Malawi Food Security

First, Malawi's president, Bingu wa Mutharika, who also heads the country's agricultural Ministry, reacted to the Famine Early Warning Network's (FEWS) warning that some districts in southern region will be affected by drought. President Mutharika has ensured his people that the country will produce enough food adding: “We may even produce a surplus, but lower than what we produced in the past three years."

Earlier this year the president assured his people that his government had set aside 215,000 tonnes of maize from last season’s surplus to mitigate hunger that may result from the inadequate rains.

On the other hand, his Ministry (agriculture) has come up with an unusual strategy of banning the traditional selling of green corn by all Malawians, as one way of ensuring food security at both national and household levels. Under normal circumstances, Malawians are allowed to trade green corn until such a time when all the corn in the fields has matured. The trade is then stopped in order to protect farmers from thieves that sell corn from other people's gardens.

This move is a clear indication that President Mutharika is very worried about the food situation despite his words of assurance. Barring this, most people would justifiably be compelled to go with Mutharika's assurance, given his record. Agriculture has been the strongest achievement of Mutharika's presidency so far, having registered the average of 3.1 million metric tonnes of maize surplus in the last three harvesting seasons.

All this is good for Malawi but everyone is missing the point: the main issue with food security in Malawi is its tragic policies, if there are any. Malawi is a very poor country, and people starve even when the country has surplus food. In September 2009 the World Food Programme (WFP) made an international appeal for 5.2 million US dollars to help feed more than half a million Malawians until the end of 2010.

"We are seeking donor support to meet the 5.2 million US dollars shortfall to enable WFP provide the food needs of the targeted beneficiaries up to December 2010... despite a bumper maize yield of 3.3 million tonnes, this national surplus does not automatically and directly trickle down to vulnerable groups such the chronically-ill and orphans", said WFP’s country director, Anne Callanan.

This is the area president Mutharika and his administration must address. Last year Malawi reportedly sold maize to Zimbabwe and Kenya, and according to the president, the country managed to put aside 215 000 tones of maize for emergency. Yet WFP was busy begging money from the international community so it can feed Malawi's "vulnerable" groups, which consists of nearly half (45 percent) of Malawi's 13 million people.

This case clearly shows that the question of how much corn Malawi will have this harvesting season is not all that relevant given that nearly half of the population - the "vulnerable" groups - will starve regardless. To address the situation Malawi could do very well to address the following areas as identified by FEWS:

First, the government must find answers as to why some areas that are considered food secure still show high rates of chronic malnutrition. Second, the country must address the inadequacy of appropriate skills and technologies for food preparation, preservation, and storage, which lead to high food losses in terms of both quantity and quality.

Also, food taboos resulting from cultural and religious beliefs limit consumption and/or use of certain foods, hence reducing food diversity at the household level.

FEWS also recommends that the Malawi government must ensure that traders in food commodities are equipped with information on market dynamics in order to make better decisions in terms of where they can trade in a particular year. Finally, FEWS points out that the government must be in control of food prices, especially in times of scarcity because traders sometimes take advantage of the situation and worsen the problem by pricing food commodities too high for the rural poor, who have little or no purchasing power.

If the government of Malawi is really serious about improving the food situation, then these are the areas that must be looked into very seriously. Going around discussing food surpluses and droughts is good; it shows that the government cares but it will not curb the situation.

Ignore the skeptics: Malawi will benefit from the AU leadership

The recent election of president Bingu wa Mutharika as head of African Union (AU) has divided opinion in Malawi. In particular, the Daily Times (Malawi's daily newspaper) and Economic Association of Malawi's vice president, Paul Kwengwere.

On one hand, Kwengwere contends that Mutharika's election means that he 'will be so much involved in African issues to the point some people may think he is doing so at the expense of domestic issues.' On the other hand, the Daily Times believes that Mutharika's position may help bring Malawi (hitherto a less known country to many people) to international recognition and therefore help bolster its efforts to attract international investors.

Meanwhile, Mutharika has insisted that 'there won't be any chunk of money flowing into the country because we have assumed the chairmanship of the AU.' In fact, Malawian government has asked the Malawian parliament to approve $3 million to run Mutharika's AU activities.

Inevitably, a section of Malawians will question this spending. More so given the fact that the parliament is unlikely to question (let alone declining it) the funding request, as Mutharika's party holds a huge majority in the parliament.

The hardest thing in life is to please everyone. If you can manage it, the chances are that you are not doing something right. On my part, I feel Malawi stands to benefit from the policies that Mutharika has promised to initiate during tenure. He said:

 "Our agenda for Africa should focus on agriculture and Food Security... Africa must share this dream so that five years from now no child in Africa should die of hunger and malnutrition. No child should go to bed hungry."

This is a statement of intent, no doubt about it. But those with longer memories will know that others have given promises before, and nothing came out of it. I would definitely empathise with such skeptics.

Similarly, Mutharika may not yet act on his promise. But any attempts he would make will benefit Malawi first. For the simple reason that Mutharika would not want to be seen as a success elsewhere but a failure at home. The fact that Mutharika had to tussle with Colonel Gaddafi for the AU leadership means that he has more than a point to prove, this should give Mutharika an added impetus to act on his promises.

'Food security' has been Mutharika's strongest selling point during his presidency. Malawi has registered maize surpluses in three of Mutharika's six years in power. Even so, the World Food Program (WFP) still estimates that about 45 percent of Malawi's 13 million population will need food aid this year.

WFP's estimate could yet raise in the coming year as Malawi is among many southern African countries that are currently facing dry spells, wich will inevitably lead to poor harvest. Mutharika will have to do something about it; fulfiling his roles both as a Malawian president and AU leader. Malawi stands to benefit.

I feel this is the area where Malawian analysts and comentators should be focusing when discussing the impact that Mutharika's AU leaderships will have on Malawi.