Political Economy of Grades and Standards in Maize in East Africa, a presentation by Sam Kareithi.

1. Political Economy of Grades and
Standards in Maize in East Africa
Samuel Kareithi, Market Systems Expert
Programme Management Unit

2. What do standards and grades cover?
Safety Requirements
Is the grain safe?
General Quality requirements
Characteristics of healthy grains
Specific Quality requirements
Caused by outside factors
 Mycotoxins
(poisons produced
by fungi)
• Aflatoxins
• Fumonisins
 Pesticide residues
 Physical materials
(stones, glass and
pieces of metal)
 Poisonous or toxic
and noxious Seeds
 Shape
 Size
 Structure
 Natural color
 Flavor
 Smell
Examples:
• Maize: dent, flint
• Maize: yellow, red, white
• Rice: long-grain, short-grain
Moisture content(same for all
grades)
Foreign matter
Other grains
Filth(same for all grades)
Physical damage
Broken grains
Defective grains
Stained grains
Discolored grains
Weather-damaged grains
Diseased grains
Mouldy grains
Blemished or damaged grains
Insect- or vermin-damaged grains
Not covered by grades
(Grades cover only grains that meets all safety requirements)
Covered by grades

3. Political Economy
• The political economy of G&S in maize can be
located around the three components for
standards – safety, quality and general
requirements

4. Quality issues
• Most contentious – Moisture content
– Grains retain an amount of moisture – which
directly relates to weight. Weight = income
• sellers want a higher moisture, millers want a low
moisture
• Importers via sea want higher moisture
• Storage companies want low moisture
• ISO recommends 15% - but some studies say this is too
high for EA
(A drop of this standard from 15% to 13.5% for a trader
selling 100MT is a ‘loss’ of 1.5 MT in income)

5. Quality issues
• Graders as final ‘say’ – too much power?
(SA vehicle roadworthy tests are outsourced by
government to mechanical inspectors at certified
service stations – room for corruption!)

6. • Politics of food safety
– Revolves mainly around aflatoxin especially the
extent to which it affects imports from origins
with higher moisture and aflatoxin standards – eg
US standard of 20ppb while EAC is now at 10ppb-importers
from US will find it difficult

7. • Foreign matter
– There have been instances of dubious matter
being added by various stakeholders along the
chain – sand, stones etc- to increase weight.
Traders accuse farmers of adding foreign matter,
millers accuse traders etc
• A 3% foreign matter content in a consignment of
100mT = 3MT loss!

8. • Packaging
– A bag of maize had no standard weight – some
bags were 90, or 100 kgs. The farmer sells as a bag
of maize, but without a weight attached to it, a 90
kg bag can be sold at a price of 50kg, a loss of 40
kgs to a farmer! Traders can thrive in this
ambiguity to increase margins.

9. Informal vs formal trade
• Informal trade thrives due to advantages of
informality – how can we ensure informal
maize trade is compliant now that the
standards are mandatory?

10. • Other political economy issues
– Cartels – maize is a political staple – are there
chances of reversals to suit cheap imports which
do not meet standards?
– Cartels – non EAC maize coming eg from Zambia –
would they fight back?
– To what extent can these mandatory standards
make compliance costs too exorbitant for
smallholder farmers and make their produce
uncompetitive? This may create a political
problem

11. Thank you.
For more information please visit our
website at www.foodtradeesa.com