02.05.2014 Views

Zimbabwe - Overseas Development Institute

Zimbabwe - Overseas Development Institute

Zimbabwe - Overseas Development Institute

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

The main d i f f i c u l t i e s f a c i n g Zimplow and Bulawayo Steel<br />

Products have revolved around three f a c t o r s : the nature of the<br />

products they have been engaged predominantly i n manufacturing,<br />

t h e i r management and, f i n a l l y , the i n s t i t u t i o n a l p o l i c y environment.<br />

Both firms began^' by making and are s t i l l predominantly<br />

dependent upon supplying the more simple range of a g r i c u l t u r a l<br />

implements and hand t o o l s to the <strong>Zimbabwe</strong>an market. Their sales<br />

volumes therefore l i e outside t h e i r grasp and c o n t r o l : when the<br />

country s u f f e r s from drought - as i t d i d i n 1982-84 and 1985-6-<br />

domestic sales f a l l d r a m a t i c a l l y . On the supply side, because<br />

some 90% of raw materials ( l a r g e l y l o c a l s t e e l ) i s supplied<br />

domestically, dependence of these two firms on import a l l o c a t i o n s<br />

i s s m a l l ' " . Nonetheless, although production i s f a i r l y labour<br />

i n t e n s i v e , c e r t a i n pieces of machinery (presses and forges etc.)<br />

have had to be imported and both the age of machinery and the<br />

shortage of spares have had an i n c r e a s i n g l y adverse e f f e c t on<br />

both p r o d u c t i v i t y and product q u a l i t y ' ' .<br />

U n t i l r e c e n t l y , however, none of these issues nor comparat<br />

i v e l y poor management have challenged the v i a b i l i t y of the firms<br />

i n question which have been able to maintain s a t i s f a c t o r y ( a l b e i t<br />

not very high) p r o f i t l e v e l s and without e x e r t i n g much e f f o r t at<br />

expanding i n t o the export market. In s p i t e of only these two<br />

firms supplying the domestic market, a s u f f i c i e n t l y "competitive"<br />

environment e x i s t e d to keep costs down and deter p r i c e - f i x i n g<br />

c o l l u s i o n , while s i m i l a r management and engineering c a p a b i l i t i e s<br />

led to "adequate" l e v e l s of p r o d u c t i v i t y and product q u a l i t y on<br />

the f a c t o r y f l o o r ' ^ . There was, however, no p r i c e or p r o f i t<br />

r e l a t e d i n c e n t i v e f o r e i t h e r f i r m r a d i c a l l y to improve product<br />

i v i t y . The o v e r a l l s e t t i n g was a p r i c e c o n t r o l system which<br />

allowed p r i c e r i s e s to be passed on to the domestic consumer i n<br />

l i n e with r i s e s i n inputs i n the normal cost-plus manner. There<br />

was l i t t l e i n c e n t i v e to keep p r i c e s down or to improve r a d i c a l l y<br />

on product q u a l i t y or p r o d u c t i v i t y . In s p i t e of often quite<br />

dramatic v a r i a t i o n s i n the l e v e l of domestic demand, plant s i z e ,<br />

the p r i c e regime and d i f f i c u l t i e s of exporting to independent<br />

A f r i c a provided no s u b s t a n t i a l i n c e n t i v e to expand s i g n i f i c a n t l y<br />

i n t o the export f i e l d . Nonetheless, the f a c t that exporting<br />

(mostly to South A f r i c a during the l a t t e r UDI years) d i d take<br />

place i n d i c a t e s that the i n s t i t u t i o n a l framework and the product<br />

i v e system d i d ( i n t h i s instance) enable these two firms to<br />

remain broadly i n t e r n a t i o n a l l y competitive (as confirn^ed by the<br />

DRC data). Over the longer term, however, the -^naintenance of<br />

t h i s p o l i c y environment would almost c e r t a i n l y have done l i t t l e<br />

more than lead to a widening between domestic and i n t e r n a t i o n a l<br />

p r i c e s , next to no improvement i n product q u a l i t y and i f there<br />

was to be export trade i t would have to be financed i n c r e a s i n g l y<br />

from higher domestic p r i c e s ' ' .<br />

I r o n i c a l l y , i n p r a c t i c e i t was neither the growing pressures<br />

for greater l i b e r a l i s a t i o n from i n t e r n a t i o n a l agencies nor the<br />

dramatic cuts i n f o r e i g n exchange a l l o c a t i o n s :that a f f e c t e d<br />

adversely so many manufacturers i n the mid-1980s) which uncovered<br />

the v u l n e r a b i l i t y and economic precar iousness of t.^.ese two firms.<br />

Rather i t was a l t e r i n g the p r i c e c o n t r o l mechanise Un e s s e n t i a l<br />

part of the UDI i n s t i t u t i o n a l framework for ir.anufacturing) which

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!