Johann Kotzé of Agri SA shares his thoughts on the South African agricultural landscape and the road ahead.
After my first calendar year at the helm of Agri SA, I can say unequivocally that the passion and ingenuity of South African farmers is the driving force behind our global competitiveness. I have spent time with farmers in every corner of our country and have experienced first-hand the diversity and complexity of our country’s food system. The courage, determination and perseverance of farmers and agribusinesses greeted me everywhere. Still, I’m increasingly worried.
Don’t get me wrong. I have full confidence in the agri-food system to continue producing food and I am positive about our outlook in 2025. However, I cannot deny the impact of rural decay and inadequate service delivery as well as the associated socio-economic challenges in communities on the sustainability of individual farmers and value chains. It’s alarming to see huge grain lorries weaving potholes through the main streets of once-thriving rural villages. I also notice the abandoned farmhouses along highways and wonder if the owners live in the sometimes equally unsafe small towns.
Our complex environment
I’m also often greeted by moms in drought-stricken areas whose spouses work in America for a financial boost. But, it’s no longer just the size of our challenges that worries me. None of these challenges are new to us.
However, I am concerned about the idea that the same resources, thinking and relationships that have brought agriculture to this point are going to ensure our sustainability in the future. The idea that decay or historical capacity should simply be restored or reclaimed to what it once was is nonsensical. Rather, we need to take into account the institution and functions that the future is going to ask of us. The same is true of the belief that the arrival of a single new leader or policy framework is the answer. Our business environment is simply too complex and fragmented. The federal nature of state administration, either, doesn’t help.
Similarly, the reactive policy-driven onslaught of organised agriculture is also no longer relevant. For a long time, the modus operandi has been that of creating policy and bargaining capacity, vociferous advocacy, and timely litigation. This approach is sometimes fraught with divisive emotion but more importantly – it has led to limited or even no outcomes in recent years. Again, get me right: I’m not denying the relevance and impact of what has worked in the past. A conducive policy environment is non-negotiable for economic growth and will always remain a priority for organised agriculture. But the current business environment demands more from us, innovative thinking to pragmatic problem-solving.
A pragmatic approach
I explain using an example. In a recent development, BFAP found that the GDP figures for agriculture during the third quarter of 2024 were significantly better than Statistics SA’s indicated 28,8% contraction. Following the study of flawed flows of data and data deficiencies that make it difficult to calculate the diversity of agriculture’s economic contribution, it was agreed to convene an ‘Agricultural Conditions Assessment Committee’. The goal is to get input from industry ranks to substantiate the statistical findings. In short, the experience of farmers at the ground level must be aligned with what is presented statistically.
The accuracy of agricultural GDP data is essential for monetary policy and as a measure of agriculture’s health and food security.
What stands out is organised agriculture and the Department of Agriculture’s limited ability to provide timely, accurate and geographical data on agriculture and the food system. Our knowledge of the industry is fragmented, creating room for dangerous and subjective opinions that sometimes lead to emotional decision-making. The fact that the same is true regarding the lack of reliable data on labour, water resources, land ownership, international trade, disease outbreaks and the state of critical agricultural infrastructure, highlights how reactive and fragmented organised agriculture and the Department of Agriculture have become. We lack a coordinated measure to evaluate our own success and health.
Important steps
The establishment of the Agricultural Conditions Assessment Committee is an important first step in Agri SA’s drive to act more proactively in consultation with the Department of Agriculture. Agri SA also recently started to build a food security index for South Africa together with BFAP and PWC. The idea is to identify key performance indicators across value chains both in agriculture and food segments of the food system and link them to relevant stakeholders within the private as well as public sectors.
The index creates a framework for analysing and interpreting intelligence on food-related economic activities, but also serves as a platform to bring about collaboration between agriculture and food segments of the value chain on critical issues. A further objective is to create a basis for foresight/insights that are critical to the sustainability of the land-based industry and food security. Issues such as climate change and the availability of water on farms, for example, will be repackaged through the lens of food security to drive critical decision-making.
Whose job is it?
However, we must remember that what is experienced at farm level and in communities is sometimes far beyond the direct influence of officials in Pretoria. Our own leadership and relationships at the grassroots level have a much greater impact on our day-to-day reality. The onus is therefore on all of us to take up our roles in the realisation of a sustainable agricultural future.
What do I mean by that? Over the past 30 years, in the midst of the decay and dysfunction of national and provincial agricultural authorities, industry organisations have played an increasingly larger role in the operation of value chains and farm-level success. Whether it is about establishing new farmers, developing new cultivars, setting up and regulating ethical and sustainability practices, providing market intelligence, opening up new markets in consultation with authorities, managing animal and plant diseases, or engaging with critical role players such as Transnet and Eskom – industry organisations do it all, financed by the farmers themselves. As a collective, we have already taken on a lot ourselves, and in some cases built stronger capacity and more influence than state entities. My expectation is that we will have to take on even more responsibilities or work more closely with state entities. This work, along with existing partnerships, will be integral to the Food Security Index and the platform it supports.
Bending the curve
BFAP frequently refers to the “bended curve” in agriculture, indicating the theoretical potential of the sector. I am confident that if we become more focused and pragmatic in how we work together – with each other as well as with state institutions – we can realise our economic potential in agriculture.
How and with what we will respond to our circumstances is what will determine the outcome of agriculture’s future in South Africa. We will have to focus on what we have and what is in our ability as farmers to create our future with ingenuity. – Johann Kotzé, Agri SA
