Recently, the Ministry of Lands, Agriculture, Fisheries, Water and Rural Development promulgated regulations curtailing or restricting grain and oilseed imports.
At the same time, the Government issued new regulations that compel millers, stockfeed producers and processors to prioritise local sourcing with a view to drive towards food sovereignty and industrial self-reliance.
In this regard, Statutory Instrument 87 of 2025, which was gazetted on September 5, saw the amendment of the Agricultural Marketing Authority (grain, oilseed and products) by-laws of 2013 by outlawing the importation of grain, oilseeds and related products, except under limited circumstances.
Specifically, the commodities covered by this new legislation include maize, wheat, soya, sunflower, cotton and related meat value chains. This move is driven by the desire to localise both production and procurement of grains and oilseeds.
Follow us on WhatsApp | LinkedIn for the latest headlines
In promulgating this law, the Government of Zimbabwe underscored that it is preparing its industries for full localisation of maize, wheat, soya, sunflower, cotton and related meat value chains.
The ultimate objective is to ensure that Zimbabwe becomes an agro-industrial hub anchored in Zimbabwe's own production.
In this regard, the new law outlines a progressive and well-calculated move towards full localisation of grains and oilseeds.
In view of this, it states that with effect from April 1, 2026, processors will be legally required to procure at least 40 percent of their annual raw material needs locally and by April 1, 2028, all such requirements must be sourced from local farmers.
In order to safeguard farmers, the new law introduces two pricing benchmarks: (i) an import parity price (the landed cost of grain in Zimbabwe, including freight and insurance); and (ii) a production parity price, pegged to local production costs. In instances where import prices fall below local parity levels, the difference will be paid into the Agricultural Revolving Fund, insulating domestic producers from external shocks.
As a proponent of local content and an advocate of structural policies, this new law could not escape my attention.
This new policy is a masterstroke.
It is a game-changer that will help the country to achieve multiple goals, which include food security, job creation and savings of foreign currency.
Additionally, it will support the trajectory towards a mono-currency.
Here are the facts on why the SI is necessary.
First, over the years; that is, from the turn of the new millennium, the country spends US$500 million per year on cereals on an annual basis.
This was particularly so between the years 2000 and 2017 and in subsequent years when the country faced droughts, as in the case of the 2023/2024 farming season.
This effectively means that, as a country, we spent over US$10 billion in the last two-and-a-half decades on imports of cereals from our regional counterparts, especially South Africa.
In doing this, we have effectively promoted local economies in the region at the expense of our own economy.
This is just the tip of the iceberg.
In the agriculture sector as a whole, the country spends over US$2 billion annually on imports, which can be domesticated; that is, honey, fruit and vegetables, cereals, eggs, et cetera.
Like any policy change, this new law was met with a massive outcry and resistance, especially after the news that Blue Ribbon had closed shop in Bulawayo because the country is short of maize.
Likewise, I supported the new policy on X and received backlash from "interested parties" and market watchers who called this new policy measure counterproductive.
Let us unpack the facts on the ground.
First, the fact of the matter is that we are not yet in the lean season -- we have reasonably enough maize that is held by farmers.
Second, inasmuch as the farmers are holding maize, at the inception of the SI 87 of 2025, the maize was not aggregated at a central point and as such millers and processors faced logistical challenges to secure maize from the farmers, as opposed to a shortage of maize.
However, based on my research, I understand that the Grain Marketing Board (GMB) has long established over 1 800 maize collection points to address this logistical challenge.
This means, if millers and GMB coordinate effectively the mobilisation of maize, there will be improvement in its availability.
Third, the new law did not ban import of maize outright but has outlined a clear path towards full localisation of production and consumption of grains and oilseeds.
This is why imports of grains and oilseeds is still taking place regardless of the existence of the law.
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
From my end, what is critical is the end goal.
The end goal we must collectively walk together is to domesticate the production of grains and oilseeds and achieve our multiple objectives; that is, food security, job creation, savings of foreign currency and supporting the trajectory towards a mono-currency.
The success of this policy will build the necessary foundation for further localisation of other agricultural commodities that consume over US$2 billion.
Ironically, imports of manufactured goods which can be domesticated are around US$2,5 billion per year and they include fertilisers and agro-chemicals, paper, pharmaceuticals, pamper and chewing gum.
In total, the country spends an average of US$4,5 billion annually on commodities that can be locally produced.
In view of the above, our focus should be aimed at collectively addressing policy glitches as opposed to dumping the entire policy and spend US$4,5 billion annually to neighbouring countries whilst our economy suffers from self-inflicted decisions.
*Gift Mugano is a professor of Economics, author and a distinguished scholar. He has published six books and over 60 articles in international peer-reviewed journals and supervised seven doctoral candidates to successful completion.
