The role of state- business relations in the performance of Zambia’s food processing sub-sector

Open access

Abstract

In ensuring growth and development collaborative State-Business relations (SBRs) matters, and with economic growth comes increasing levels of employment, options for poverty reduction and hence more equitable development. Whereas it is known that SBR matters at a macro-economic level, the concept of SBR has also been employed in a more or less all-encompassing way in the literature. Accordingly, while it is clear that SBRs work, there is lack knowledge about which dimensions of SBRs are the most important. Due to the continued importance of agriculture in many developing countries, processing of the food produced in the sector is a key manufacturing activity of high economic importance to many economies. Ensuring collaborative SBRs in the food processing industry is therefore of interest to growth and development, particularly as it is a sector about which little is known about the role of SBRs. The paper attempts to examine how and why SBRs matter to and influence the growth and performance of local owned firms in the food processing sub-sector in Zambia. In particular, the paper analyses the roles and influence of government regulations and policies compared to those of business associations for the performance of the food processing sector in Zambia. The paper draws on primary data from a survey of firms in the food processing sector which was conducted between 2013 and 2014. It is shown that while the majority of the Zambian food processing firms experienced growth over the last five years, with increased employment and in a number of cases growing earnings, this seems to have happened in spite of a business environment which is not particularly supportive. The firms’ experience is that the SBRs mainly constitute institutional barriers to the performance of firms and highlight that formal government institutions and polices are incapable of assisting the firms and in most cases government institutions formulate and enact insufficient support schemes.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Abdel-Latif A. and Schmitz H. 2010: Growth Alliances: Insights from Egypt. In: Business and Politics Vol. 12 (4) pp. 1-27.

  • Bates R.H. and Collier P. 1995: The Politics and Economics of Policy Reform in Zambia. In: Journal of African Economies Vol. 4 (1) pp. 115-143.

  • Bigsten A. and Söderbom M. 2006: What have we Learned from a Decade of Manufacturing Enterprise Surveys in Africa? World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 3798 Washington DC: World Bank.

  • Bräutigam D. Rakner L. and Taylor S. 2002: Business Associations and Growth Coalitions in Sub-Saharan Africa. In: Journal of Modern African Studies Vol. 40 (4) pp. 519-547.

  • Copestake J.G. 1998: Agricultural Credit Management in Zambia: Business Development Social Security or Patronage? In: Development Policy Review Vol. 16 (1) pp. 5-28.

  • CSO 2000: Quarterly Employment and Earnings Survey Report CSO Lusaka CSO 2006: Formal Sector Employment and Earnings Inquiry Report CSO Lusaka.

  • Faber M. 1971: The Development of the Manufacturing Sector. In: Elliott C. editor Constraints on the Economic Development of Zambia Nairobi: Oxford University Press pp. 299-322.

  • Government of Zambia 2004: National Agricultural Policy 2004-2015 Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives Lusaka.

  • Government of Zambia 2011:’Sixth National Development Plan 2011-2016’ Lusaka Republic of Zambia.

  • Haglund D. 2010: From Boom to Bust: Diversity and Regulation in Zambia’s Privatized Copper Sector. In: Fraser A. and Larmer M. editor Zambia Mining and Neoliberalism. Boom and Bust on the Globalized Copperbelt New York: Palgrave MacMillan pp. 91-126.

  • Handley A. 2008: Business and the State in Africa. Economic Policy-Making in the Neo-Liberal Era Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Hansen M.W. and Schaumburg-Müller H. 2010: Firms in Developing Countries: A Theoretical Probe into the Borderland of Business Studies and Development Studies. In: European Journal of Development Research Vol. 22 (2) pp. 197-216.

  • Leftwich A. Sen K. and Te Velde D.W. editors 2008: The Economics and Politics of State Business Relations in Africa Manchester: University of Manchester.

  • Kaunga C.K. 1982: Regional Development Strategy: A Case Study of Zambia 1966-1976 Unpublished PhD Thesis New York: State University of New York.

  • Kragelund P. 2009: Knocking on a wide open door: Chinese investments in Africa. In: Review of African Political Economy Vol. 36 (122) pp. 479-497.

  • MoFNP 2013: 2013 Annual Economic Report Ministry of Finance and National Planning. Lusaka Zambia.

  • Moore M. and Schmitz H. 2008: Idealism Realism and the Investment Climate in Developing Countries. IDS Working Paper No. 307 Brighton Institute of Development Studies.

  • NORAD 2002: Study on Private Sector Development in Zambia Oslo Norwegian Agency for Development Co-operation Sen K. and Te Velde D.K. 2009: State- Business Relations and Economic Growth in Sub-Saharan Africa. In: Journal of Development Studies Vol. 45 (8) pp. 1267-1283.

  • Shafer M. 1994: Winners and Losers. How Sectors Shape the Developmental Prospects of States. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

  • Taylor S.D. 2007: Business and the State in Southern Africa: The Politics of Economic Reform Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers.

  • Taylor S.D. 2012: Influence without Organizations: State-Business Relations and their Impact on Business Environments in Contemporary Africa’. In: Business and Politics Vol. 14 (1) pp. 1-35.

  • UNDP 2006: Economic Policies for Growth Employment and Poverty Reduction: Case Study of Zambia Lusaka: UNDP.

  • World Bank 2009: Zambia. Commercial Value Chains in Zambian Agriculture: Do Smallholders benefit?’ Report No. 48774-ZM. Washington DC: The World Bank.

  • World Bank 2013: Doing Business in Zambia. Washington DC: The World Bank.

Search
Journal information
Impact Factor


CiteScore 2018: 1.11

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.218
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.591

Cited By
Metrics
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 371 187 3
PDF Downloads 158 107 3