Dear Editor,
I’ve noticed with interest the diverse points of view (expressed in letters to the editor) on the impact (or not) of Guyana’s participation in the November 1, 2007 trade fair/seminar in Miami. While these type events have a role to play in developing sustainable production and marketing chains, their main purpose is just to bring potential buyers together with potential suppliers (and emphasis must be given to the word potential). Success will be determined a few years down the road when exports have increased or not. However, between the time of such meetings and effective marketing a great number of pitfalls can humbug trade from taking place. Consequently, sellers usually consider themselves lucky if one out of twenty of the interested buyers actually makes a purchase; and luckier still if a follow-up purchase is made.
The potential buyers at the Miami forum were different from potential buyers participating in such events elsewhere around the globe only in that a high percentage of them were Guyanese. All potential buyers at such events seek opportunities to purchase some minimum quantity (usually container loads) of specific products with high quality standards, supplied on a regular basis at a competitive price.
Guyana’s main competitors for supplying the USA markets with fresh and processed fruits, vegetables and meat and dairy products are Mexico, Costa Rica, Honduras, Nicaragua and Guatemala in Central America, and the Dominican Republic and Trinidad in the Caribbean. What makes competition difficult for Guyana at this point in time is that all these countries have: a wide diversity of micro-climates for growing good quality produce; very fertile soils that maximize productivity; relatively cheap labour (with the exception of Trinidad) to lower production costs; and their infrastructure (roads, ports and air and sea transport), technology transfer systems (training of farmers and supply of farm inputs and improved technologies), quality control, and energy costs outperform those found locally.
While the export potential for non-traditional products from Guyana is not hopeless, success will require an intensive private/public sector integrated systems approach that prioritizes the effective transfer of available technologies to small and medium size farmers on coastal and hinterlands. Otherwise, Guyana’s farmers will never have the capability to supply those regular shipments of quality fresh products at the competitive prices demanded by the “potential investors” identified in Miami. Such a strategy does not require large sums of money but does require dedicated and competent human resources working with farmers on priority products on a regular basis over an extended period of time (5-10 years). In the meantime, risks to exporters will be less if they focus on adding value to products that extend shelf-life and facilitate storage and shipping.
To suggest that farmers should grow new high value products for export, e.g. strawberries or exotics of any kind, before they have been adequately researched, grown and exported successfully (meaning at a profit without subsidies from development efforts) is a disservice to farmers as it motivates them to invest their scarce resources in unproven, high- risk adventures.
Yours faithfully,
Jerry La Gra