na kupasishwa kwa wakulima. Shida inakuja

kwamba kawaawa inapopandwa kwa mara ya kwanza inatumia samadi baada ya hapo ndio

unaanza kuapply industrial fertilizer ambazo zingine zinaongeza ukavu km utaziaaply

vibaya. Kwa hiyo yield inayofuata inategemea sana ulivyoapply mbolea kwenye msimu

uliotangulia. Kwa kawaida kahawa/mibuni yetu inaanza kuzalisha mwaka wa tatu kwahiyo

kama hukuapply mbolea miaka iliyotangulia huwezi pata mazao mazuri. Application ya

industrial fertilizer na madawa kuzuia ukungu, pestcides. Kama unachukuwa mbegu ambazo

ni deisease resistant au draught resistant hutumii sana chemicals. Miche inapatika TACRI

hawa wanafanya utafiti wa soil pia. Matumizi sahihi ya mbolea na mbegu ni ya msingi.

Wasambazaji wanapaswa kutoa elimu pia maana mafanikio ya usambazi wako unayapata

kupitia feedback ya wakulima (mafaniko yao). Maafisa ugani kutoka wilayani nao wanatoa

elimu husika. Maboresho yanatakiwa katika utafiti wa udongo ndipo tutakapo jua hasa

tunamwitaji nani atufanyie nini. Utafiti wa udongo ndio utakao onesha tunahitaji nani

atufanyie nini katika kila eneo. Mavuno hayategemei tu mbolea kuna factors nyiningine

kama spacing, muda wa kupanda (zao la kahawa kwa mfano linahitaji usiliache sana, inabidi

kila mara ulitembelee shamba lako – commitment). Mashamba yaliyoko karibu na makazi ya

watu yanapendeza zaidi kwa sababu watu wanakuwa na muda wa kuyaangalia mashamba

yao mara kwa mara.

Tatizo lingine ni kuwa vijana (working class/labour power) wamehamia mijini. Ila kuna

vijana wamerudi wanalima kisasa ambavyo wazee hawawezi kulima hivyo. Uhamasishaji wa

ulaji wa ndani (domestic consumption) unaweza kuboresha uzalishaji. Kwa sasa domestic

consumption ya kahawa hapa Tanzania ni 7% kwa magunia milioni moja tunayozalisha

ukilinganiusha na Ethipia wenye kuzalisha takribani gunia milioni tano kwa mwaka lakini

asilimia 51% wanakula wenyewe. Wabrazili wanazalisha gunia milioni 47 mpaka 50 lakini

wanakula more that 50% (gunia 25) domestic consumption. Ndio maana kahawa yetu

nyingi inauzwa raw. Watu wahamasishwe kuanzisha coffee bars. Tunazalisha lakini

hatucontrol market.

29

RICHARD KAROGA – MFANYA BIASHARA

Sisi ni wakala wa premium japokuwa wakati mwingine huwa nachukuwa mbolea za YARA

pia. Uwa inatokea wakati fulani wakulima wanalalamika kwamba pembejeo hazikufanya

kazi vizuri. Wakati fulani huwa tunajiuliza sisi kama haya makampuni ambayo serikali

inakuwa imeyasajiri, na naamini kuwa mbolea zinapokuwa zinaingia zinakaguliwa. Sasa

kama zinakaguliwa inakuwaje kwamba zinapomfikia mkulima zionekane kuwa hazina

viwango? Ndio kitu ambacho wakati fulani mimi huwa najiuliza sana. Malalamiko mengi

yako kwenye mbolea, kwenye mbegu wakati fulani imejitokeza na kwenye madawa pia.

Sijasikia kukamatwa kwa watu wanaouza pembejeo fake ila kuna wakati fulani imewahi

tokea kwamba mbolea zililetwaga huku kuna watu walikamatwa zile za YARA walipewa

fine ikaisha. Walipokuja tayari taarifa zilikuwepo. Halmashauri huwa wanafanya ukaguzi wa

kushtukiza na wanakuja na vipimo wanaaangalia kila mwaka. Sisi wenye maduka hatuuzi

pembejeo fake ila kuna wakati fulani iliwahi jitokeza, wakati wa mijingu huko vijiweni kuna

watu wanatafuta mifuko ya DAP wanaweka mijingo alafu wanashona alafu wanawauzia

watu. DAP ndio iko juu.

Kwa mkulima wameshatuzoea sisi wenye maduka kwa sababu tumeshafanya nao biashara

kwa muda mrefu kwahiyo wanatuamini na mimi naiamini kampuni inayotuuzia. Kwahiyo

yakitokea matatizo mie napiga simu kwenye kampuni. Wakulima wakiona bei ya chini sana

wanastuka, kwa mfano kuna kampuni moja hapa (siwezi kuitaja) ilileta mbolea, bei yake iko

chini lakini hata kama ukiiweka wanastuka kwanini bei iko chini sana. Unakuta hawajawahi

kuitumia ivyo wanastuka hata kama iko dukani hawainunui.

Madawa fake yanatokea kwa kuwa makampuni yamekuwa mengi na uaminifu haupo.

Kampuni ni nyinig ila ubora wa bidhaa ni wa mashaka. Ila watu wanaoruhusu hizo kampuni

ziingie sokoni ndio wanatia mashaka. Watu wa pembejeo wanakuja kukagua hapa ila

sijawahi pata nao matatizo. Kwa sasa sijasikia malalamiko kuhusu pembejeo

zakuchakachuliwa. Sisi wafanya biashara tunaaminiana, anaweza aje mteja hapa asiikute

mbolea anayoihitaji nikamwelekeza kwa rafikiangu akanunue.

Mijingu ya Babati ilikuwa ya bei ya chini sana ukiilinganisha na DAP kwahiyo watu huweza

nunua pembejeo zilizochakachuliwa kwa kuogopa bei. Umakini serikalini ni mdogo.

Inawezekanaje mbolea itoke nje na mpaka ifikie kwa mlaji ndio ionekane haifai. Inakuwaje

mwagizajia aliyesajiriwa na serikali na inapoingia bidhaa lazima ikaguliwa na serikali ila

ikifikia walaji ndio ionekane haifai. Kwanini ili litokee wakati ulikuwepo ukaguzi. DAP 71

elfu, YARA 72 elfu.

VICTOR THOMAS LEMA (MERU GREEN CARE TANZANIA) – MFANYA

BIASHARA

Mimi ni muuzaji wa madawa na mbegu. Tatizo la pembejeo fake linalalamikiwa na

wakulima japokuwa mimi binafsi halijawahi kunikuta kutoka mikonononi mwangu.

Wakulima wanadai wanayoimani na mie japokuwa wanalalamikia maeneo mengine.

Kuna mambo mawili ambayo sina uhakika nayo. Mkulima anaweza kuja kwa sababu ya

ugumu wa maisha. Anaekali mbili anakuja kununua dawa ya kuuwa wadudu inayotosheleza

30

ekali moja. Mkulima akifika shambani analazimisha dawa. Kwahiyo moja kwa moja hawezi

pata majibu mazuri kama yule amabaye atachukuwa dawa ya hekali moja ananyunyizia

shamba la hekali hiyohiyo moja. Kwa hiyo akipita akalinganisha anaona yeye kauziwa dawa

mbovu. Ilo ni moja. Jingine ni kuwa ukimshauri mkulima hashauriki kwa sabasabu ya ugumu

wa maisha uwezo hana na shamba analo lazima alilime lote.

La pili ni kuwa kuna wengine wananunua. Inawezekana kweli ipo dawa fake. Mimi ni

mfanya biashara siwezi kukosa kuuza kwa kuwa ni mfanya biashara. Unaweza kumshauri

kuhusu matumizi ya dawa ila hashauriki. Mie kama mfanya biashara namuuzia tu kwa kuwa

nahitaji pesa. Mimi sijawahi nunua dawa yenye matatizo kutoka kwa suppliers. Ila

inawezaekana ukajikuta unanunua dawa ambayo baadae muda wake unaisha. Unaweza

ukajikuta una chupa mbili tatu za namna hiyo ni hili ni swala la kawaida. Kitu ambacho

kiliniletea shida kwenye biashara yangu kama miaka minne mitano iliyopita. Niliwahi kuwa

wakala wa mbegu za luzuku. Niliwahi kununua mbegu kutoka kwenye kampuni ya pannar

seed, wakaniuzia mbegu ambayo haikufanya vizuri, haikuota kabisa. Ila nikawasilianana

viongozi na pannar seed wakaja na mabwana shamba wao wakagagua wakaongea na

wakulima wakawaomba msamaha wakawafanyia fisidia.

Mimi nimepitia kozi kama sita mpaka saba, kozi fupifupi zakuniwezesha kuimudu biashara

yangu. Awali nilikuwa nawatumia mabwana shamba. Shida ya mbegu za pannar lilitokea

kijiji kizima. Kwanza niliwafahamisha nilipelea taarifa wilayani kilimo wakaja na maafisa

wao wakamtuma na msimamizi wao hapa Mbeya wakaenda kwa wakulima wakulima

wakaitwa wote wakaenda shambani wakachukua zile mbegu wakazichunguza wakagundua

zilikuwa na upungufu. Wakawasiliana na tawi lao kubwa liko Arusha, basi wakawaomba

kwamba nichukuwe mbegu za kampuni nyingine zinazouwiana na ukanda ule. Basi mie

nikafanya kuwahudumia tu wakatoa na gharama za mbolea na nini. Mbegu zao zilipofia

(nadhani wanachukulia South Africa) zilipofika wakaja kunifidia mimi.

Ila watu wanaolalamika kuhusiana na dawa kutofanya kazi na kuharibika kwa mbegu ni

wengi sana. Mie najitahidi sana kuangalia muda wa dawa naangalia sana kitu kisiniharibikie.

Mie ni mfanya biashara lakini pia mkulima. Kikibaki hicho kidogo nakitumia kwenye

mashamba yangu ya kahawa na mahindi. Dawa ikipita muda inakuwa na muda wa ziada cha

miezi sita. Kwahiyo dawa zinazofikia kikomo cha muda nazitumia kwenye mashamba yangu

na zinafanya kazi vizuri sana. Mie siwezi uza dawa feki kwa sababu ni mfanya biashara na

natamani biashra yangu ikuwe zaidi. Ninapofanya kitu cha namna hiyo inaamna sitawapata

wateja. Mtu hata ukimuuzia data feki hata kama ni kwa bahati mbaya hata kaa akuamini tena.

Kwa wafanya biashara wenzangu waelewe wanapofungua biashara kwa mfano za pembejeo

za kilimo, hawategemei wakae na hiyo biashara kwa miezi sita au mwaka mmoja.

Wanaendelee kukuwa nayo ili wawe wafanya biashara wakubwa. Unapoanza biashara swala

la kwanza si kukusanya pesa ila wateja wengi sana. TPRA ofisi za kilimo taasisi za serikali

na taasisi binafsi wanapaswa kuwachukulia hatua hao watu. Suppliers wangu wakubwa wa

mbegu ni pananar seed, seed crop, island seed, Meru seed na Kipato seed. Kwa upande wa

madawa ninao Positive international, Sura international, Bajuta intenational, Twiga industry,

Kenfeeders, nk. Kuna wengine wanakuja wengine nimeshajenga nao mazingira mazuri ya

biashara.

31

ZAINAB MWAJUMA – MFANYA BIASHARA NA MKULIMA

Mjasiliamali ana duka na pembejeo paleple Mlowo lakini pia ni mtumishi wa serikali.

Analima pia mbegu za island seeds akishirikian na wenzake wamekuwa contracted kulima

mbegu na shirika hilo. Lakini pia ni bibi shamba wa halmashauri. Bibi Zainabu pia ni

Mkurungezi wa Mbozi Society of HIV AIDS.

Tatizo la uchakachuaji kwa sasa limepungua ila hatuwezi kusema kwamba limeisha bado

lipo. Kuanzia 2014 limepungua. Kitu kicholifanya tatizo hilo kupungua ni kwamba

ulikuwepo ufuatiliaji uliofanywa na watu wanaosimamia hilo. Wanasimamia mbegu,

madawa na mbolea. Walipitapita sana kukagua wakishirikiana na halmashauri ya Mbozi

wakaanza kuwa kama baadhi ya watu waliokuwa wakifanya hivyo waliotoa kwenye

magodown ya walifanya kazi wakubwa. Hilo lilitishia mpaka mwaka jana zikaanza kuja

mbolea nzuri, dawa nzuri. Tatizo kubwa la uchakachuaji liko kwenye mji wa Mloo na mji wa

Tunduma. Wachakajuaji wakubwa ni wafanyakazi wakubwa. Sisi baada ya kuwa wakala wa

Island seed kwa kuchukuwa pembejeo na kulima kwa kuwa wakala wao, wafanyabiashara

walichukia sana mpaka wakamwita mmoja wetu na kumweleza kuwa hiyo biashara muiache

mtatuharibia biashara yetu. Kwa kuwa mimi ni mtaalamu wa kilimo niliwaambia wenzangu

tufanye kazi maana sikupenda mimi kwenye biashara yangu niwe na bidhaa mbovu.

Tatizo liko kubwa kwenye mbegu kwanza. Kwenye mbolea pia sisi kama wataalamu wa

halmashauri tuliweza kukamata wafanyabiashara wa hapo. Lory zima lilikuwa na mbolea

zisizokuwa halali. Baada ya kushuhudia hilo basi wakaogopa na kugundua kuwa sasa moto

unaanza kuwaka. Sisi wataalamu wa kilimo tumeishaitwa na watu wa mbolea na mbegu pia

na kuelezwa jamani mkiona hiki basi elewa kuwa hii si nembo yetu hii si biashara yetu. Ila

pia tunawaambia wakulima kuwa wanaponunua pembejeo/mbegu wachukue receipt

wakishapanda mbegu, hizo receipt na mifuko wavitunze mpaka mahindi yaote angalau

yafikie hatua ya kuvuna. Akiona kuwa mbegu zinasumbua basi atoe taarifa kwa wataalamu

wa kilimo hapo halmashauri ambao wanafuatilia kwa muuzaji na kugundua kama mbolea ile

ni sahihi au la. Kama si sahihi mwenye bidhaa ile lazima aseme ameitoa wapi. Imeenda

hivyo kwa takribani miaka miwili hivi mpaka uchakachuaji ukapungua kidogo.

Kwa kukadiria hili tatizo limewaathiri wakulima 2012/2012, mie pia nilikuwa mwathirika

mmoja wapo. Nilipata gunia nane kwa hekali kwenye hekali moja badala ya kupata gunia 25

kwa hekali. Gunia moja linakadiliwa kuwa na kilo 90kg – 110kg. Watu wengi walipata

hasara sana huo mwaka mpaka wakakata tamaa. Zamani watu walikuwa wanachukuwa tu

mbegu.mbolea bila kuangalia expiry dates ila kwa sasa wameshakuwa wajanja wanachukuza

kwa makini kabla ya kununua. Hapa walikuwa hadi machine za kufungia mbolea, Tunduma

kwa mfano walikuwa na hadi mifuko ya mbolea.

Uchakachuaji ulijitokeza zaidi kwenye pembejeo za kupima ila kwa sasa wameanza kuweka

packages kwenye kil tano kumi, kumi na tano, nk. Wakaguzi wengi wanapita madukani

kwetu ambayo ni njia sahihi ya kuthibiti uchakachuaji. Sinjeta, Supagrow, Twiga

wanamadawa mazuri. Mkulima anapata elimu kuhusu matumizi ya pembejeo kupitia

shambadarasa vijijini. Kuna hata wauzaji pembejeo wanakuwa na siku zao za wakulima

(fieldday) wanakuwa na vipaza sauti wanakuwa wanawatangazia wananchi kuhusu ubora wa

pembejeo. Wanaita hata wakulima kutoka kila kata na walikuwa na training pale Mbeya

mjini kuhusu jinsi ya kutumia dawa, mbegu nzuri, jinsi ya kuepukana na uchakachuaji.

32

Semina za mara kwa mara na pamoja na kuguswa na matukio yamewaamsha sana wakulima

na kwa sasa mtu akipata matatizo anakwenda kuripoti moja kwa moja. Wakulima wa Mbozi

wanakopa tu kwa ajili ya kahawa na sio mahindi. Wengine wamekimbia na wengine

wamebadilisha mazao. Ni benk chache sana zinakopesha kwenye mazao tofauti na kahawa

(mahindi), kwa mfano TIB. Ila lazima mkulima awe na shamba lake mwenyewe na vyanzo

vya uhakika vya maji na wenye mipunga pia ndio wanapewa sana mikopo.

Athari: Halmashauri yenyewe inakosa ushuru kama uzalishaji ukiwa mdogo. Mfumo wa

serikali kununua mazao kwa kuwahamasisha wakulima watunze mazao yao umewaharibia

sifa wataalamu maana serikali haikuwalipa wakulima kwa wakati. Wakati huu wakulima

hawakubali kupeleka mazao yao kwenye maghala. Mkulima kwa sasa akiambiwa apeleke

mazao ghalani anastuka kuibiwa tena. Ila kwa sasa serikali imebadilisha mfumo kwa

kuwaruhusu wanunuzi wengi binafsi ambao wanawashawishi wakulima kwa kununua mazao

kutoka kwa wakulima kwa kutumia bei inayokuwa sokoni. Mbozi kulima bila mbolea

haiwezekani. Familia ni kubwa, matatizo yanapotokea wengine wanaachika kwa kushindwa

kuvumiliana. Huku wanawake ndio wakulima wakubwa. Watoto pia waliathirika, lishe,

watoto hawaendi shule (elimu), watoto kutoka English medium za laki tatu-nne na kurudi

kwenye shule za kawaida. Idadi ya kusomesha watoto ikashuka na kuwafanya watoto

wafanye kazi kwanza akma kuchunga ng’ombe ili wapate pesa ya kwenda shule (hii

inapelekea kuwagawa watoto kimahitaji).

Ushauri: Elimu kwa biashara na wakulima iwe ya mara kwa mara. Na ufuatiliaji uwe wa kila

mara kwa sababu wafanyabiashara wanabuni mbinu mpya kila wakati. Elimu inasaidia ila

inapaswa iambatane na ufuatiliaji wa kila wakati. Watu wanatafuta mitaji kwa nguvu sana.

Kwa sasa kila kijiji Mbozi kwa mwaka huu kuna wataalamu. Mimi nimeanza kazi mwaka

1987 kwa hivyo nina uzoefu wa miaka mingi na nilianzia hapa hapa Mbozi. Ila upo

umuhimu wa kupima maeneo pia kwa sababu baadhi ya wakulima wanadai kuwa na hekali

kadhaa lakini pengine ni pungufu ya hapo. Mtu analalamika kupata mazao machache kwa

heka tano kumbe ni heka nne au tatu.

TANGANYIKA FARMERS ASSOCIATION (TFA)_MARTIN CHADULAGA

TFA ILIANZISHWA MWAKA 1953. Uchakachuaji wa pembejeo upo kwenye: madawa,

mbegu na mbolea pia. Tunaposema kuchakachua ni kwamba, dawa ime-expire mwaka 2014

kwa mfano, wanaweka sticker au wanagonga mihuli isiyo halali kwamba hii dawa inaexpire

2016 wakati inaexpire 2014. Sasa mteja anayeuziwa ile dawa akijua ile dawa iko uptodate

kumbe ilisha-expire miaka miwili iliyopita. Huo ndio tunaweza sema ni uchakachuaji kwa

upande wa madawa.

Kuhusu mbegu watu wanarepack. Wanapack upya mbegu. Kwa mfanno tuseme mbegu

imekuja inayotakiwa idumu kwa miaka miwili. Mtu anatoa mbegu kwenye mifuko (package)

ya awali na kuweka kwenye package mipya zingine ambazo zinaonekana ziko mpya

(anaziongezea uhai) ila ndani zinakuwa zilishaisha muda wake. Mkulima anakuja kununua

na kuzipanda, kisha anaanza kulalamika kuwa hazioti, kumbe hajui kuwa zilikuwa zimeisha-

expire.

Mbolea: Changamoto kubwa ya mbolea ni pale mbolea wanapoanza kuzipima. Mbolea

inakuja kwenye kilo hamsini kwa mfano, kisha wanazifungua na kuanza kuzipima kwenye

33

kilo tano tano kwa mfano. Wanapopima mbolea lazima inaharibika haraka. Kwahiyo

tunapendekeza kuwa usiwepo utaratibu wa kupima. Itoke inakotoka ikiwa tayari kwenye

mifuko ya kilo tofautitofauti. Tatizo lipo ila haliko kubwa sana. Ni baadhi ya

wafanyabiahsara ambao si waaminifu wanaofanya huo uchakachuaji, wakubwa kwa wadogo.

Wafanyabiashara ambao si waaminifu (culprits) wanaweza kugundulika kwa mkulima

mwenyewe kulinganisha.

Wanachukuwa aina moja ya mbegu kutoka kwa mfano TFA na kutoka kwa muuzaji

mwingine na kupanda sehemu mbili tofauti. Mkulima mwenyewe anangundua kuwa mbegu

ileile ya mwaka uleule inaota tofauti ndani ya shamba lilelile. Baada ya hapo anakuja

kulalamika kwetu sisi hapa. Kama alikuwa na receipt inakuwa rahisi kufuatilia na kulalamika

kwa maafisa kilimo halmashauri. Hatua zinazofuata baada ya hapo sijawahi sikia/sijui.

Dilution ya madawa ipo pia. Mfanyabiashara anaweza akachukuwa kwenye vikopo

vidogovidogo kwa kuchanganya yenye nguvu na dawa nyingine isiyokuwa na nguvu ili apete

faida kwa kuuza kwa bei yenye nguvu zaidi.

Uchakachuaji wa mbolea unatokana na kupima japokuwa hairuhusiwi kupima. Mbolea

inayochakachuliwa kuliko nyingine ni za kupandia km DAP na TSP. Hizi zikichanganywa

kwa mfano na mijingu hazibadiliki sana na wanasema hii mbolea ni DAP kwa mfano. Sisi

kwama TFA mbozi tunajitahidi kutoa elimu wanaonunua pembejeo wachukuwe taadhari.

TFA tumefanya training nyingi sana kuhusiana na pembejeo hivyo inakuwa rahisi

kumuelimisha mkulima. Tunashirikian pia na mabwana shamba. Maafisa kilimo wanaweza

kutushirikisha sisi kama wafanya biashara katika kutoa elimu labda maramoja kwa mwezi ili

tupate elimu kwa pamoja. Ila haifanyiki mara kwa mara, hakuna utaratibu rasmi.

Kuondokana na tatizo hili serikali ingetoa mwongozo kuhusu nani asambaze pembejeo.

Seerikali ingeweza kuangalia ni nani ahusike na usambazaji wa pembejeo. Kama ni ushirika

basi wao ndio wawe suppliers wa mbembejeo. Soko hulia ni zuri ila lina changamoto zake.

Wakulima wanaohoji kuhusu uhalali wa data, expiry date, kama imepitishwa na TPRA, nk ni

wachache. Walio wengi tunawaeleza kuhusu ubora na matumizi ya dawa bila wao kuhoji,

baada ya kusikiliza maelezo ndio wakulima wanafanya maamuzi.

DAVID MWALUKASA – MKULIMA NA MFUGAJI

Kiwanda kidogo cha kusindika maziwa cha wafugaji wa mbozi kipo katika mikakati ya

maandalizi ya kiwanda hiki. Kilikuwa initiated na wafugaji kwa lengo cha kuanzisha

kiwanda chao. Kila mfugaji atakaye kuwa mwanachama atakuwa na hisa. Kipato ni kidogo,

tungeshaanza processing kiaka miwili iliyopita ila hatujapata kifaa - boiler ya kutumia kuni

au makaa ya mawe/mkaa wa kawaida/gesi. Boiler iliyopo inatumia umeme mkubwa sana. Na

michango inapungua kutoka kwa wafugaji. Tukipata pesa tutaanza kuprocess hapahapa

Mbozi.

Niseme hivi kwamba pamoja na kwamba mie nilikuwa kwenye mashirika ya umma, pengine

kwa sababu tulilelewa na wakoloni, tulikuwa waaaminifu. Tulikuwa tunawiwa kuwa

tulikuwa na deni kwa taifa au serikali na tulifanya kazi kwa uwaminifu kuonesha kuwa

serikali haikufanya makosa kuwapa nafasi ile. Kwa sasa kila mmoja anatafuta kujinufaisha

wenyewe na wenye sifa ni wale wanaonyakuwa kwamba fulani ni mwanaume.

34

Kwa sasa tunasema vifaa ni fake ila hatujaprove scientifically kwamba ni fake. Lakini ni nani

anatufuatilia sisi kama walaji kutuuliza je hizo bidhaa mnazopata zinakidhi malengo yenu?

Hakuna. Hivyo tunabaki tu kusema ni fake. Tunabaki kusema tu ni fake kwa kuwa hatupati

matarajio yetu. Zamani tulikuwa tunafikia lengo na kuvuka kwa kuwa tulikuwa tunapata

matarajio yetu. Kwa hapa Mbozi inakadiriwa kuwa kwa hekali moja mkulima anaweza pata

gunia kumi na tano zikizidi sana kumi na sita. Mimi nilipoanza shughuli za kilimo hapa

Mbezi nilichukuwa eneo na kufuata masharti yote ya kilimo na kuweka pembejeo

zilizohitajika, nilipata 38 bags per acre, kila mmoja akabaki anashangaa na kusema sasa huyu

mnyakyusa sasa ni mchawi. Ila kwa kuwa nilipata the right inputs, the right place and

probably the right person. Tangia siku hizo sijapata tena uzalishaji wa namna hiyo. Swala

kubwa ni mbolea. Sisi kama wafugaji kwa mtandao wangu sasa tulipofanya kujadiliana

vikundi vyote kwamba tatizo letu nini. Ilionekana kuwa brids zetu za ngombe ni poor.

Tuliazimia kupata brids nzuri kutoka nje ili kucross-brid na kupata brid nzuri.

Tukawasomesha vijana wetu Tengeru Arusha. Walienda na kujifunza. Ili kupata matokeo

mazuri tulianzimia kila mfugaji awe na malisho mazuri. Tukaendelea kuwahimiza wafugaji

waongeze maeneo ya malisho. Seeds hatukuwa na wasiwasi maana tunapata hapahapa

Mbozi. Tulitarajia maziwa yawe mengi ndio tukaja na wazo la kujenga kiwanda.

Kumlisha ng’ombe majani yenyewe bado hujamaliza tatizo. Tatizo likaja kuwa madini.

Madini ni tatizo kwanza planning yetu imekuwa mbovu, mbali ya kuwa madini yanaweza

kuwa fake. Lakini sasa unanua madini yametengenezwa India, yametengenezwa Sri-Lanka,

yametengenezwa Kenya. You are not using the right inputs. Nani kafanya research kwenye

maeneo yetu haya ya nyanda za juu kusini kuona kwamba kweli boold test Nyanda za juu

kusini wanamahitaji haya na haya. Serikali inatuangalia tu imetunyamazia.

Ungekuwepo mpango wa kufanya research na kubainisha kuwa nyanda za juu kusini

wanahitaji madini ya namna hii ambayo yana-contents hizi na hizi na hizi kwa kiasi hiki.

Wakisha fanya hivyo sasa wanamtafuta mtu ambaye atatengeneza hayo madini. Tunao

wasomi kwenye vyuo vyetu kwanini asichukuliwe hata mmoja akafanya kazi hii ya utafiti na

atafutwe mtu wa kutengeneza madini ambayo yanafit mkoa huo. Sasa nakwenda kununua

madini Kenya, India, nk hayo ni makosa makuwa kwa sasa=babu yametengenezwa kwa ajili

ya maeneo husika. Hatujawajibisha wasomi wetu nandio maana watu wanaacha taaluma zao

wanakwenda kwenye siasa because inpolitics they are well paid.

Kuna madini fulani yalikuwa yanatoka Kenya, ungemlisha ngombe leo, kesho unaona

mabadiliko katika upatikanaji wa maziwa. Yatakapo kwisha hayo madini utanotice change.

Mfugaji anakwambia ee bwana eee kile kitu kinahitajika. Baadae watu wakagundua kuwa

hata umlishe ng’ombe packet nzima hakuna mabadiliko, basi tukagundua madukani

kumeharibika. Yakaja madini mengine nayo phosphorous ya kutosha nakadhalika, watu

wakayatumia tumia baadae nayo yakaharibikiwa. Baadae tukapata madini fulani Vitalake

kutoka Dar es Salaam wafugaji wakayakubali. Hizo ni local research zetu ndogo. Ila kwa

sasa hamna.

Mfanya biashara anataka kumaximaze profit, alipoweka gram 100, kesho ataweka 99 na

baadae 80. Ataendelea kupunguza ilimradi apate profit. Waindi ndio maana wanaingia

kwenye biashara isiyofuatiliwa fuatiliwa. Viwanda vingi vya namna hiyo vimeshikiliwa na

waindi. Watu hawajali jaamii kuwa watakuwa wanapata hasara. Serikali yetu lazima iweke

smart control lazima na ufuatiliaji. Ni juu ya serikali kufuatilia km vitu vinaenda km vilivyo

35

km watu wanapata vitu walivyotarajia. Mwingereza kwa mfano analinda heshima yake.,Na

sisi tumejichanganya na waindi. Kwahiyo research inahitajika na TBS lazima ifuatilie.

PETRO NDUNDU – AFISA KILIMOMO MAZAO

Pick ya uchakuaji ilikuwa ni 2012/13. Ilianza kushuka kwa sababu ya ambush. Tulianza

kupita kweye maduka ya hao wanaoitwa mawakala wa pembejeo bila taarifa na tulikuwa

tunaambatana na polisi ambaye amevaa kiraia. Kwahiyo tungekukuta na madudu

tunakukamata palepale. Kuna watu walikuwa wanauza chumvi na wengine mchanga. Hivi

vyote vilikuwa vikichanganywa na mbolea nusu kwa nusu. Sina evidence kama kuna kesi

ambayo ilikuwa prosecuted ila tuna insepector wa pembejeo ila leo hayupo angekuwa na

taarifa zaidi.

Mbolea ilikuwa ikichakachuliwa kwa kuweka mchanga halafu juu zinawekwa kama kilo

mbili za mbolea alafu wanauza. Tatizo la wakulima wetu walikuwa wanabeba bila hata

receipt wakurudi pale wanawaruka. Tumeanza kuwaelimisha kwahiyo kwa sasa wameanza

kuelewa. Kwa mbolea inakuwa ngumu kuhakiki kwa ndani kwa sababu hatushauri ile

mbolea kuifungua. Mbolea nyingine ni agroscopic zinaabsorb moisture. Ila wapo

wafanyabiashara wanaofungua mbolea hizo na kuuza robo, nusu, nk. Na juani wanaweka

japokuwa tunawaelimisha wasiweke.

Mbegu ndio balaa zaidi.Zile mbegu wanachokifanya wanachukuwa mahindi ya kienyeji

wananunua rangi wanadust. Hata ukiwa mtaalamu usipokuwa makini unajua ni original,

utagundua ni fake baada ya kupanda. Yatatoka mahindi meusi mengine meupe, nk. Wengine

wanapata packets genuine kutoka kwenye source, wanaleakisha. Kuna madudu mengi sana

watu wanafanya. Wakulima wengine wametumia mbegu za kisasa na wanaelewa umuhimu

wake. Kama kweli ni alisia na mtu anafuata masharti zinazaa vizuri.

Madawa hayana cases nyingi, sio sana. Madawa yanachakachuliwa kwa mfano unanunua

gramaxon unapiga si inabidi inaua haiuwi. Na wanachakachua kwa sababu gani? Kwanini

uifungue uiuze kidogokidogo? Sawa inawezekana mkulima mwenyewe ndio mwanzilishi

kwamba bwana mimi sina pesa ya kununu akiasi iki. Mfanya biashara ukishamruhusu

afungue basi huo ndio mwanya wenyewe.

Kuna wakulima pia wananunua mbegu genuine wanapanda hazioti 100%. Sasa pale

sikuelewa tatizo lilikuwa ni nini. Nadhani kule kwa wazalishaji ndio chanzo chenyewe kule

wanakuuzia mbegu fake. Tatizo ni kuwa mkulima ni kuwa mkulima akishagundua hilo

hanunui tena hizo mbegu.

Tunagundua kama upo uchakachuaji baada ya mkulima kutusensitise/akilalamika kwetu

hapo ndio tunajua kuwa upo uchakachuaji. Kwa sababu mkulima anaweza kutuchukuwa

hapa na kutupeleka shambani kwake tukashuhudia kweli shamba lake limeathirika. Kuthibiti

ni ngumu kabla ya matokeo.

Effect kwa mwaka tatizo lilipokuwa kwenye pick 2013 ilikuwa dogo si kubwa. Mbozi watu

wanazalisha mahindi si mchezo. Kwahiyo ukichakachua kwa kiasi ambacho kitaleta mpact

kubwa linakuwa janga la kiotaifa maana hapa kuna ghala la taifa. Ni cases ambazo zipo

36

tunajitahidi kuzithibiti. Kwa hiyo ni wakala wachache tu na maduka si mengi. Kuna watu

ambao hawafanyi biashara halali hata siku moja kwa sababu walishazoea.

Halmashauri idara ya kilimo kuna vikao vinafanyika na wawakilishi wa wakulima. Kwa

mfano mwaka jana mkuu wa wilaya alifanya kikao na hao wawakilishi na hilo swala la

pembejeo lilizungumziwa sana. Na mabwana shamba wetu uwa wanafanya mikutano na

wakulima kila mwezi kwamba ni lazima wawahimize wakulima kwamba ni wapi pa kununu

pembejeo. Kwa sababu hapa tatizo ni wapi unaponunua. Ila wafanyabiashara wengine ni

waaminifu kabisa. Kuna pia wizara ya kilimo na baadhi ya mashirika yanayoshirikian nasi.

Kwa mfano kupitia kwenye maeneo yote ambayo yako ndani ya BRN kuna vijiji viliingizwa

kwenye mradi wa BRN na vinajengewa maghala. Kwahiy hao watu wa wizarani walipokuja

tulipita kwenye maghala hayo, yalikuwa 26 ila kwa sasahivi wameongezea mengine 20 .

Tulipokuwa tunapita walikuwa wanatoa seminar fupi katika maghala hayohayo. NGOs

wanafanya ila si kwa wingi. Wanfanya seminar zao bila kutualika hivyo hatujua wanakuwa

wanaongelea nini. Watu wawizarani walipokuja waliongea na wakulima na wao wakataja

matatizo waliyonayo kama vile kukosa soko/wateja.

Kununua pembejeo kupitia ushirka ingekuwa njia sahihi ya kutatua tatizo ila viongozi

unatuangusha. Kwa mfano hapa Mbozi mwaka jana ilitokea kesi ambayo serikali ilinunua

mazao kwa bei nzuri (kilo TSH 500) wakati mtaani ilikuwa TSH 250, kilichotekea walewale

viongozi waliwazunguka wakulima wakachukuwa ile pesa wakatoweka. Ilipaswa watu

wanunue pembejeo kama ushirika tusingekuwa na tatizo la uongozi, kuforge ni ngumu sana.

Cha kufanya ili tatizo liishe ni kuendelea kuwaelimisha wananchi. Kwa mfano NGOs

zinazoingia kwa mfano stellasta (kuna NGO moja hapa inatangaza madawa ya kuulia

magugu) waliwaalika wote wafanya biashara na wakulima na kuwapa seminar ndogondogo.

Hizi zinasaidia kwa sababu kwa sasa wakulima wamekuwa wajanja wameshagundua tatizo

lilipo. Midaalo ya wakuhusisha wadau wote pengine ingeweza pengine kusaidia pia kwa

sababu kila mtu anamlaumu mwenzie.

Wahusika hasa na uchakachuaji ni wafanya biashara wadogowadogo. Wafanya biashara

wakudumu na waliojijengea jina hawawezi kufanya vitu kama hivo ni wafanyabiashara

wavamizi tu wenye kutafuta fursa na pesa ya haraka. Kwa mfano, wakati wa voucher watu

waliokuwa wakiuza mitumba wakaacha wakaamia kwenye pembejeo.

HAJI HAMIS IBRAHIM – AFISA TARAFA VWAWA

Ki ukweli uchakachuaji wa pembejeo upo na tena upo kwa kiasi kikubwa hasa tukizingastia

mwaka jana ulikuwepo uchakachuaji katika mahindi tofauti na mwaka juzi. Kitu kilicho

sababisha uchakachuaji uwe mkubwa mwaka jana ni ukosefu wa pembejeo za luzuku. Sasa

na wafanya biashara wanaitumia fursa ile. Mahitaji yanapokuwa makubwa ndio

wanapotengeneza fursa ya kuchakachua hizo pembejeo. Kwa sababu matarajio ilikuwa

wakuliwa wapewe pembejeo. Kwa kuzingatia ule walaka wa serikali kwamba wakulima

walipe kwanza asilimia 20 na serikali pia ilipe asilimia 20 alafu baadae mkulima amalizie

asimilia 60. Kwa kiasi kikubwa kwa wilaya yetu haikufanikiwa hata kidogo. Hiyo

ilisababisha uchakachuaji mkubwa kwa sababu sasa wakulima badala ya kupata ile luzuku

unajua iratibiwa na serikali inakuwa inatoka sehemu moja ambayo inaeleweka. Pia na zile

taasisi au viwanda vinavyozalisha zinakuwa ubora wake wameisha udhibitisha.

37

Sasa inafika sehemu mkulima anatafuta sehemu tofauti, hapo ndipo shida inapotokea.

Wakulima wetu pia si wakubwa sana na kipato chao si kikubwa sana anahitaji mbolea ya bei

nafuu na hapo shida inapokuja. Wanachokifanya ni kulinganisha bei na kuchagua pembejeo

za bei nafuu. Ukosefu wa pembejeo za luzuku ndio ulisababisha mwaka jana kuwepo na

pembejeo ambazo ni fake. Mbolea ndio ilikuwa imechakachuliwa kwa wingi kwa sababu

huku watu wanapanda kwa kutumia mbegu lakini watu wengi wanaotumia zile mbegu za

viwandani (mbegu bora). Wanachoangalia waweze pata mbolea ya kupandia na kukuzia,

kwahiyo mbolea ndio shida kubwa huku na ndio yenye tatizo.

Tofauti ya bei kati ya mbolea ya luzuku na ile ya mitaani inakuwa ni kubwa kwa sababu

kwenye luzuku serikali inakuwa imeshatia 20 percent nakupunguza mzigo kwa mkulima.

Mahitaji yanapokuwa makubwa ndipo wafanyabiashara wanapoitumia hiyo kama fursa.

Tatizo ni kuwa baadhi ya mabwana shamba kwa sababu ya kukaa maeneo fulani kwa muda

mrefu nao wanajikuta wameshakuwa wakulima. Nao pia wanakumbana na matatizo ya

uchakachuaji na kupata hasara katika ushalishaji wao. Unapomwambia mkulima kwanini

usimtumie bwana shamba, wanadai yeye mwenyewe mbona amelima lakini amekosa.

Kukosa haimaanishi kuwa bwanashamba hana uelewa kuhusu ipo ni mbolea bora

wanshindwa sasa kuwatumia kupata ushauri wanapokwenda kununua mbolea.

Hata baada ya kuinunua ile mbolea hawataki kwenda kwa yule afisa kilimo kwa ushari

kuhusu jinsi ya kuitumia. Bahati mbaya mwaka jana wakulima waliunguza kahawa kabisa

kwa kupulizia dawa kwa sababu ya kutowatumia maafisa kilimo. Shida ni kwamba ukosefu

wa luzuku unawafanya wakulima watafute mbolea sehemu yoyote bila kujali ubora na

wanaangalia zaidi bei.

Mwaka jana tulikuwa na vitu vitatu ambavyo vilipunguza uzalishaji (output). Kukosa

pembejeo ilikuwa sababu ya kwanza ya pili pepmbejeo fake ya tatu ni bei ya mahindi

waliyouzia mwakaq juzi ilipunguza uzalishajia. Maana watu walijikuta wanauza debe zima

kwa elfu tatu. Sasa kwanini mtu anedele kulima mahindi wakati hayana faida! Kwahiyo

mwaka jana uzalishaji wa mahindi ulipungua kwa sababu huko ndiko wanakotumia

pembejeo kwa wingi. Wengi walibaki na mahindi ya mwaka juzi. Uzalishaji waweza kuwa

ulipungua kwa asilimia 20 kwa maana wengi hawakulima.

Watu wanategemea kahawa kama zao la biashara, wanategemea mahindi kama zao la

chakula na biashara wanategemea pia viazi. Lakini kitu kingine kinachowasaidia zaidi ni

maharage. Sas anapoona bei ya mahindi imeshika hawalimi ya ziada wanalima kwa ajili ya

matumizi ya chakula tu. Wanaweza kulima heka moja kandokando ya mito na aongezei tena.

Uchakachuaji wa pembejeo uko kwenye network kwa sababu hata pesa za luzuku zikija nazo

zinachakachuliwa. Zinapokuwa pembejeo za serikali na kwa kiasi ambacho hakijatimia

maanake kuna tatizo. Na hapa si mfanya biashara kwanza mana kuna mtumishi kwanza ndiye

anayefanya jambo hilo. Kuna watumishi ambao si waadilifu hawafikishi stahiki za wakulima.

Kuna luzuku ziligundulika kwenda pembeni maana takwimu zilionekana kuwa kubwa kuliko

kiasi walichopata wakulima. Mawakala wa makumpuni wanasumbua pia. Makampuni

yakishawatambulisha mawakala sisi tunawaamini. Wakienda kuchukuwa mzigo huwezi jua

kama anachukuwa mahali husika au anachukuwa kutoka sehemu nyingine. Kumbuka yule ni

mfanya biashara anatafuta faida zaidi na ili tunaweza kuligundua kupitia upambanishaji wa

mbolea ya sasa na ile ya miaka iliyotangulia. Unakuta mbolea ya mwaka jana kwa mfano

38

ubora wake unakuwa wa juu zaidi. Matokeo yake wakulima wamekuwa watu wa

kubadirishabadirisha sana mbolea. Kwakuwa haziwapi matokeo wanayokuwa

wanayategemea.

Tulikuwa na mpango mwaka jana watu wote wanaouza mbolea kupitia mawakala kwa maana

lazima system hii ya kuuza mbolea itambulike ofisini kwa maana kwenye halmashauri na

kwenye ofisi ya mkuu wa wilaya. Tatizo lilikuja kuwa mpango wa serikali ulifail. Ulipofail

ule ilikuwa ngumu kumweleza mkulima chochote. Kwahiyo mwaka jana kwa bahati mbaya

tulikumbwa na mambo mawili kwa mkupuo: cha kwanza ilikuwa NFRA kuchelewa kulipa

mahindi ya wakulima cha pili mbolea ya luzuku haikuja. Kwahiyo unaposimama kama

serikali kuwaambia wakulima wanakuwa hawakuelewi. Kwanza wameuza mahindi yao

NFRA hawakulipwa kwahiyo huna chochote cha kuwaambia. Pili luzuku ya serikali kwenye

mbolea haipo wamekosa kabisa kwahiyo unashindwa kuwacontroll watu hawa. Wakulima

wakishakosa imani na taasisi kufuatia kutofanyika au kuchelewa kwa yale uliyowaambia

wanakuwa hawakusikilizi au hawakuamini kabisa.

Taratibu kuhusu kukamatwa kwa wachakachuaji ulikuwa uanzie kwa wakulima kwa sababu

ni mkulima ndiye mtu wa kwanza kabisa kutambua kama mbolea inafaa. Tushafanya vikao

tukawaamashisha kuripoti kuhusu mbolea wanazokuta zinamatatizo. Afisa kilimo aje

atwambie tatizo hilo. Wakulima kutoa ushirikiano, wapi alinunua inakuwa ni mtihani kwa

sababu hizo mbolea hawafuati mbali. Unakuta kila kijiji kuna kibanda cha mawakala na

maisha ya wakulima wa huku inakuwa ngumu kutoa ushaidi. Unamwambia uje na sample

unakuta hana. Wanaishi kindugu hivyo wanaogopa kuharibiana. Na wengine wanakuwa

hawakununua kwa keshi wakuwa wanachukuwa pembejeo kwa maelewano kwa mikataba

yao wenyewe. Mkulima anakuwa hana pesa ya kulipia mbolea hapo kwa papo. Kuna mtindo

mwingine huku unaitwa kuchumbia. Kwa maana baada ya mtu kukupa mbolea anasubiria

uvune umpe debe kadhaa labda za mahindi na sio cash. Serikali tumeshaipiga marufuku

lakini tumeshindwa maana wanifanya kwa siri. Inagundulika tu wakishakorofishana.

Halmashauri ya Mbozi wanao utaratibu mzuri. Wanayotabia ya kukutana kila mwezi,

maafisa kilimo wote, wakielekezana majukumu wakitafuta nani anauza mbolea fake pamoja

na kujadili taratibu nyingine za kumsaidia mkulima. Lakini shida inakuja kuwa hawa ni

watumishi, unakutana nao unaongea nao lakini wakirudi makazini wanakuwa hawana

nidhamu katika kazi yao kama mtu unavyokuwa ukitarajia. Kama hawashirikishwi zaidi

katika shughuli za kilimo hawezi kuwa na effect. Wale wanaotumika zaidi ni wale wa

mifugo kwa sababu ya magonjwa yaliyo wazi kwa mifugo. Hawa wa kwenye mazao

matumizi yao si makubwa sana.

Serikali peke yake haiwezi tatua tatizo hili. Taasisi nyingine inaboidi zitoe ushirikiano wao.

Lakini taasisi ya muhimu zaidi ni wakulima wenyewe. Wao wakitoa ushirikiano tunaweze

tukafanikiwa. Hapa kunakikao kimoja tu cha pembejeo kinachokutanisha wadau wa kilimo,

hakuna sehemu nyingine tunazokuatna nazo. Hata asasi za kiraia zinazojihusisha na kilimo ni

chache sana. Hicho ni kitu kinachokosekana, Wengine wanashughulikia vitu kama HIV.

Bahati mbaya asasi hizi ni binafsi kama hazipo ni ngumu kwa serikali kuzianzisha na hivo ni

ngumu kupata link kati ya wakulima, serikali na asasi hizo.

Moyo wa kujitolea haupo kama zamani. Watu wanajitolea lakini katika kufanya hivyo

wanapotoa ripoti ya kujitolea kwao unakuta kuna pesa imetumika. Hicho ndicho

kinachopunguza imani huyu bwana anatudanganya huyu anadai anajitolea lakini kuna kitu

39

atadai (pesa). Luzuku inatolewa kwa heka moja kwa kila mtu hata kama una hekali kumi.

Tatizo lingine ni kwamba ulitoka walaka wa kutaka wakulima wanaohitaji luzuku

watambiliwe. Voucher zilikuwa kabla ya utambuzi huo kufanyika. Sasa ugawaji wake

ulikuwa wa shida. Lawama zikaenda kwa serikali.

Ili kupunguza ili tatizo lazima tuwe na mfumo wa kudumu wa voucher (kuhusu hizi

pembejeo za luzuku). Likishaeleweka hilo inakuwa ni rahisi kuzuia. La pili wakulima

wapewe elimu waelewe umuhimu wa maafisa kilimo ambao wako kwenye vile vijiji. Pia

uadilifu wa hawa wataalaam. Kwahiyo mfumo ukikaa vizuri, wataalamu wakawa waadilifu

na wakulima wakawategemea wataalamu hapo tunaweza tukaenda vizuri. Ila kitu kingine

muhimu cha kuongelea ni kwamba wakulima wanaonekana ni wengi na wizara ya kilimo

inakuwa haiwezi kutosheleza mahitaji ya watu. Na voucher zinazokuja zinakuwa ni chache

ukilinganisha na mahitaji ya wakulima. Kwa maana hiyo tunakuwa tunawasukuma wakulima

wazalishe mazao ya chakula kwa sababu hekali moja haiwezi kuwa kwa ajili ya biashara .

Wakizalisha mazao ya chakula sasa hao wanaozalisha mazao ya biashara luzuku wataipata

wapi.

Wizara inapaswa kuwaangalia wote kwa ujumla wao. Ikifanya hivyo inakuwa ni ngumu

wakulima kwenda sehemu nyingine. Tatizo ni uadilifu ambao unatokea kwenye nafsi ya mtu.

Kuongeza uadilifu lazima tuwe na uwazi maana bila hivyo ni ngumu kuongeza uadilifu wa

mtu ambao uko ndani ya nafsi yake. Uwazi utamfanya mtu awe mwoga kwa sababu mambo

yako wazi. Lakini pia uadilifu unaanzia juu. Viongozi wakiwa kioo (ethical) inakuwa ngumu

kwa watu wa chini kutokuwa waadilifu wataogopa.

JULIUS MWAMPASHE – MKULIMA

Ni volunteer kwenye mradi mmoja wa Pamoja Tuwalee unasaidia watoto wanaoishi katika

mazingira hatarishi. Ni mkazi wa kijiji cha Isangu na ni mkulima. Mwampashi analima

maharage, mahindi na karanga. Alikuwa na kahawa pia ila hakuendeleza miche kwahiyo

akawa ameiua baadhi ya miche kwahiyo kahawa anayolima ni kidogo sana. Aliiua kahawa

baada ya mimea hiyo kushambuliwa na magonjwa. Madawa yapo lakini hayasaidii,

unapulizia lakini unakuta hakuna mabadiliko utafikiri haukupiga dawa. Dawa inakuwa

haifanyi kazi utafikiri ime-expire. Unaweza kukuta kwenye label yake imeandikwa expiry

date ni 2017 na unaitumia 2015 lakini haifanyi kazi. Kitu kinachoonekana ni kuwa

wanabadilisha package uenda muda wake unakuwa umeisha basi bikaamua kuachana na

kahawa na kuendelea na kilimo cha kawaida.

Sasa na huku kwenye kilimo cha mahindi kumeingia uchakachuaji balaa. Afadhali ya

madawa kuliko upande wa mbegu, hasa mbegu za mahindi zimekuwa ni tatizo kubwa sana.

Kitu ambacho wameishakifanya katika mbegu za mahindi ni kuwa mbegu tulizokuwa

tukitumia awali hazikuwa na matatizo zilikuwa nzuri sana hazikuwa na matatizo yoyote.

Kwa mfano ilikuwepo mbegu ya Kenya 614 alafu ilikuwepo pia mbegu ya hybride ya Uyole

615. Ilikuwepo pia na pannar 627 na Sidco 617. Mbegu zote hizo tulizitumia zilikuwa nzuri

sana.

Tatizo hasa lilianza mwaka juzi, ukinunua hizi mbegu za pannar hazioti. Yaani inaweza

ikaota mbegu moja hapa moja pale, unahesabu mashimo kwenye shamba ambako mbegu

hazijaota. Alafu ukifukuwa kwenye mashimo ambako mbegu hazijaota unakuta zile mbegu

zimo alafu ukizishika unakuta imeoza, ukiishika inapukutika. Hii inamaana ile mbegu

40

haikuwa na uhai. Kwahiyo ikabidi tuanze utafiti wa kuotesha kwanza. Yaani nichukuwe

mfuko wa mbegu nilizonua au nichukuwe mbegu hata mbili tatu nipande alafu nimwagilie

nione kama zinaota bila hivyo unaweza peleka mbegu shambani alafu ukashangaa kuona

shamba zima mbegu hazioti.

Tatizo lilianza na mbegu za pannar. Ile mbegu inaweza ikaota ukaitunza vizuri ukaweka

mbolea ya kukuzia ilakini ile mbegu ikishaanza kutoa vinywelenywele, imeanza kubeba sasa

inaweka massacres kupita kiasi yaani unaishiwa hamu. Yaani vipandikizi kwenye muhindi

mwenyewe vinakuwa vingi. Yaani unaweza ukatoa vipandikizi asubuhi alafu ukarudi tena

baadae ukakuta vimeota tena. Ukiacha siku moja bila kuingia shambani utakuta kule ndani

hakuna kinachoendelea. Baada ya hapo watu tulilalamika sana kwa watu wanaoleta mbegu.,

Mwaka uliofuata (mwaka jana) wakasema ile mbegu wameiboresha na mbegu nyingine pia

zimeboreshwa. Nane nane mwaka jana nilinunua mbegu ya sidco 627 kwa ajili ya kupanda

kandokando ya mto (kwenye vinyungu) alafu nikanunua Uyole 615 ya zamani si hii ambayo

wameleta sahizi ya 6603 nikaenda mtoni nikapanda. Baada ya kupanda ile mbegu ya zamani

sikuwa na hamu ya kununua ile mbegu. Ni mbegu ya Uyole tu ambayo sikukuta ina matatizo

katika upandaji.

Ile mbegu ya Sidco ikaonesha matatizo yaleyale ya Pannar. Yaani inaotesha massacres

shamba zima. Na unakuta shamba ni kubwa na kutoa massacres shamba zima ni ngumu.

Kwahiyo unakuta ule muhindi ambao uliuruka unakuta tayari hauna muhindi. Ndio hizo

mbegu za Sidco na Pannar ikaonesha kabisa zile mbegu hazina ubora kabisa. Niaona kuwa

ngoja tujaribishe na mbegu nyingine. Mimi nilineda Isongele-Ireje nikanunua sidco ileile 627

ya Malawi kilo kumi ambayo pia iko Tanzania. Nikaja nikapanda. Ile mbegu ilikuwa nzuri

kupita kiasi, sikupata matatizo yoyote. Nilikuwa nilikuwa nimepanda vizuri kwa kufuata

vipimo vilevile katika shamba lilelile sikukuta kimelea hata kimoja. Ikaonesha mbegu ya

Malawi ya Sidco ikanekana ni nzuri. Eneo lingine nilikuwa nimepanda eneo la Msiha

nilikuwa nimekodi shamba kule nilipanda pannar ya Zambia. Ile pannar niloiyopanda eneo

lile nilikwenda kuinunua pia Tunduma, hakuonesha saccres hata moja. Kwahiyo ikaonekana

wazi kuwa ni mbegu za Tanzania tu zinazochakachuliwa lakini si begu kutoka nchi jirani.

Tupo Tanzania wakasema wameboresha mbegu za Uyole, kwamba ile Uyole ya 615

wameiboreshea kwenye Uyole 6603. Sasa hii mbegu ya Uyole 6603 baada ya kusema

imeboresha nikainunua na kuipanda.Mazao yake tumevuna mwezi wa sita mwaka huu

(2015). Yaani hakuna tofauti ya ile pannar 627- ni massacres tupu.

Wakulima kinachotukatisha tamaa na kinachotuangusha zaidi ni ile mbegu kuweka

mapandikizi. Yaani mtu unapalilia na kuondoa massacres inakatisha tamaa. Unapokwenda

kununua mbegu sehemu nyingine ina maana unadadisi wao wanafanya vipi. Tofauti na

Tanzania viwanda vya Malawi na Zambia, vinapoandaa mbegu bila kutumia ujanja wa aina

yoyote. Wanakuwa makini sana katika kuandaa mbegu. Kwakweli mbegu zao ni nzuri hata

kama zimekaa miaka miwili. Za kwetu zinakaa mwaka mmoja lakini zinakuwa na matatizo

za kwao hata ukikuta muda wake umeisha unapanda na zinaota.

Sisi kwa sababu tunanunua mbegu kutoka kwenye maduka na zinakuwa na nembo ya shirika

au kiwanda kichoandaa, tunajua basi uchakachuaji unafanyika kwenye viwanda na sio

kwenye maduka. Unakuta mbegu imepakiwa mwenye mifuko na mifuko hiyo ina nembo zao

na namba za simu na kila kitu wameshakielekeza pale. Kwa maana hiyo huwezi kufikiri

kwamba mchakachuaji ni mwenye duka. Kuna mbegu moja haina muda sana inaitwa kitale

na inazalishwa Arusha. Awali tulijua ile mbegu ni ya kutoka Kenya ambayo tulishaizoea

41

haina matatizo yoyote. Yaani mbegu inayotoka Kenya 614 haina matatizo yoyote, kwahiyo

tukawa tumezoea baada ya kusikia kwamba Arusha wamezalisha mbegu ina maana ya kitale

ambayo imetoka kwenye ile hybrid 614 inayotokea Kenya, tukajua moja kwa moja kwamba

ile mbegu basi wameiboresha zaidi. Yale mahindi yaliyotokea na hiyo mbegu ya Arusha

yalidumaa, mie niliyafyeka kabisa nikalima maharage heka mbili na nusu. Watu walilia na

kulalamika sana walio baahatika ni wachahce tu hiyo mwaka juzi. Mie nilivyeka nikalisha

ng’ombe. Ubora wa mbegu kwa nchi yetu ya Tanzania hata kama mbegu zinatengenezwa

vizuri kutoka kwenye mashirika au viwanda vinavyoandaa mbegu, inavyoonesha ni kuwa

hakuna ufuatiliaji na kuakiki vile vitu vinamadhara gani kwa wakulima. Ungekuwepo

ufuatiliaji haya matatizo wangeyakuta moja kwa moja kila mahali wanapopita.

Kuna tofauti pia ya mbegu pia. Ile mbegu iliyopakiwa ya kilo 2 ni shilingi elfu 12 hapa

Tanzania. Ukienda Isongole pale hiyo ni shilingi elfu saba mia tano, kwahiyo bei ni ndogo

zaidi ya hiyo mbegu inayotoka nje. Kwahiyo hakuna sababu kabisa ya kununu ambegu za

hapa Tanzania. Za nje ni nzuri na bei iko chini.

Kwenye mahindi kuna tatizo pia. Huu ni mwezi wa kumi, mimi nina mahindi yangu

(niliyovuna) nimeweka dawa mwezi wa saba. Niliweka kiwango kikubwa na kizuri sana. Ni

kwamba niliuza nikaambiwa kuwa CC 50 inatakiwa kwenye gunia tano za mahindi za debe

sita sita. Mimi nilikuwa naweka CC 70 kwenye gunia tano za debe sita sita. Nimenunua

kama nuzu lita kwahiyo ikawa imezidi idadi ya magunia 40 niliyokuwa nayo maana ile dawa

ilikuwa ni ya magunia 50. Nilizidisha kwa lengo la kusema ivute kidogo. Nimepaka

mwenyewe hiyo dawa kwenye mahindi yote kisha na kuyapack tena kwenye magunia.

Wanashauri kuwa ukiyashona magunia yanatunza joto sana kwahiyo mie nikayaacha wazi na

kuyapanga bila kuyafunga chumbani.

Hivi jana naingia ndani nikakuta mahindi yameshaanza kubunguliwa, yameishaingiliwa na

wadudu. Ina maana nikanunue dawa tena na kupaka tena mara ya pili. Wakati siku zote za

nyuma tulipokuwa tunaweka dawa kwenye mahindi mwezi wa saba ilikuwa inaenda mpaka

mwaka mwingine usingeweza sikia mdudu wa aina yoyote. Kwahiyo usalama kwenye

mbolea haupo, usalama kwenye mbegu haupo na usalama kwenye madawa haupo. Ukitaka

ufanikiwe zaidi ina maana ukinunua DAP basi ununue na Keni pia uende kuchanganya. Na

kupandie mahindi. Hata DAP hakuna kitu. Ikupandia DAP peke yake kama tulivyokuwa

tumezoea hupati mahindi. Wakati mwingine unatanguliza samadi na kisha kuweka mbolea

juu hapo ndipo mahindi yatatoka na nguvu za kutosha. Tofauti na hivyo huwezi pata kitu.

Mie najiuliza bila kupata majibu, mbolea zote za Malawi na Zambia zinatoka huku Tanzania.

Kwanini zile ziwe na ubora zaidi ya hizi za huku? Ina maana kuna sehemu hapa katikati zetu

zinachakachuliwa. Kwa upande wa serikali za mtaa tumewahi kulalamika sana kwa mtendaji

kuhusiana na ubovu wa pembejeo. Na mtendaje anadai atafikisha malalamiko wilayani ila

hatujawahi pata majibu kama hayo malalamiko yalifikishwa kule au kutolewa ufafanuzi.

Hatujawahi kupata watu wakutusaidia kutoka wilayani. Bahati mbaya makundi ya umoja

yako kwenye kahawa tu, hakuna umoja/vyama vya wakulima wa mahindi.

Kwa asimilia kubwa ya watu wa huku tunategemea kilimo. Kwahiyo tunalima ili tupate

mazao ya kutosha ili tuweze kuyatunza na kisha kuyauza baada ya bei kuongezeka ili kuweza

kufanya mambo mengine. Wakati mwingine unalazimika kuuza mazao mapema zaidi ili

kukwepa kuharibika kwa mazao hayo. Tunapata madhara kutokana na madawa kwa sababu

kuna wadudu ambao hawafi kutokan na madawa tunayotumia. Tunayapata madhara pia

42

kutokana na mbolea na mbegu pia. Hivi vitu vinaturudisha nyumba. Kwa mfano waweza

kuwa na mpango wa kuuza na kuongeza majengo, kusomesha watoto na kuongeza shughuli

za biashara, tunaishia kula tu. Kinachochangia kingine ni kuwa masoko ni ya msimu inabidi

kusubiria soko lichangamke. Ukiwa na shida inabidi uuze kwa bei ya hasara. Kiafya kuna

tatizo pia kwa sababu mtu ungekuwa unauza kwa bei nzuri ina maana unapata pesa ya

kujiunga na bima ya afya kwa mwaka mzima. Kwahiyo unakuta unauza mazao ili ukatibiwe

bila kujiunga na bima ya afya.

Ingekuwa inawezana serikali ingeunda mfumo wa ufuatiliaji wa pembejeo zote kila mahali

na wafanye hivyo kwa wakati muhafaka. Alafu kama sio uchakachuaji unafanyika mtaani ina

maana wazalishaji wajitahidi kuboresha pembejeo zao. Kwanini begu za kwetu zitofautiane

na zile zinazokwenda nchi nyingine kiubora wakati mbegu ni zile zile. Tatizo lilikwa kubwa

sana mwaka juzi na mwaka jana kuja mwaka huu.

MR. & MRS JOSEPH KABUJE – WAKULIMA (KIJIJI CHA ISANGU)

Bwana na Bi Kabuje ni wakulima wa mahindi, karanga, maharage, kahawa kidogo

(japokuwa tumeanza kuiua). Tunafuga pia ng’ombe, koku, na nguruwe. Tuna heka kama tatu

ambamo tunalima mazao tuliyotaja kwa rotation. Tuna hekali kama tano hivi za malisho ya

ng’ombe wa maziwa watano hivi (wakubwa watatu na ndama wawili).

Kuhusu uchakachuaji, nianze na mbolea ambayo ina sura mbili. Iko mbolea ambayo unaweza

kuweka kwenye mazao alafu yasibadilike. Alafu iko mbolea ambayo inaonekana kuwa

imekaa muda mrefu (pengine zinakotoka, sijui) mabadiliko yake yanakuwa kidogo.

Napoongelea kubadilika nina maana tuna mbolea ya kupandia alafu kuna kukuzia. Sasa

unaweza kutumia mbolea hizo mahindi yasibadilike yakadumaa.

Kwa upande wa mbegu hasa za mahindi kuna tatizo kubwa. Unaweza kwenda dukani

ukanunua mbegu iko kwenye mfuko wa kawaida na lebo yake na sifa zake lakini ukipanda

matokeo yake yanakuwa ni kidogo. Tatizo ninaloliona ni ujanja ujanja unafanyika. Nasikia

wenye maduka wanaenda sijui kwenye viwanda au wapi wanachukuwa mahindi ya kawaida

wanayapaka rangi na kutuuzia kama yaliyotoka viwandani. Na hili linafanywa hasa na

wafanya biashara wakubwa nadhani. Miaka mitatu iliyopita nilipanda heka tatu sikupata

kitu. Yaani nilipanda mahindi vikawa vinatoa vitoto vya ajabuajabu ni miaka kadhaa imepita

lakini.

Tulichokifanya ni kupiga kelele tu kwa viongozi wetu hasa maafisa kilimo. Wanatusaidia

kwa maana ya ahadi lakini hapa katikati tatizo halikuwa kubwa. Ila nasikia mwaka jana

walitokea baadhi ya wakulima kulalamika ila mie halijanitokea. Kwa wakulima hakuna

umoja kupiga kelele. Kwa sasa hivi vyama vya ushirika viliisha.

Huku pia tuna tatizo la mabwana shamba. Sijui ni kwa sababu ya uchache! Ile kwamba

anabisha hodi kuja kukutembelea, hakuna. Labda mie nipige simu nimwambie kuwa nina

tatizo fulani atakuja lakini ile routinely aje kututembelea, hakuna.

Madawa kwa upande wa kilimo siwezi kulisemea. Ila madawa kwa upande wa mifugo ni

tatizo kubwa kubwa kubwa. Ni kwamba madini ni fake ni fake ni fake sana. Hata nilipokuwa

kwenye mkutano wa balaza la wakulima juzi juzi kule Babati nilijaribu kukutana na watu

kutoka shirika la TBS nikawaambia wakasema watakuja kufuatilia. Unampa ng’ombe madini

43

hakuna kinachotokea. Na madini hayo yanakuwa na lebo yenye sifa zote. Au unamchoma

nguruwe sindano ya kutoa ukurutu na minyoo unakuta manyoya yako vilevile wala

habadilike. Alafu blocks hizi za kulamba hizi, wanapaka rangi tu. Ng’ombe akilamba siku

tatu unakuta kama tofali vile anaacha.

Hata dawa za kuweka kwenye mahindi. Unaweka lakini mahindi yanabunguliwa vilevile.

Sijui kama wanakuwa wametengeneza vibaya au la. Ila nafikiri ni ujanja ujanja tu kuna watu

wanaoharibu biashara hapa katikati. Kuhusu kudai fidia, kinachotuponza ni sauti. Unaweza

kuzungumza peke yako mwenye duka anakukatalia anasema labda umenunua sehemu

nyingine, maana mnakuwa hamna mkataba. Anadai mbona watu wengi tu wamekuja

kununua hapa hawajalalamika.

Kikubwa ni sera ya taifa. Maana ukimwambia mtu kuhusu ushirika anakumbuka yaliyotokea

nyumba anajua ni wajanja walewale tu. Kwahiyo huwezi mwambia mtu kuhusu mambo ya

ushirika. Tumeachana na kahawa kwa sababu ya gharama zake. Unakuta gharama ni kubwa

kuliko unachokipata. Si lazima ulime kahawa unaweza ku-diverge na kulima kitu kingine.

Kuondokana na kilimo cha kahawa kunaathari lakini si kote. Ukiingia ndani huko kuna

wakulima wazuri sana. Ila na bei haieleweki inashukashuka sana.

Kitu cha kufanya ni kama hivi mlivyokuja. Hivi vitu vinahitaji utafiti. Kwamba tatizo liko

kiasi gani, linawaathiri watu wangapi. Nafikiri ili tatizo la pembejeo linaweza kuwa

linawaathiri asilimia kama sabini hivi ya wakulima. Kwahiyo utafiti ukifanyika nafikiri

tunaweza kufaulu. Serikali inaweza kujipanga upya. Kwamba wewe unazalisha mbolea na

tunajua kuwa mbolea inapatikana sehemu fulani. Tukikuta ina madhara basi mzalishaji

anawajibika. Lakini pia ikiwezekana watu tukiwa na sauti moja ingetusaidia kuliko mtu

mmoja mmoja kupiga kelele. Kwahiyo mimi bado nasisitiza, ushirika ni muhimu. Ni

kuwatoa tu watu fikra kuwa si uleule wa zamani. Ufisadi usiwepo, uchakachuaji usiwepo,

basi mambo yataenda vizuri. Kinachowaudhi watu ni ile kutotoa taarifa mambo yanaenda

hovyohovyo tu. Basi wanakata tamaa.

Hata kuku unampa dawa ya kideli unafikiri anapona kumbe ndio unawamaliza kabisa. Hata

dawa ya utitili unakuta haisaidii. Mie naona ni kazi ndogo sana ni usimamizi tu. Nimewahi

tumia pia madawa kutoka nje (Malawi) naona ni nzuri sana japokuwa nimetumia majina

(brand) tofauti. Lakini naona kama na wasomi wamenyamaza sana, mko kama hampo. Watu

wengi wanafanya utafiti ila hatupati mrejesho. Sasa nyie wasomi mnaona serikali inatufisadi

mnanyamaza tu. Watu wamesoma vizuri ila naona kama hawatumiki.

44

Annex 3 Validation Meeting Report ADDRESSING THE CHALLNGES OF COUNTERFEIT AGRICULTURAL INPUTS

IN MBOZI DISTRICT

BRIEF REPORT ON VALIDATION MEETING

Following the challenges of counterfeit agricultural inputs in Mbozi District, the Centre for

Policy Research and Advocacy (CPRA) of the University of Dar es Salaam Business School

in collaboration with Agricultural Council of Tanzania (ACT) did field research in Mbozi

from the 19th to 22nd of October 2015 to look into that contentious issue. This culminated in a

research report based on both primary and secondary sources of data and information. The

primary data were generated from a few information-rich interviewees that were purposively

selected as representatives of other stakeholders. Thus, the research findings emanating from

that sample were regarded as a means to an end and not an end in themselves. That being the

case, we found it scientifically worthwhile to validate our findings by convening a meeting

with additional stakeholders in that district. Under the guidance of two researchers from

CPRA and one resource person from ACT the validation meeting was held in Mbozi district

on 3rd March 2016 with representatives of three groups of the major stakeholders, namely

government officials stationed in Mbozi District, distributors/traders of agro-inputs and

farmers.

The meeting started at around 9:00am with a short introduction by all the participants. After

the introduction, Mr. Cleophace Rwechungura from ACT gave a preamble relating to what

prompted ACT to take the initiative to conduct this study in Tanzania and particularly in

Mbozi district. It was highlighted that Mbozi is among the richest districts in terms of

agriculture and yet its people suffer from severe poverty, which is partly caused by poor

agricultural practices including the counterfeiting of agricultural inputs. Mr. Rwechungura

clarified that our study and efforts aimed to uncover the genesis of counterfeiting and the

reasons that make the majority of farmers in Mbozi district fall prey to counterfeit inputs that

are becoming increasingly detrimental to the economic development and welfare of the

people in that district. In support of the latter, Dr. Baisi from CPRA started the presentation

by clearly explaining that our meeting and discussion ought to come up with a strategy for

achieving the policy change appropriate for the economic development and welfare of the

entire community. Drawing on the preliminary research findings, he charted the major causes

and effects of counterfeit agricultural inputs in Mbozi district. This presentation was coupled

with key recommendations deemed relevant for dealing with the situation.

After the presentation all the participants were asked to split into their respective groups and

the two researchers from CPRA guided them in validating the preliminary findings and

coming up with additional views. The guiding questions were: (a) What are the major

reasons that make farmers in Mbozi district use counterfeit agricultural inputs? (b) Who are

the major actors involved? (c) To what extent do counterfeit agricultural inputs affect the

economy and welfare of the people in Mbozi district? (d) To what extent are these

counterfeits a constraint on the economy of the district and the country as a whole? (e) What

could be done to get rid of this problem? (Also suggest key players and where possible the

timing for their intervention). Having completed the group discussions we all convened again

for group presentations and general discussion. Each group had its own perspective on the

questions raised, which however tied in with the preliminary research findings:

45

I. The business cadre made the following comments:

a) The causes of counterfeit agricultural inputs

The curse of current free market practices

Business people and farmers lack the knowledge and skills to differentiate

between genuine and fake products

Lack of continuous follow-up by the government

Lack of willingness and capacity on the part of the department responsible for

preventing the entry of fake agricultural inputs

b) Major actors

The government (specifically the ministry responsible for agriculture). There

seems to be an inadequate number of agriculture extension officers/experts.

Unscrupulous and untrustworthy business people (manufacturers and/or

traders)

c) The effects of this problem on the economy and welfare of the farmers in Mbozi

The effect is more than 40 percent

d) Constraints on the economy of the district and the nation

Reduced government/district revenue

Tax evasion

Reduced personal income and the resultant lack of foodstuff.

II. Government officials had the following views:


The curse of current free market practices

Greed/desire for huge profits by business people

Lack of agriculture extension officers/experts

b) Major actors

Manufacturers collaborate with distributers/traders

Government officials


Reduced productivity and income of the farmers

Adverse effects on farm soil and environmental degradation

Increased production costs as farmers find it necessary to reapply the

appropriate inputs.


Reduced government/district revenues

Government/district failure to implement development plans

e) Recommendations

The department responsible for preventing the entry of fake agricultural inputs

(TPRI) should play its part.

The government/NGOs to review prices of agricultural inputs and smallholder

farmers to be educated/guided.

The district council should allow only the traders/distributors with a good

track record/reputation.

Agriculture extension officers should work more closely with the farmers.

46

III. Farmers analysed this issue as follows:


Desire for huge profits

Lack of knowledge among smallholder farmers to differentiate between fake

and genuine products.

Poverty among smallholder farmers compels them to buy small packages

which are easily faked.

b) Major actors

Big manufacturers/traders

Corrupt government officials


Reduced personal income among farmers and the related effects on education,

health, etc.


District/government failure to realise development plans

e) Recommendations

There should be ongoing and unceasing close professional follow-up

Educating smallholder farmers on the differences between fake and genuine

products

Government intervention

In line with the specific objectives of this research, the issues raised are concomitant with the

ones identified and summarized in Section 6 (please see the main report). Based on the

preliminary report and findings from the validation meeting, we conclusively deduce that the

key informants agree on the following issues:

(v) There is an acute problem of counterfeit products in Mbozi district.

(vi) The problem adversely affects the economic wellbeing of the district.

(vii) The problem reached a peak in the period 2012 - 2014.

(viii) There is great zeal to look for ways to resolve the problem.

Based on these issues, it is clear that Mbozi district and businesses in it have been

adversely affected by counterfeit agricultural inputs. Although the causes and effects were

well articulated, views relating to the culprits of the ongoing counterfeiting are mixed.

Counterfeiting practices are blamed on several groups, namely, famers, traders (i.e.

manufacturers, big and small businesses) and government officials. It is therefore important

to carry out a dialogue that will convene all these stakeholders (in good numbers) to

deliberate on the change desired that will eventually result in an appropriate policy.

agricultural council of tanzania (act) - Business Insightz Home

Documents