A growing dispute over grain import levies is exposing competing visions for the future of Zimbabwe’s agricultural economy, as policymakers, farmers and millers debate how best to balance food security, local production and market efficiency.
At the centre of the debate is Statutory Instrument 87 of 2025, a policy framework designed to encourage greater local sourcing of grain and oilseeds while generating resources to support irrigation development and agricultural production.
Supporters argue the measures are part of a long-term strategy to reduce Zimbabwe’s vulnerability to climate shocks, strengthen domestic agriculture and lower the country’s dependence on imported food. Critics, led by sections of the milling industry, contend that the policy could increase costs and constrain supplies if implemented too aggressively.
The latest intervention came from the Indigenous Grain Millers Association of Zimbabwe (IGMAZ), which publicly backed the levy framework and accused opponents of pursuing a model that would leave Zimbabwe increasingly dependent on imports. The association argued that excessive reliance on imported grain risks undermining local farmers and weakening domestic production systems.
IGMAZ also challenged claims previously made by some millers that grain shortages and bread price increases would result if imports were restricted, noting that grain made available through the Grain Marketing Board had reportedly not been fully accessed.
For Government, the argument extends beyond grain pricing.
Officials view food security as a strategic national issue, particularly as climate change increases the frequency of droughts and weather-related production shocks. The levy framework is intended not only to manage imports but also to finance infrastructure capable of expanding local production.
According to IGMAZ, the policy has already generated approximately US$7.5 million, funds that have been directed towards supporting 17 irrigation schemes across the country.
That investment comes as global climate agencies warn that another El Niño weather event is likely to affect parts of Southern Africa, potentially increasing pressure on food systems and agricultural output.
Supporters of the levy framework argue that Zimbabwe cannot sustainably continue importing commodities that can be produced locally, particularly at a time when foreign currency remains scarce and global supply chains are becoming more unpredictable.
Yet concerns within the milling sector remain.
Some processors argue that domestic production has not yet reached levels sufficient to meet industrial demand and caution that localisation targets should be aligned with actual production capacity.
The broader policy direction, however, appears increasingly settled.
Government has consistently embraced import-substitution policies across multiple sectors, from agriculture to mining, with the aim of building domestic productive capacity, retaining foreign currency and creating more resilient value chains.
The grain levy debate therefore reflects a larger economic question confronting Zimbabwe: how to transition from dependence on imported essentials toward a model built on local production without creating disruptions for consumers and industry.
As that debate intensifies, the discussion is becoming less about levies themselves and more about the kind of economy Zimbabwe wants to build — one anchored on imports, or one increasingly driven by domestic production, irrigation, value addition and food self-sufficiency.
