(3 Minutes Read)
When Botswana enforced a ban on vegetable imports in January 2022, it was promoted as a bold move to support local farmers, enhance food security, and reduce reliance on foreign produce. However, behind the protectionist agenda, a shadow market emerged. Large commercial farmers exploited regulatory loopholes, using cartel-like practices to dominate the market, while informal traders—especially hawkers—were systematically excluded.
The ban covered over 30 vegetables and created deep inequalities. Investigations by the Competition and Consumer Authority (CCA) exposed how large producers manipulated pricing and supply chains, sidelining small-scale vendors in breach of competition laws.
At a policy dialogue hosted by the Botswana Institute for Development Policy Analysis (BIDPA), CCA Director Ernest Bagopi revealed that informal traders were denied access to high-quality produce. Commercial farmers prioritized retailers and wholesalers, leaving hawkers with damaged or spoiled goods—often at inflated prices. Queues at farm gates could last weeks, and complaints—especially over potato access—were widespread.
Despite laws banning cartel behavior, the CCA found patterns of illegal coordination. For instance, the Ministry of Agriculture’s staggered cropping strategy effectively gave temporary monopolies to select farmers, enabling price hikes. One notable incident in Ghanzi saw hawkers sold frost-damaged potatoes that rotted by the time they reached markets, resulting in heavy financial losses with no recourse for compensation.
While some regions like Pandamatenga showed fairer practices, areas like Tuli Block and Ghanzi were highlighted for discriminatory behavior. Though temporary compliance followed inspections, violations resumed once oversight ended.
Read Also;
https://trendsnafrica.com/botswana-eases-restrictions-south-african-vegetables-return-to-market/
Ultimately, the policy enriched commercial farmers at the expense of informal traders and consumers, driving up food prices. The CCA has since urged the government to improve coordination among agencies to protect small businesses and ensure equitable policy implementation in critical sectors like food supply.
Bagopi concluded that while the policy had good intentions, it lacked the safeguards needed to prevent abuse and protect vulnerable groups.
