lize producer incomes, are often
counterproductive because they
disrupt incentives for private
dealers to transport and store
grain, with the result that the state
assumes these functions at great
expense. Economies of scale in
transporting, storing, and
processing grain often do not mate-
rialize because centralized market-
ing facilities are inefficient and
wasteful. Given all of these prob-
lems, the results of government
participation in maize markets
have been mixed at best.

Recent policy changes introduced in
many countries to increase the
productivity of resources devoted to
maize production are intended to
bring about the increasing commer-
cialization of smallholder produc-
tion. If these new policies are to
succeed, it will be increasingly
important that small-scale farmers
have reliable access to market
outlets and that governments
follow a consistent policy towards
marketing and pricing. This will
require considerable rethinking of
the respective roles of the public
and private sectors in maize
marketing.

In many African countries, the
most desirable level of public sector
participation in maize marketing
remains an open question. Govern-
ment marketing organizations
address real political and economic
needs in countries where the uncer-
tainty of maize production and the
difficulties of trade make policy
makers reluctant to rely on unregu-
lated private trading to ensure
adequate supplies and stable prices.
That is why countries of such
different political persuasions as
Kenya and Tanzania rely exten-
sively on state participation in
maize marketing. However, the
experience of the past 25 years
suggests that the political benefits


of public sector participation in
maize marketing must be weighed
carefully against the high economic
costs. Efforts to place maize mar-
keting entirely in the hands of
government organizations have
often proved inefficient and ineffec-
tive, confirming that private
traders are better able to perform
certain marketing functions. Thus,
the challenge facing policy makers
is to design effective marketing
systems that allow private traders
sufficient freedom to exercise their
considerable marketing skills while
at the same time ensuring the
stability that can be provided only
by the active participation of public
sector organizations.


 Realizing the
 Potential of Maize in
 Africa

Although it is risky to make precise
projections, general orders of
magnitude can be estimated for the
factors most likely to contribute to
future growth in demand for maize
in Africa. Population growth will
stimulate demand at an annual
rate of approximately 3% well into
the next century. Income growth is
more difficult to predict, especially
in view of the disappointing per-
formance of many African econo-
mies during the past two decades,
but it is perhaps not too optimistic
to hope that economic growth of
1-2% per year will resume in many
countries before the end of the
century. Rising incomes will
translate into increasing demand
for maize, both as human food and
especially as livestock feed. At
higher income levels, the demand
for maize for food should eventually
diminish, but this effect will be
more than offset by an increase in
demand for maize used as feed and/
or in industry.


Population growth, rising incomes,
intensification of livestock produc-
tion, and policy-induced changes in
food consumption patterns could
contribute to future growth in
demand for maize in Africa at a
rate of 3-5% per year. Growth in
demand of this magnitude is well
above historical production growth
rates, implying that a significant
increase in future supply will be
necessary to maintain (or prefera-
bly improve) maize self-sufficiency.

Without a doubt, the potential
exists for significantly increasing
the productivity of resources
devoted to maize in Africa, despite
the imposing constraints reviewed
above. But will maize realize its
potential?

This report has shown that the
possibility exists for significantly
reducing the unit cost of producing
maize. If lower production costs are
translated into lower market
prices-that is, if governments do
not intervene to support prices at
high levels in an attempt to redis-
tribute income to producers-maize
production and consumption can be
expected to rise. The crucial impli-
cation for policy is that technologi-
cal change has the potential to
resolve both the supply and de-
mand problems, since higher
productivity will simultaneously
increase the profitability of maize
to producers and reduce the price
paid by consumers. Thus, techno-
logical change can lead to the inten-
sification of maize production
systems, generation of employment,
and growth in income.

Improved technologies are already
available to at least double maize
yields in many areas, and if these
technologies can be transferred to
farmers, maize production in Africa
could accelerate rapidly. However,
transferring technologies to farm-
ers and establishing the stable,


(continued on p. 37)