Australia’s livestock success highlights SA policy gaps
South Africa and Australia have much in common. Both possess favourable climates, extensive grazing land and highly skilled livestock producers. Yet one has become one of the world’s great meat-exporting nations while the other continues to underperform despite its enormous agricultural potential.
Having spent much of my career involved in South Africa’s meat industry and now living in Australia, I have had the opportunity to observe both systems from close quarters. The contrast is striking.
Australia, with a population of just more than 27-million, has built one of the world’s most productive livestock industries. It exports most of its beef and lamb production while still supplying its domestic market with abundant, consistently high-quality meat at prices that remain competitive by developed country standards. Australians also consume about twice as much meat per person as South Africans.
South Africa’s livestock producers are no less capable. They continue to produce excellent meat under conditions that are often far more demanding. Their challenge is not a lack of expertise but an operating environment characterised by unreliable infrastructure, policy uncertainty, rising production costs and recurring animal health threats.
The poultry industry illustrates the point. Australia has protected its domestic flock through uncompromising biosecurity and is essentially self-sufficient in chicken production. South Africa has built a substantial poultry industry but still relies on significant imports to satisfy domestic demand. That is not a reflection of poorer farmers, but of a more difficult commercial environment.
Perhaps the greatest difference lies in consistency. Australian producers benefit from reliable electricity, dependable transport networks, predictable regulation, advanced genetics, strong research support and efficient logistics. These advantages translate directly into higher productivity, greater competitiveness and stronger export performance.
Nothing illustrates this more clearly than foot-and-mouth disease (FMD). Australia has maintained FMD-free status without vaccination for decades through rigorous border protection, surveillance, traceability and rapid response. South Africa faces more complex geographical realities, including a wildlife reservoir of the disease, but recurring outbreaks have also highlighted the importance of effective fencing, animal movement controls, veterinary capacity and biosecurity. The economic consequences extend well beyond livestock losses to disrupted exports and reduced investor confidence.
The comparison is not intended to criticise South African agriculture. On the contrary, it demonstrates what South African farmers continue to achieve despite formidable obstacles. Given a stable policy environment, dependable infrastructure and sustained investment in animal health, there is every reason to believe the industry could compete even more successfully on world markets.
The lesson from Australia is not that it enjoys better farmers or richer natural resources. It is that long-term investment, sound policy and effective institutions allow agricultural potential to be realised.
Australia has shown what good policy can achieve. South Africa has already shown what its farmers can achieve despite poor policy. Imagine what they could accomplish if government became an ally instead of an obstacle.
David Wolpert
Sydney, Australia
Local motor industry challenges mirror those of textile sector
Ford Motor Company Africa president Neale Hill’s article refers (“How the next six months will define SA’s automotive decade”, July 27)
Decades ago the domestic textile, clothing and footwear industries faced similar competitive market entry from China. It started slowly, and then suddenly the impact decimated the sector, including with successful fully imported brands.
Valiant finger-in-the-dyke institutional efforts, including well-constructed master plans, have had little effect, and the decline of what is left continues.
And so it is now with our motor vehicle industry. Copy and paste all the above. The motor retail sector may survive, but the motor manufacturing sector may not.
It all goes about the retail price point.
Alan Fleetwood
Kenilworth
Global uncertainty requires review of gold reserve strategy
In 2022 the world witnessed a stark reminder of gold’s enduring value when a G20 nation had about $300bn of its foreign reserves frozen virtually overnight.
Unlike foreign currency reserves or digital assets, gold cannot be sanctioned, frozen or switched off. It remains one of the few truly sovereign stores of value.
Recognising this reality, central banks worldwide — particularly among the Brics nations — have been steadily increasing their gold holdings as a strategic safeguard against geopolitical and financial uncertainty. However, South Africa has taken the opposite path.
In 2003 South Africa sold about 60 tonnes of gold at prices near $300 an ounce. At today’s prices that same gold would be worth about $7.7bn. Even more concerning, the country has not purchased a single ounce for its official reserves in the past 23 years.
Last year, it reportedly used gains on the limited gold it still holds to help plug a budget deficit rather than strengthen the nation’s long-term financial resilience.
As the global monetary landscape shifts and nations increasingly seek protection from economic volatility, South Africa must ask itself a difficult question: can it afford to remain on the sidelines while others continue to build their strategic gold reserves?
Dr Duarte da Silva
MD, Northbound Processing
JOIN THE DISCUSSION: Send us an email with your comments to letters@businessday.co.za. Letters of more than 200 words may be edited for length. Anonymous correspondence will not be published. Writers should include a daytime telephone number.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.