72848
AFRICA TRADE POLICY NOTE NO. 32 JULY 2012
JULY 2012
Africa Trade Policy Notes
John Keyser
Counting the Costs of Compliance with Trade
Requirements from a Value Chain Perspective:
Evidence from Southern Africa
HIGHLIGHTS
This note uses a value chain perspective to show how the cost of
COSTLY TRADE complying with regional trade requirements affects agriculture
PROCEDURES FOR FOOD competitiveness and rural incomes. On the one hand, phytosanitary rules,
STAPLES… product standards, and certification procedures are important to protect
have a leveraged impact on human, animal, and plant health. These requirements also help to
farmers’ incomes and trade improve buyer and seller confidence in international markets and can be
competitiveness
useful for trade facilitation. Equally, however, it is also clear that every
inspection and certification procedure adds to the total cost of trade to the
RAISING REVENUE AS
MUCH AS THE DESIRE TO point where trade requirements can become a trade barrier if the policies
PROTECT PUBLIC are not well designed or are poorly implemented. The recent proliferation
HEALTH… of mandatory standards for food staples in East Africa is a good example
is often behind fees and of this where regulators have introduced various product specifications
procedures, which add to the
that have little or no bearing on public health and mainly relate to milling
build-up of costs along the value-
outturn and private financial returns.
chain and limit the amount that
can be distributed to farmers Following a brief introduction to value chain concepts, the note uses data
from Malawi to illustrate how efforts to streamline trade procedures for
THERE IS CONSIDERABLE fertilizer could have a leveraged impact on farmers’ incomes and trade
SCOPE TO STREAMLINE
TRADE PROCEDURES… competitiveness. The rest of the discussion then provides an overview of
countries and regional groups the main trade requirements for staple foods and crops inputs in East and
would benefit from reviewing Southern Africa. Each of these transaction cost takes away from the total
current trade requirements and profits available to flow upstream to farmers and other domestic value
removing areas of overlap and chain participants. Efforts to streamline regional trade procedures could
unnecessary costs therefore have a direct impact on trade competitiveness and poverty
reduction.
Value Chain Concepts
Value chains essentially represent enterprises in which different producers
WORLD BANK and marketing companies work within their respective businesses to
pursue one or more end markets. Value chain participants sometimes
cooperate to improve the overall competitiveness of the product, but may
1| www.worldbank.org/afr/trade
also be completely unaware of the linkages between their operation and other upstream or downstream
participants. Value chains therefore encompass all factors of production (land, labor, capital, technology, and
inputs) as well as all economic activities (input supply, production, transformation, handling, transport, and
marketing) needed to create, sell, and deliver a good to its terminal market.
From this perspective, trade competitiveness can be measured by comparing the build-up of total costs along the
value chain with the amount customers are willing to pay for the final product. In an open economy, this price is
determined competitively and value flows upstream from the consumer to each producer and marketing
company in the chain.
The key stages of a value chain for internationally traded staple foods are illustrated below. In this diagram, an
arrow connects cross-border movement with input supply to show that trade procedures directly affect the prices
of imported fertilizer, seed, agrichemicals, farm machinery, and all other imported inputs used during the
production, assembly, and domestic processing stages of the value chain. A second arrow likewise connects
input supply with other domestic production stages to show this is a crosscutting function that impacts on all
stages, not just farm production.
Figure 1: Value Chain Stages for Internationally Traded Staple Foods
DOMESTIC STAGES FOREIGN STAGES
DOMESTIC
INPUT FARM CROSS- FINAL PROCESS
ASSEMBLY &
SUPPLY PRODUCTION BORDER & DISTRIBUTION
PRIMARY
MOVEMENT
PROCESSING
Trade Costs and Rural Incomes in Malawi
To demonstrate how seemingly minor changes in trade costs for fertilizer can have a leveraged effect on
agriculture competitiveness and rural incomes, an example using indicative data from the 2007/08 agricultural
season in Malawi is given below.1 The point of this quick example is not to recommend specific policy
alternatives for Malawi, but to illustrate how efforts aimed at reducing trade costs could have an amplified
impact on trade competitiveness and poverty reduction.
First, Table 1 shows the estimated price build-up of fertilizer under two price scenarios. The base scenario
reflects the actual conditions that prevailed in Malawi in 2007/08 in which the economic (unsubsidized) price of
imported fertilizer was estimated to be USD 50.25 per 50kg bag. The reduced cost scenario, on the other hand,
1
Analysis based on Tchale and Keyser, 2010 Quantitative Value Chain Analysis: An Application to Malawi, World Bank
Policy Research Working Paper, WPS 5242.
2| www.worldbank.org/afr/trade
reflects the type of savings that might result from efforts to introduce bulk procurement of fertilizer and
streamline import requirements and certification procedures. Malawi does not charge import duty or VAT on
fertilizer, yet this example shows how 10% to 30% savings on selected trade costs could result in a 7.7% overall
reduction in the economic value of fertilizer at the farmgate.
Table 1: Farmgate Build-up of 2007/08 Fertilizer Prices in Malawi (USD/ton)
Next, Table 2 summarizes a set of key value chain indicators for medium- and high-input hybrid maize using
the base 2007/08 price of fertilizer and hypothetical 7.7% reduction modeled above. In the analysis, total
accumulated costs at the into mill or depot location exclude profits that are distributed to farmers and domestic
assemblers. This approach allows total costs to be subtracted from the import or export parity price to show
how much total profit is available to flow upstream to farmers and other value chain participants. Unless
indicated, all values are expressed in USD per ton of tradable grain.
Table 2: Value Chain Indicators for Malawi Hybrid Maize (USD/ton tradable grain, 2007/08 prices)
The analysis shows that Malawi could derive significant benefit from streamlining trade procedures for fertilizer.
Although there is no guarantee that incremental profits will flow all the way up the chain to farmers, Scenario 1
shows how a 7.7% reduction in fertilizer costs would result in 12.2% and 11.7% more total profit per ton of
3| www.worldbank.org/afr/trade
tradable grain at the medium- and high-input levels respectively when sold as an import substitute. In Scenario
2, it is assumed that the lower price of fertilizer results in 10% more use per hectare and 15% higher yields.
Under these conditions, the total available profits from one ton of import substitute maize would be 35% to 30%
higher at the medium- and high-input levels respectively compared with base conditions. In all cases, the
analysis shows that export maize is a marginal activity for Malawi and even returned a net loss under 2007/08
base conditions.
Table 3: Total Available Profits per Hectare from Malawi Hybrid Maize, 2007/08 base conditions and
two alternative trade scenarios (USD/ha)
Finally, Table 3 looks at total available profits in per hectare terms, which is the most relevant measure for
farmers. In Scenario 2, where yield increases as a result of more intensive fertilizer use, each hectare of maize
would provide 55% to 50% more total profit at the medium and high input levels respectively. According to
these estimates, export maize remains a marginal activity even with the improved yield, but is still more than
USD 88 more profitable per hectare compared with base conditions.
Formal Sector Trade Requirements
With the link between trade costs and opportunities for increased rural incomes in mind, the next part of this
note describes the typical trade requirements for cross-border movement of food staples and crop inputs in East
and Southern Africa.
In considering the costs of trade, it is important to keep in mind that trade requirements often vary from one
country to another and can even be subject to sudden change with little if any advance notice. These factors add
to the cost of cross-border movement since traders have to stay aware of current policies and may even have
their business plans undone by last-minute changes in trade rules, such as a sudden ban on exports. It is also
clear that the requirements for formal sector trade can be a particular disadvantage to small traders who often
lack the necessary economies of scale, financial resources, skills, and information needed to comply with each
requirement. As a result, considerable volumes of agricultural produce cross Africa’s borders through informal
channels that can be even more expensive to navigate on a per ton basis and risk exposing consumers to danger
if the goods are diseased or faulty.
The typical requirements for formal sector trade of food staples and crop inputs in East and Southern Africa are
summarized in Table 4 below. The trade requirements for crop inputs primarily differ from food staples with
respect to the need for product registration and institutions involved with issuing the required certificates.
4| www.worldbank.org/afr/trade
Table 4: Typical Trade Requirements for Food Staples and Crop Inputs
Food Staples Crop Inputs
Trade permit (import/export license) Product registration
Phytosanitary certificate Trade permit (import/export license)
Non-GMO certificate Phytosanitary certificate (seed)
Quality assessment Non-GMO certificate (seed)
Certificate of origin Quality assessment
Filling of customs documents Certificate of origin
Filling of customs documents
Trade Permits and Licenses
Despite numerous commitments made by African governments to regional free trade, trade permits and other
types of import and/or export licenses continue to be used in many countries and can be significant trade
barrier. In the first place, governments very often enact temporary import and/or export bans on food staples.
These bans are unpredictable but are often placed on imports during good harvest years to ensure domestic
production is consumed first and on exports during bad harvest years to protect self-sufficiency. Moreover,
because small traders are not always able to meet the minimum volume and other licensing requirements
needed to obtain a trade permit, these individuals can be prevented from participating in the formal market.
In Tanzania, for example, imports and exports of strategic grains including maize, rice, and wheat are subject to
licensing by the Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security. While there is no fee to get the license, the
importer/exporter must have a valid trading license and be registered with the Tanzania Revenue Authority. For
the controlled commodities, traders are issued a time bound permit, normally valid for one-month only,
stipulating the quantity allowed for import or export. Under this system, the Strategic Grain Reserve advises
government whether or not any of the strategic grains need to be imported and what if any surpluses are
available for export. To control excessive depletion of food reserves, trade permits are issued on a consignment
basis only.
The importation of all foods to Tanzania including bulk grains also requires traders to obtain a separate Food
Import Permit from the Tanzania Food and Drugs Authority (TFDA) in Dar es Salaam. To get the Food
Import Permit, importers must register annually with TFDA. The Food Import Permit itself is usually valid for
one month and requires the applicant to provide information detailing the source of import, quality and quantity
to be imported, entry point, and expected date of delivery. On top of these procedures, importers must send a
pre-shipment sample to the TFDA for quality analysis. The shipment is then subjected to physical inspection at
the point of entry by a TFDA officer who may direct additional laboratory analysis if there is reason to believe
the consignment does not conform to the specifications on the Import Permit. The costs of all inspections are
paid by the importer.
In Malawi, maize is not on the list of restricted products requiring an import license, but is subject to regulation.
In this case, the government imports maize through a tendering process in which the private sector is sub-
contracted to import maize. Once the maize is in the country, the government makes it available in all areas at a
subsidized price through the state-owned enterprise, ADMARC. It is therefore very difficult for private traders
to import large quantities of maize in a private arrangement and find a market at commercial prices. Exporting
maize from Malawi, on the other hand, is restricted and is subject to intermittent bans and export licensing.
Even when export bans are temporarily lifted in times of a good harvest, traders complain that government
officials are slow to issue export licenses thereby blocking trade until a new ban is put in place.
5| www.worldbank.org/afr/trade
In Zambia, import and export permits for maize and mealie meal cost ZMK 745,000 (USD 150) per 510 tons
(USD 0.29 per ton) and are valid for 30 days. To be issued a permit, traders must be registered with the Zambia
Revenue Authority and have a valid taxpayer identification number. If the full 510-ton allotment is not used
within the 30-day period, the balance does not carry forward and traders must pay for a new permit.
Compounding the problem, Zambia-based grain traders report that decisions to introduce or remove food trade
restrictions are poorly communicated in many countries. Sometimes, small groups of key officials decide on
bans via unpublished decisions or internal documentation. This can lead to the introduction of bans by border
officials each year merely as a seasonal norm, or to bans extending beyond their legal life because customs
officials are unaware of their expiration.
Similar to the requirements for staple foods, most countries require trade permits for seed, fertilizer, and
agrichemicals. In Zambia, importers and exporters of crop inputs must apply through the Ministry of
Agriculture and Livestock for a trade permit specifying specific quantities and types of product to be traded.
Each truck must carry an original copy of the permit at a cost of ZMK 35,000 (USD 7.00) per certificate or
USD 0.23 per ton based on a full 30-ton load. For trucks carrying small quantities or mixed consignments, the
cost of the permit can obviously be much higher on a per ton basis.
Product Registration
Box : Costs of Pesticide Registration in Tanzania and Kenya
Even before seed, fertilizer, and The table below compares the cost of pesticide registration in
agrichemicals can be traded, these inputs Tanzania and Kenya, and shows that Tanzania charges significantly
must normally be tested and registered by more than its main regional competitor. Tanzania generally does
the Ministry of Agriculture and/or other not recognize the testing and registration of chemicals done in
statutory agency in the importing country. other countries and requires a minimum of three full seasons for
Product registration is customarily done to domestic field trials. Consequently, because of the high cost and
ensure the product is safe and effective to time taken to comply with Tanzania’s registration requirements,
use given the importing country’s own agri- there are many newer, more effective, and safer chemicals
climatic conditions with suitability trials available on the world market that Tanzanian farmers cannot
typically requiring from two to six crop access. Moreover, because the market for pesticides in Tanzania is
cycles before a new product can be much smaller than in Kenya, the difference in cost as a share of
approved. Requirements vary from country potential future sales is even higher than the data indicate.
to country and can have an important
bearing on trade competitiveness (see the Tanzania Kenya
example in the Box). Once a product is Application 50 0
approved, annual fees may also apply for Field trial (typical) 4,500 1,500
re-registration. Registration (full) 600 435
Total USD 5,150 1,935
Phytosanitary Certificate Source: TAHA, 2007
Pesticides are not normally used for maize growing, but are
In both domestic and international
beneficial to other staple foods including wheat, rice, and cassava
markets, sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS)
and are widely used for fumigation to prevent post-harvest losses.
measures are fundamentally concerned
with the protection of human, animal, and plant health. Importing countries typically require guarantees that
exports are derived from areas that are free from specified pest and disease risks. Proof may also be required
that grains have been fumigated to eliminate pests and are free of other potentially dangerous substances. Table
5 summarizes phytosanitary declaration conditions for seven African countries.
6| www.worldbank.org/afr/trade
Table 5: Phytosanitary Declaration Conditions in Selected Countries
KE UG TZ MAL ZAM ZIM ETH
Sclerospora graminicola schoret and sclerospora sacchard miy are
not known to occur in the country of origin X
Xanthomonas stewatii is not known to occur in the place of
X
production
The maize was fumigated before dispatch (details to be stated in
X X X
the SPS Certificate)
The material is not genetically modified X X X X X X ?
Free from Erwinial Stewartii (bacterial wilt) X
Free from Large Grain Borer X X X
Open pollinated variety of seed avoided X
Source: RATES, 2003 (updated with current information where possible)
Phytosanitary certificates are normally issued by a designated National Plant Protection Office (NPPO) in each
country. In Kenya, for example, phytosanitary certificates are issued by the Kenya Plant Health Inspectorate
Service (KEPHIS) and cost KES 1,000 (equal to around USD 11.75 or USD 0.39 per ton for a standard 30-ton
truck). In Tanzania, phytosanitary certificates are issued by the Department of Plant Health Services (PHS) and
cost USD 15.00 per consignment at the point of exit. In addition, the Tanzania PHS charges USD 2.00 for
fumigation inspection and USD 100 minimum for treatment supervision (i.e. USD 117 in total, or USD 3.90
per ton for a typical 30-ton load). In Zambia, phytosanitary certificates are issued by the Zambia Agriculture
Research Institute (ZARI) and cost ZMK 310,000 (USD 62.00) for a book of 20 certificates. One certificate is
required per truck and this works out to USD 0.10 per ton for a 30-ton load.
On the input side, phytosanitary certificates are also required for seed, which is a plant product and naturally
subject to SPS control. In Zambia, however, traders complain that officials at the Kasumbalesa border with the
DRC also require phytosanitary certificates for fertilizer, which is not a vector for human, animal, or plant
disease. Often there are delays issuing these certificates and exporters say the process can sometimes take two
weeks or more. In practice, the SPS certificate must be obtained first before the trader can apply for a fertilizer
export permit.
Non-GMO Certificate
As shown in Table 5 many countries also require maize and other crops to be certified as non-genetically
modified. As with the SPS certificate, Non-GMO certificates are issued by a specialized department in the
exporting country’s ministry of agriculture. Non-GMO testing may also be required by the importing country. In
Zambia, non-GMO certificates are issued by ZARI and cost ZMK 150,000 (USD 30) each. One certificate is
required per truck meaning the cost works out to USD 1.00 per ton for a typical 30-ton load. On top of the
certificate itself, however, various levels of testing are required to determine the shipment’s non-GMO status.
Zimbabwe, for example, requires a full GMO test whereas other countries may only require a lateral flow test or
so-called “quick test.�? In Zambia, a GMO “quick test�? costs around USD 150 per sample and may be
performed by the exporter’s superintendent as part of the pre-shipment inspection. One quick test can cover up
to 2,000 tons of grain if stored in the same warehouse giving a minimum cost of USD 0.08 per ton. For deals
involving smaller quantities or when grain has to be sourced from multiple warehouses, however, the cost can be
much higher. Even though Zambia does not allow any type of GMO seed to enter, non-GMO certification is
still mandatory to obtain an export permit regardless of the destination country’s own GMO policy.
7| www.worldbank.org/afr/trade
Certificate of Origin
Certificates of Origin are used to prove where a commodity was produced for the purpose of obtaining duty
free status under regional free trade agreements. The procedures for issuing Certificates of Origin vary from
country to country and can have a high cost on cross-border trade if the exporter has problems obtaining the
certificate and/or if it is not accepted by the importing country. In Tanzania, the Chamber of Commerce in Dar
es Salaam is the sole issuing agency and charges a fee of TZS 20,000 per certificate (i.e. USD 13.33 each or
USD 0.44 per ton based on a full 30-ton load). To get the certificate, exporters must have a valid phytosanitary
certificate and sales agreement/contract for the commodity already in hand. Because the certificate can only be
obtained in Dar es Salaam, traders in far-off border regions say it is both time consuming and expensive to try
and engage in duty free trade and often do not bother.
In Uganda, on the other hand, agricultural traders report that the process works very well. After registering with
the Uganda Export Promotion Council in Kampala, exporters are able to buy a book of blank certificates of
origin for around USD 25 and are only required to return the receipt stubs when the book is finished.
Quality Analysis
In addition to traditional SPS certificates and non-GMO certificates, many countries have adopted a host of
minimum quality standards and testing requirements for food staples promulgated by their national bureau of
standards. Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania, Malawi, Zimbabwe, and Ethiopia, for example, each require food imports
to be accompanied by a test certificate issued by the exporting country’s national bureau of standards. On top of
the exporting country’s certificate, many countries also require importers to obtain a local quality certificate
and/or subject the consignment to further detailed inspection before the goods are allowed in. The Tanzania
Bureau of Standards (TBS) for example requires maize importers to apply for Batch Certification at least one
week prior to arrival at a cost of TZS 10,000 (USD 6.65) for the application and 0.2% of the cif value for actual
certification. The TBS analysis is additional to the TFDA’s own pre-shipment inspection and both agencies
routinely carry out further inspections and analysis at the border.
Also in Tanzania, all food commodities are subject to mandatory radiation testing by the Tanzania Atomic
Energy Commission (TAEC) based in Arusha. TAEC charges 0.2% and 0.4% of the fob value of exports and
imports respectively for this service. The testing policy does not distinguish between foods that come from areas
without risk of radiation exposure and all consignments are subject to inspection without allowing for free
passage of goods that previously passed the test. In practice, however, TAEC reports that it only tests 10-15
samples per day meaning that there is a large gap between its stated policy of testing every shipment and actual
procedure. Moreover, there has not been a single interception of tainted food leading traders to speculate that
the testing requirements are as much about collecting fees for TAEC as they are with protecting public health or
preserving Tanzania’s reputation in the global market. Kenya requires all grain imports to be tested for radiation
but does not require testing of exports.
The multiplicity of standards as well as differences in standards between countries has been identified by the
EAC and COMESA as significant impediment to regional free trade and led to calls for trade standards to be
harmonized across Member Countries. As discussed in more detail in Africa Trade Policy Note 33, the EAC
has developed mandatory standards covering at least 42 staple foods that provide detailed specifications for
mycotoxin contamination together with various other quality attributes including moisture content, foreign
matter contamination, and maximum allowable share of broken, shriveled, or discolored grains. The standards
also include detailed hygiene, packing, and labeling requirements together with instructions for sampling and
8| www.worldbank.org/afr/trade
conformity analysis. Efforts are currently underway to extend the harmonized standards to SADC and
COMESA countries as part of efforts to establish a tripartite free trade area between the three regional blocks.
In most large transactions, the buyer specifies the quality attributes they require and it is then up to the seller to
prove they are able to supply the type of product required. These assurances are normally provided through an
impartial superintendent who is hired to inspect the shipment, carry out all necessary quality tests, and oversee
the loading and unloading. Depending on the terms of the contract, ownership may change on collection or
delivery. When grain is sold on delivery, a further inspection is usually required as part of the offloading to be
sure it was not tampered with during transit.
The price for a superintendent’s oversight will vary depending on the company used, range of tests to be carried
out, and place of loading. One superintendent in Zambia, for example, said the price for pre-shipment
inspection in Lusaka for a 500 to 1,000 ton load works out to around USD 0.50 to 1.50 per ton excluding the
cost of non-GMO testing. For supervision outside the capital city, the cost of pre-shipment inspection was said
to be 50-100% higher.
Superintendent companies are sometimes also used to source grain stocks that match a buyer’s requirements.
The cost of this service was said to be USD 1.00 to 1.50 per ton for each place inspected. In Zambia, large
exporters including the World Food Programme report that superintendents often have to inspect four or more
depots to find grain that conforms to the EAC’s harmonized standards for discolored and shriveled grains.
Virtually all marketed maize in Zambia is grown by smallholder farmers so is sundried and therefore sun
bleached. Undersize pips are also a common problem that can result from not using fertilizer or other inputs at
the right time or in the right quantities.
Filling of Customs Documents
Table 6: Customs Clearance Requirements for Maize (2003, updated where possible)
KE UG TZ MAL ZAM ZIM ETH
Export permit (Ministry of Agriculture) X X X X X
Import permit (Ministry of Agriculture) X X X X X
Pre-shipment inspection (clean report of findings) X X
Certificate of origin (EAC/COMESA) X X X X X X X
Phytosanitary Certificate X X X X X X X
Quality Standards Certificate (by Standards Bureau) X X X X X X
Safety Standards Certificate (by Health Authorities) X X X
Contract with importer, irrevocable letter of credit X
Import Declaration Form, Single Entry Document X X X X X X ?
Original invoice X X X X X X X
Table 6 provides a summary of the customs clearance requirements for maize in seven African countries. While
SPS and other trade requirements do serve a legitimate purpose, it is also clear that institutional overlaps exist
whereby traders can be required to obtain certificates for the same or similar things from different agencies with
duplicate procedures and inspections often required by the exporting and importing country. Whereas large
traders usually have a staff of people whose job it is to follow the trade procedures and may even send people to
9| www.worldbank.org/afr/trade
the border to oversee physical clearance, small and medium-size firms without this kind of capacity can be
severely disadvantaged.
To streamline customs clearance procedures, EAC, SADC, and COMESA countries have adopted the Single
Entry Document (SED). To clear staple foods and crop inputs using the SED the trader is required to provide
various original documents including all trade permits and/or licenses, SPS Certificate, Certificate of Origin,
Certificate(s) of Standards Compliance, and original invoice. Depending on the country, traders may also be
required to complete an Import Declaration Form (IDF) which is a document used to record details of the
transaction including particulars of the importer and exporter, type of product being traded, the product’s value,
and expiry date. Often there is no extra charge for the IDF, but in Kenya importers pay an IDF fee equal to
2.75% on the cif value of the consignment to cover the cost of border documents and quality and SPS
inspection by KEBS and KEPHIS respectively. In Zambia, importers must pay 6% of the cif value of all
consignments as advance income tax and USD 10 per entry for use of the automated custom data system
(ASYCUDA fee). Moreover, to process all trade documents with Customs, traders are required to use a
licensed clearing agent in the importing and exporting country. The fees for this service vary but typically range
from USD 50 to 150 per commercial invoice handled.
Conclusions
From a value chain perspective, every cost that occurs during the production and marketing of an agriculture
commodity takes away from the total profit available to be shared between farmers and all others involved with
the production and delivery of the commodity to its terminal market. With food staples, the link between trade
costs and total available profit is a direct one whereby any savings in the costs of trade are immediately available
to be shared between value chain participants. With agricultural inputs, a savings in trade costs not only has the
potential to benefit farmers through lower input prices, but can also have leveraged impact on agricultural
competitiveness through increased yields.
Although the costs of formal sector trade vary depending on the requirements of each country involved, trade
permits and certification fees can easily add USD 25.00 or more to the per ton shipment value of food staples
when traded in full 30-ton truckloads. At Kasumbalesa, for example, the cost of moving a full 30-ton truck of
maize or mealie meal from Zambia to the DRC was estimated to be USD 36.38 per ton or around 6% of the
landed value of mealie meal in Lubumbashi. For traders dealing in smaller consignments, the costs of crossing
the Kasumbalesa border are estimated to be even higher at least USD 97.63 per ton or roughly 17% of the
Lubumbashi mealie meal price including fees paid to bicycle porters and unofficial charges (bribes) collected by
Zambian and DRC officials for letting the goods past.
While many trade requirements do serve legitimate purposes, it is clear that there is considerable scope to
streamline the procedures and eliminate duplicate requirements. At the international level, traders are faced the
problem of having to obtain multiple permits, test results, and quality certificates from both the importing and
exporting country. Similarly, at the domestic level, various departments and institutions have overlapping
responsibilities and each charge fees that seem to be driven as much by the need to raise revenue as they are by
the desire to protect public health. Rather than look in isolation at specific issues like standards harmonization
or SPS management, therefore, a good next step for individual countries and regional trade blocks alike would
be to carry out their own detailed assessments of current trade requirements to identify areas of overlap and
opportunities to streamline trade procedures.
10| www.worldbank.org/afr/trade
About the Author
John Keyser is an independent consultant based in Lusaka, Zambia. This work is funded by the Multi-Donor
Trust Fund for Trade and Development supported by the governments of the United Kingdom, Finland,
Sweden and Norway. The views expressed in this paper reflect solely those of the authors and not necessarily
the views of the funders, the World Bank Group or its Executive Directors.
References
East Africa Community (2005). A Guide for Maize Traders on Regulatory Requirements for Imports and
Exports of Maize in East African Community, The East African Community (EAC) Secretariat, Arusha.
Kagira, Bernard (2009). The Use of Trade and Associated Policies in the Eastern and Southern Africa Grain
Sector; The Case of Maize, AAACP Paper Series No. 9 for Consultative Expert Meeting convened by
Eastern Africa Grain Council (EACG) and Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) in Dar es Salaam
2-3 June 2009, All ACP Agricultural Commodities Programme (AAACP), Brussels.
Keyser, JC (2011). Tanzania Policy Note: Addressing Standards Management Challenges from a Strategic
Perspective, report submitted to The World Bank, Poverty Reduction and Economic Management
(PREM), Dar es Salaam.
RATES (2003). COMESA and EAC Regional Maize Trade Policy Paper, USAID Center for Regional
Agricultural Trade Expansion Support (RATES), Chemonics Inc., Nairobi.
Tanzania Horticulture Association (2007). Advocating for a Market Oriented Strategy for Pesticides Regulation
and Control in Tanzania, report prepared by The Chemical Risks Foundation of Tanzania (CREFT),
Tanzania Horticulture Association (TAHA), Arusha.
Tchale, H and Keyser, JC (2010). Quantitative Value Chain Analysis: An Application to Malawi, World Bank
Policy Research Working Paper, WPS 5242.
11| www.worldbank.org/afr/trade