Vijiji vya Ujamaa vilivyokufa ni vipi?

[Mzee Mwanakijiji]

Tulipopata uhuru tulianza kwa kujenga taifa, tulifanya makosa?

 

[Waberoya]

Tulipopata uhuru tulianza kwa kujenga taifa, tulifanya makosa?

Refer my previous post, hakuna kosa; tulikuwa kwenye right track, right time, right people, ila concept akujenga taifa wengi hawakuijua na leo wengi hawaijui. Leaders wliokuja baada ya nyere were not right guy to build a nation na ukisoma my earlier post nimeeleza hivyo.

 

[Zakumi]

Hodi Hodi:

Kuhusu kushindwa kwa vijiji vya Ujamaa. Kuna mambo mengi tu ya kuangalia. Kwa kuna masuala ya kihistoria. Kuna masuala ya kiuchumi na masuala ya uongozi.

Kuhusu historia: Vijiji hivi havikuwa compatible na maisha ya mwafrika na vilianzishwa kwa lazima. Wakati Nyerere ana-implement sera za Ujamaa alitaka watu wahamie kwa hiari yao na serikali kutoa huduma katika vijiji hivyo. Huo ulikuwa mwishoni mwa 60. Kufikia 1973, kulikuwa na vijiji 180 tu nchi nzima. Na Nyerere akatoa hutuba kuwauliza wananchi kuwa serikali inatoa huduma bure, je mchango gani wananchi wanatoa kwa serikali? Kulikuwa hakuna jibu. Na katika kipindi hiki kulikuwa na mahusiano makubwa kati ya Tanzania na China. Na baadhi ya viongozi walivutiwa na vijiji vya Ujamaa China. Hivyo uhamuzi uliochukuliwa ni kuwalazimisha watu kujiunga na vijiji hivyo.

Kuhusu uongozi: Kuongoza watu ni complex issue. Vijiji vya Ujamaa vilikuwa vinatakiwa kuwa ni Modern economic engines lakini viongozi wa vijiji hivyo hawakuwa na expertise zozote katika means of production, wealth distribution na mambo mengine. Hivyo recipe of disaster ilipikwa tayari. Kama watanzania wenye digrii zao walishindwa kuendesha mashirika ya umma, viwanda na taasisi zingine; je darasa la saba au mwenye elimu ya ngumbaru atafanya vipi kuongoza kijiji.

Vilevile viongozi wengi wa Tanzania katika ngazi zote walikuwa na bado wana-mentality ya kikoloni ya kusiliza gavana, rais, mkuu wa mkoa au watu waliojuu yao na sio kufikiri jinsi ya kuwaongoza watu walio chini yao. Hivyo vijiji vingi vilifunguliwa kumfurahisha Nyerere lakini sio kuondoa matatizo ya wananchi. (Top-down approach).

Kuhusu kiuchumi: Mradi mzima wa vijiji vya Ujamaa was a toss. Watu mnaboronga-boronga kwa kutaja vijiji fulani na vitu vilivyofanyika. Mnachoelezea ni mwanzo (initial stage) lakini mnashindwa kueleza sustainability ambayo inapatikana baada ya initial stage kuvukwa.

Hakuna kijiji cha Ujamaa Tanzania kilichofikia development sustainability level ambayo ilidumu kwa zaidi ya miaka 10. Hakuna kijiji cha Ujamaa Tanzania kilichoweza kufikia level ya kulipa mishahara ya wafanyakazi wa kijiji hicho kama walimu, manesi au mabwana shamba.

Hakuna kijiji cha Ujamaa kilichoweza kufanya mabadiliko ya uongozi na kuwa na awamu zaidi ya moja ya uongozi.

Hakuna kijiji Tanzania kilichofikia level ya kuweza kununua machinery kwa mkopo na kulipa. Hata hivyo vijiji bora ilibidi Nyerere atoe zawadi.

Mtu yoyote anayefikiria kuwa kulikuwa na vijiji vya Ujamaa Tanzania naomba atuletee accounts za kijiji hicho zenye kuonyesha revenues and expenses. Vilevile atuletee idadi ya watu na tupime maendeleo ya kijiji hicho kwa kutumia namba na sio magunia ya mahindi na zawadi ya matrekta.

Z10

 

[Zakumi]

Tulipopata uhuru tulianza kwa kujenga taifa, tulifanya makosa?

Mkuu:

Unaweza kuwa na nia nzuri ya kujenga taifa lakini ukibugi steps matokeo yanaweza yasiwe tofauti na yule ambaye hakufanya juhudi zozote.

 

[Mzee Mwanakijiji]

Mkuu:

Unaweza kuwa na nia nzuri ya kujenga taifa lakini ukibugi steps matokeo yanaweza yasiwe tofauti na yule ambaye hakufanya juhudi zozote.

Kwa hiyo ilikuwa ni muhimu kuacha kujenga taifa na kujaribu kuendelea tu na kuacha taifa lijijenge lenyewe? au tulipaswa kusahihisha makosa na kuendelea na ujenzi wa taifa? au tungeacha sekta binafsi ndiyo isimamie ujenzi wa taifa?

 

[jmushi1]

Nimeipenda essay hii hapa chini,itasaidia kupanua mjadala huu zaidi...Pia naona tatizo ambalo sera ya ujamaa ilikuwa nalo ni kupractice a private closed economy,yani ukiangalia in a macro perspectives,ni AD=C+G,no net export(Import-Export) Ujamaa kwa ujumla uli discourage export,tatizo ni kwamba kama uko kwenye a private closed economy kama ujamaa ulivyokuwa ukipractice, net export haikubaliki,unaweza kuona kuwa mafanikio yetu makubwa prior to our independence yalitokana na export.....Nimeipenda essay hii kwasababu mwandishi wake tunashare one idea kwamba kama open economy ingeruhusiwa under ujamaa matokeo yangeweza kuwa tofauti hivi sasa...Tatizo lilikuwa ni kuweka sera zitakazokuwa zinaestablish an open economy that is compatible with ujamaa.....Chini hapa ni essay hiyo.





Tanzania used to be the granary of East Africa. Between 1961 and 1970, Tanzania has the highest domestic food production rate, it increased about 7% per year according to the United Nation figure, whereas in Kenya, it is about 5% (U.N: 1972). By my understanding, from the end of W.W.I to the late 1960's, Tanzania had a booming and healthy agriculture sector. As Lofchie suggests (1988: 144) Tanzania had the highest rate of increase in domestic food production for the entire African continent during the decade of the 1960's. And according to Uma Lele (1984: 161) by the end of W.W.I, subsistence peasant agriculture sector began to commercialize, export oriented corps are not only tea and coffee, but also tobacco, cotton, pyrethrum, oilseeds etc. Those corps were grown by peasants mostly and the production raised by about 3.5% from 1930's to 6% until late 1960's. However, since the beginning of the 1970's Tanzania is consistently importing food in order to meet a persistent food gap. As a matter of fact, between 1973 and 74, Tanzania imported Maize, Rice and Wheat for a total of 410,200 metric tons of grain, and have produced only 58,100 metric tons. This is remembered as the food crisis of 1974/75. Although the volume of importation and domestic production of corps fluctuates form one year to another, nevertheless, on the average it is about 200,000 metric tons of grain per year during the late 70's and 300,000 metric tons in the early 80's. The failure of Tanzanian socialist is an obvious fact for all, but ironically, for Julius Nyerere who was the engineer, after he announced in 1985 that he would not run for the office again, his international reputation raised even higher! You are my

visitor

EMAIL ME PLEASE​

HOME ME, MOI


This page support

Rwanda​

Congo
China
Japan
Somalia
World Politics​

The failure of agriculture production is not due to climate factor, according to president Nyerere it is principally a problem of implementation. However, critics argue that in fact, just like any other Tanzanian economic sectors, the deterioration is caused by government's basic economic strategy. Finally starting in 1975, Tanzanian government begins to reform its economic policy gradually, which is known as the Dar es Salaam Spring.
In my view, the misfortune that Tanzanian had to experience was another historical experimentation for a non democratic socialism. The goal for Nyerere was to make a poor nation economically independent with an equalitarian society, unfortunately, just like any other social experiments of such nature, it became a failure. In this essay, I am going to briefly analyze the issues that in my view could be considered as the major causes, and then I will examine the economic policy and practice of Tanzania with three different economic theories.

Historical Cause​

Tanzania was once a colony to Germany; at that period, German intensified the Sisal corps production which is only good for industrial use. After the W.W.I, Tanzania became a British mandate, technically it means that Tanzanian could become an independent sovereignty at any time; therefore, unlike in Kenya, British never invested on the infrastructure and economic foundation of the country. Road is a means to connect people, without it, people of rural world could not do commerce between them and could hardly to go to Dar-es-Salaam. From a political perspective, this factor undermined the Tanzanian farmers to become unified as a single political unity or interest group. Later this factor became the key cause for the failure of Tanzanian economy, not because the road scarcity but because its consequence. Tanzanian government implemented consciously harmful policy toward agrarian world because the decision making in the government is uniquely composed by urban elite, they favored industrial development which takes place in the urban area, because that is where they live. They also believed that by lowering the official price of food crops, the demand would rise subsequently and the farmers would continue to produce the same quantity of corps. As farmers are unorganized; therefore, they are not recognized by the urban elite. The fact is Tanzanian elite unlike in the case of Kenya, they do not have personal economic interest in agriculture activities; consequently they become insensitive to rural problems. As the result, because the poor profit and discriminatory policy, farmers lost the interest on large production, and engenders a situation of "Administratively Generated Rent" as the result. It means due to government policy, foodstuff becomes a scarcity, a large gap exists between official price and black market price, and urban people have to buy the food on the black market pay the higher price because the government's food could not suffice .
Unlike in Kenya who has the system of Mixed Farm, farming industry in Tanzania at the time of independence was poorly developed. De facto Tanzanian farms were small of size, production was not so intensified, badly concentrated between them and cities. Nevertheless, Tanzania is a large African nation, at the period it had a relatively small population, hence rural people had no problem with scarcity of land or job, and agriculture provides 80% of employment (same as for today). In sum, Tanzanian agriculture sector at the time of independence was the core of nation's economy, although it was not as advanced as the Kenyan one, but it was increasing, healthy and earning foreign currency.

Government Policy


The malaise in Tanzania has evoked a voluminous academic commentary. Most of Africanist argue that the causes of its failure are both internal and external; it is a response that; however, in my view lacks academic credibility for the reason that such answer could be used at any circumstance and apply to any issue. I am very interested with the explanation of Uma Lele (1984: 160) who suggests that external influence such as the drought of 1973-74, the break up of East African Community in 1977, the war with neighboring Uganda in 1979, two oil crisis of 1973 and 1979 had indeed contribute to the failure of Tanzanian economy. But, she argues, it is also necessary to "blame on failure of the government's own economic policy", because Tanzania is one of the largest African recipients of foreign aid, it received $2.7 billion from 1971-81. Therefore it exceeds the external factor cost. Lofchie (1988: 14 exemplifies that the nature of failure is a result of long series of harmful policy, a social political dilemma between concentration of capital and redistribution of wealth. As a matter of fact, external factor must to be considered with attention, but I believe internal cause should be studied with even closer consideration. The fact is the socialist Tanzanian government opposed to any substantial admixture of capitalist practices in the Tanzanian economic development, it was against the use of market incentive system as means to excite agriculture production or any other mercantile sectors, such policy also discouraged foreign investments. Overall, it eliminated the possibility of to use market competition as stimulus of economic growth.
Observers who are sympathetic to Tanzanian socialism generally seek to blame on the external economic effect in order to exonerate Nyerere's socialist policies, which are in my own perception the ultra cause of economic failure. Other academics argue that if the export volume of agriculture corps remains the same during the 70's, Tanzania would not have to face to such economic catastrophe. As a developing country, Tanzania needs foreign currency badly, but if the export volume of crops fall, and at the same time major import goods price such as for oil, and expenditure increases, it is normal that the government went bankrupt financially an faced balance of payments crisis during the early 1980's.

Ujamaa Villages


Tanzanian government attempted to implement a nationwide system of collectivized agriculture. Due to geographical problem, Nyerere thought by putting peasants to live together they would benefice fully the social infrastructure such as school or clinic, another goal for the latter was to see the agriculture production increases subsequently. Ujamaa is the word in Swahili to describe such village. The technique of Ujamaa is to replace individual farms with a network of village communities in which land should be collectively held and production collectively organized. In the analysis of Arkadie ( 6), the project of Ujamaa was:
To transform the pattern of rural settlement by congregating the rural population with previously had been resident predominantly on dispersed family smallholding – in nucleated villages of sufficient size to be efficient units for the delivery of services.
Of cause, no one, especially for the peasantry would like to give up their traditional habitat, the resistance of villagers was common, both in terms of to give up the farms and to move. The villagization became even more intense after 1969 (during the period of second Five Year Plan). In two occasions, because the policy was so unpopular that Tanzanian government had to use military force, it happened in the region of Dodoma and Kokuma. According to Lofchie (1988: 153) before the collectivization, merely 5% of rural population lived in villages, but by the end of 1975 Ujamaa policy had forced more than 60% of rural population to live in settled villages.
After different academic researches, the collectivization policy contributed directly to Tanzanian agriculture crisis of 1974-75. For instance, the marked agriculture production in the 1970's differs extraordinarily with the previous decades, thought, the population growth was about 2.5%, but the 6% growth realized in agriculture sector from 1950's and 60's indicates without doubt that it was increasing. But in contrast, during the 70's different export corps are either decreased or stagnated. Worth, according to Lele (1984:166) during the 1980's export volumes were less than half those of 1970. She argues that if the export volumes had been maintained as the 1970's, the balance of payments crisis clearly would not as this bad.
On the other hand, in my view, if the industrial sectors had performed as great as Julius Nyerere had expected, although the food production decreased, the financial crisis could not happen either. Therefore, the poor economic performance including agriculture and industrial sector was the result of policy implemented by the socialist government.

Arusha Declaration: Between 1967 and 1975


In February 1967, president Nyerere declared in Arusha that Tanzania is a socialist country, his policy will pursuit the realization of self-reliance and egalitarian society (Arkadie: 1995). From 1961 to 65, politically Tanzania enjoyed a period of Open Society, with a multiparty and free civil association system. People are free to elected local officials and join any political association they want. However, due to the economic policy of that time, which was the USSR style of Central Planning system and Import Substituting Industrialization, the political environment changed gradually.
Like any other Third World countries of that period, Tanzanian leaders are looking for an economic development model that promises to promote a fast industrialization, which believed wrongly as the key to economic success. After 40 years of socialism, Soviet launched Sputnik, it demonstrates the successfulness of Russian economic model. Hence, the socialite Central Economic Planning, which opposes to the free market system was the one preferred by most new leaders of Third World. However, the Central Planning System, regardless five years or seven years plan has an objective to achieve. In order to realize the objective, it can not allow any different voices to challenge the plan. Therefore, to ensure the process, it requires as in Russia an authoritarian government. Nyerere as the result declared in Arusha that for the well being of the people, Tanzania is a socialist country, and embrace one party state system.
Tanzanian version of socialism development was an unbridled program of state regulation and control (Lofchie: 198. It was accompanied by implacable governmental opposition to any substantial admixture of capitalist practices in the nation's development and; therefore, refused to use the Free Market Incentives as a means of improving agriculture and industrial growth. Capitalism was considered as imperialism and profit seeking was evil doing. The socialism of Julius Nyerere carries out three major policies that caused the economic failure. 1. overvaluation of currency, 2. suppression of agriculture price 3. the determination of to pursuit ISI.

Overvaluation of Shilling


In 1967, Tanzanian government creates Tanzanian shilling, it was an over valuated one. The purpose to over valuate the currency is to allow the government to import foreign good, such as technology, at a cheaper price. The state also control the banking system, so the government could decide to which economic sector the loan will be provide, and at what interest rate, such practices are known as mandatory interest rates and guaranteed Letters of Credit. The overvaluation of currency significantly reduced the real producer price received by Tanzanian farmers because they are paid with the local money. But the profit they received are calculated with the official exchange rate between the U.S dollar and shilling; therefore, they received fewer shilling as by comparing with the shilling of real free market exchange rate. At the same time it also means that the food produced in Tanzania is much more expensive than the free market price, consequently it is more interesting to buy the food from international market, and the Tanzanian government encouraged such practice because it believes that by allowing food to be imported, it reduces the internal food price (World Bank: 1981), and provides cheaper and more food for urban population.

Suppression of Agriculture Price


The state establishes Marketing Board, which controls the buying and selling of all agriculture products. This system permits the government to setup a purchase price which does not reflect the real market price. Hence the government can offers to the urban people low cost food and at the meantime makes further profit on the export oriented corps such as coffee. The profit made with the Marketing Board in theory will go to finance the growing urban industries and other social expenditure such as school and clinics. The idea sounds excellent, but technically, the government made a mistake. The members of the Marketing Board were chosen by the government, not by the farmers like in Kenya, those officials represent; therefore, the interest of government not farmers. In addition because members are not elected by the farmers, they are insensitive to their issues. In contrast, in the neighboring Kenya, the members of Marketing Board are farmer elite elected by farmers, they are responsible to their constituency, and therefore farmers' economist interest is protected.
In Tanzania, government legally controls prices for basic foodstuffs; Nyerere argues that by doing so, people's interest is been protected. For the farmers, regardless the price of international market they will always receive the same tariff for their products, and for urban population, food will always be cheap. Hence, the government monopolized the buying of crops nationwide, the prices are fixed at below real market price, and agriculture producers could not negotiate the price with the government officials. When the cost of local food becomes too high, subsidies are provided to the urban people by selling the import food at below landed coast. Yet, the fact is in addition of import food and international aide, urban people still do not have enough food!
The socialist government's strategy was a to be self sufficient; however, ironically it could not even maintain a normal ability of food production. The collectivization policy in the agrarian world was to promote a social equality among farmers; hence, larger farmers were called as "Kulaks" or exploiters, and had land confiscated. If to produce more food is; therefore, an act of capitalism and subject to punition, no farmer is willing to produce any extra food. This is the reason of way Tanzania experienced food crisis and had to import food from international market, which exhausts its currency reserve.

The Determination of to Pursuit I.S.I


The Advantages of Import Substituting Industrialization


The world leading development economists suggest that firstly, different branches of economics for different economic condition. Market system of Ricardo and Smith is only looking for profits and does not invest in industries with future potential; therefore, the government needs to take initiative to plan and intervene in the economic development. As far as the agriculture is concerned, farmers have low demand elasticity as consumers, and at the meantime they present also low supply elasticity as producers. In sum, for the development economists, it is not likely that agriculture will promote any economic development.
The agriculture sector was considered as the Gold Egg, and farmers as the price takers, by taxing agriculture sector, the government earns revenue and invests it into the industrial development. As the industrial sector develops, government earns more revenue and then reinvest into agriculture sector. The idea seemed very good because it promises not only an escape from the poverty and most importantly, an escape from the western domination.
It permits a rapid industrialization, and because you will produce the basic merchandise locally in lieu of importation, the government is going to saves money from importation.

Why Tanzanian Adopts I.S.I and Socialism?


The reason for Tanzanian to adopt I.S.I is because its independence occurred during a period in which trade is believed as pessimistic. Economists suggest that private sectors do not invest where they do not have interests, hence the capital will only concentrate in certain area among few people. Secondly Import Substituting Industrialization was a dominant economic idea of that time. The success of Soviet model convinced new Third World leaders and numerous world leading economists that Russian's strategy of industrialization is the key solution for the deprived poor nations. In addition, it was also a period of nationalism, newly independent states were looking badly to escape for the shadow of the past. In Tanzanian, it had also a racial factor, because Tanzanian economy was mainly dominated by the Asians, and the anti-capitalist Tanzanian government decided to Africanize every thing in Tanzania. In accordance with Keynesian theory, the government took initiative on nation's social economic development. A series of measure was adopted, and it was backed by foreign academics and journalists, Tanzanian government as the result felt confident by implementing I.S.I strategy.

How to achieve I.S.I


Firstly, the state is the responsible for the design and implementation of policy, it will be based upon Central Planning system, the government will protect local industries from exterior competitors under forms of tariffs and quantitative restrictions, and at the meantime the government constructs small industries that produce basic consumption goods such as beverage, shoes, clothing etc. After the small industries become successful, the development will concentrate on heavier production and transportation field. The financial wherewithal will come from international loan and taxation on agriculture sector.

Taxation


In Tanzania, the taxations on agriculture sector were under two forms, the explicit and implicit one. Explicit taxes are the legitimized taxes, it includes export duties tax, local tax, development tax and marketing and processing tax. For instance, Tanzania government imposes tax on exports which are the main export oriented corps such as coffee, tea or sisal, and the price paid by the government is much lower than the free market price. In order for the farmers to sell their crops, they have also to paid marketing and processing taxes as an obligation. In addition farmers are required to pay development and local taxes. The means for government is to create the Marketing Board which monopolizes the purchasing process.
Implicit taxes including overvaluation and inflation tax. Those are more hidden taxes that diminish farmers' revenue further. Basically because the Tanzanian government overvalued the Shilling, producers receive a profit that is lower than the international price. And at the mean time, the government pays to the farmers their credit after certain duration, so the government can takes advantage of inflation's effect on the formers profit.

Bureaucracy


As the central government in Dar es Salaam is the single player in the Tanzanian economy, in order to do so, it needs a huge bureaucracy army for the purpose of to execute its policy. Consequently, Tanzanian government copied from other socialist countries, for the purpose of to control rural farmers the system known as cooperatives. However, by the mid-1970's it was evident for the government that neither the extensive of corruption nor the increased political manipulation of cooperatives by the rural elite could be avoided, so the cooperatives were replaced by a public sector monopoly of agricultural Parastatals. (Lele: 1984). Parastatals received a complete legal monopoly over the purchasing, storage, processing and marketing. There are one dozen major assigned Parastatals. According to Lofchie (1988:160) "these organizations have exhibited pervasive patterns of inefficiency." There are mismanaged and corrupted, after a study made by the Tanzanian government (United Republic of Tanzania: 1983) these authorities absorbed a large part of profit and as the result, they contributed significantly to the downward pressure on producer prices. Sometimes the bureaucracy overhead coast was so high that there has been no cash remainder for the farmers. As the result of the growing disenchantment with the quality of Parastatals and their uncontrollable financial losses, the government was once again considering to give the power back to cooperatives.
Such organization engenders the public expenditure to increase faster than the revenue of government; therefore, economically speaking it is wrongdoing. Nevertheless, it was believed that although inefficient, it would produce more social equality than if private trades and merchants were allowed to operate.

Explanation on the Failure of I.S.I and Tanzanian Economy


According to Uma Lele (1984: 159), between 1971 and 1981, per capita income declined nearly by half. Although because the strategy of I.S.I, the Tanzanian industrial sector expended at the same time; however, in 1980, the Tanzanian fifteen major industries utilize only 45% of its' capacity of production. Way I.S.I did not work in Tanzania? In this part of my essay, from three economic perspectives, which are the Left Dependency School, Centrist and the Orthodox School, I am going to examine on the nature of I.S.I, the process of this theory by the government, and why it resulted in such consequences.
The Left Dependency School would argue that first of all, the failure of Tanzania is due to Neo-Colonialism and Core Periphery system. Tanzania and the Third World states in general are the victims of exploitation from the North. Capital earned by Tanzanian government went back to the core western states to purchase machineries; Tanzanian is the victim of this vicious capitalism circle. Secondly, the government of Tanzania is too corrupted itself, and in order to maintain such insufficient bureaucracy, the young developing industry as well agriculture sector are over loaded by formal and informal taxes. In sum the Left Dependency School would blame the failure of Tanzanian economy on the industrialized countries and the incompetence of Tanzanian government.
The Centrists would argue that the Tanzanian government should have higher criteria on the selection of industries in which it is going to invest. The process of industrialization should be done step by step; however, in Tanzania every thing was built within a very short period. The failure is also due to the poor implementation of government policy at local level, and the nature of enterprise ownership should be private not public, so the enterprises will face to external challenge consequently become efficient and competitive. But in Tanzania; however, it was public and the productivity was low. Tanzanian have a limited financial resources, strategically speaking the government should help only the healthy growing industries not the non-profitable ones. On the other words, to help the fittest to grow faster and let the uncompetitive ones disappear. But Tanzanian government in contrary helped the not competitive one with the means that should go to the better-formed industries. The insufficiency and weakness of Tanzanian economy is also largely due to the protectionism, the Centrist thinks tariffs should be temporary duration, with a timetable to be phased out; therefore, the industries will be competitive by facing the international competition. And finally the Centrists would suggest that the ultimate cause of failure is the Tanzanian government's insensitivity to develop its agriculture sector and thirstier economy.
In concordance with Classical Orthodox School of David Ricardo and Adam Smith, agriculture sector is the most important one, they would definitively oppose to Nyerere's economic policy, which in favors only the urban industries. Classical Orthodox School believes that in order to have a healthy economy, a balance must be made between the state's interference and market influence. Neither the influence of free market nor government is prefect; they think both side have to work together. The market must be open because the free trade is the best system of economy with a lot of advantages, whereas in Tanzania under I.S.I, the market is closed, industrial production is only for the purpose of self-sufficiency and not export oriented. Technically, it could not be profitable if the machineries do not stretch to its maximum of productivity, and in Tanzania, as demonstrate by Uma Lele, in 1980 the Tanzanian industries utilize only 45%.

Conclusion


The Tanzanian intelligentsia was always in favor of socialism even in the early 80's. But with the arriving of new generation of professionals who have being schooled in the western countries, new ideas influence the political sphere of Dar es Salaam. The food crisis was like a detonator; it blows up all hidden social criticism. As early as 1975, a struggle within Tanzanian government was going on between elements who favored liberal economic system versus the other side who wanted to continue the old economic model, the political leadership was shrinking and at disarray. After the food crisis of 1974/75, government begin to liberalize the agriculture sector. In cities, government also allowed small businesses such as grocery stores, restaurants or bookstores to operate under private ownership. Prices as the result increased naturally to inline with the regular market consideration. The collectivization was officially over, Ujamaa villages are replaced by new law of villages and villages cooperatives act of 1975. The old cooperative model based upon Chinese model, cultivated every thing collectively, has been changed to Israeli model of Mushade, collective farm but single-family farm unite. However, obviously it did not work very well, or perhaps it was too late, Tanzanian government went bankrupt.
In nowadays, the economic grow about 4% annually and the population increases 3.5%. According to economist prediction, by year 2020, the economy of Tanzanian will catch back its stage of 1950's. As a student, it is hard for me to make comments on the policy of president Nyerere who is now even being called as the "Teacher".

Source: http://www.empereur.com/tanzania.html

 

[Rev. Kishoka]

Hatimaye mwana Mpotevu kaibuka! i was eargly wondering where is Zakumi? Karibu bwana utupe fresh perspective!

 

[Regia Mtema]

Mmh vijiji vya ujamaa tena?

 

[Ndahani]

Refer my previous post, hakuna kosa; tulikuwa kwenye right track, right time, right people, ila concept akujenga taifa wengi hawakuijua na leo wengi hawaijui. Leaders wliokuja baada ya nyere were not right guy to build a nation na ukisoma my earlier post nimeeleza hivyo.

There you are talking.The move we have now is backward movement.Where we began in those 60 and 70, should not be allowed to perish just like that. Kama azimio la arusha ambalo lilitoa mwongozo wa Taifa, lilikuwa na kasoro, mbona hawa viongozi waliolitupilia pembeni hawakuja na any sort of official document ya kuliondoa azimio hilo na kuleta yale wanayotaka kuyaleta? Badala yake walilivunja kimya kimya ili kila mtu aje na tafsiri anayojisikia kuja nayo! Hapo tulikosea na ndipo mimi binafsi namuona Mwalimu Nyerere kama genius maana yeye hakutaka kuongoza watu kwa ujanja ujanja na kutumia mambo ya kufikirika tu. Tusipokuwa na guidance ya nini sisi tunataka kutoka kwa viongozi na wananchi wake, hatutaweza kujenga Taifa imara. Tutatumia vigezo gani sasa?

 

[Keil]

Nimeipenda essay hii hapa chini,itasaidia kupanua mjadala huu zaidi...Pia naona tatizo ambalo sera ya ujamaa ilikuwa nalo ni kupractice a private closed economy, yani ukiangalia in a macro perspectives, ni AD=C+G, no net export (Import-Export) Ujamaa kwa ujumla uli discourage export, tatizo ni kwamba kama uko kwenye a private closed economy kama ujamaa ulivyokuwa ukipractice, net export haikubaliki,unaweza kuona kuwa mafanikio yetu makubwa prior to our independence yalitokana na export.....Nimeipenda essay hii kwasababu mwandishi wake tunashare one idea kwamba kama open economy ingeruhusiwa under ujamaa matokeo yangeweza kuwa tofauti hivi sasa...Tatizo lilikuwa ni kuweka sera zitakazokuwa zinaestablish an open economy that is compatible with ujamaa.....Chini hapa ni essay hiyo.

Mkuu Mushi,

Hapo kwenye maneno niliyopigia mstari naomba nitofautiane na wewe. Ina maana wakulima wetu walipokuwa wanalima mazao ya biashara [pamba, mkonge, tumbaku, kahawa, chai, na pareto] walikuwa wanalima ili watumie wenyewe? Ni kwa vipi Ujamaa una-discourage export?

Kwanini shirika kama GAPEX na Vyama vya Ushirika vilianzishwa? GAPEX ilikuwa ina deal na exports za sector ya kilimo kama sikosei.

Ujamaa hauna uhusiano wowote na closed or open economy. nchi inaweza kuwa ya kibepari na bado ikawa closed. Kinacho-close/open economy ni tariffs pamoja na urasimu mwingine ndani ya nchi, na huo urasimu sio lazima utokane na Ujamaa. Marekani na Nchi zilizoendelea kila siku wakienda kwenye WTO nchi masikini zinalia kwamba hazina fair competition kwenye mazao yao ya kilimo kwa kuwa nchi tajiri zinatoa ruzuku kubwa kwa wakulima wao na hivyo wakienda kwenye soko la dunia wanavuruga bei na nchi masikini zinaishia kuuza kwa bei ya chini while wananunua pembejeo kwa bei kubwa sana, at the end of the day wakulima wa nchi masikini wanapata hasara.

Ninadhani tatizo kubwa liko kwenye marketing system ya mazao yetu. Wakati tunapata Uhuru, mkoloni aliacha marketing system ambayo ilikuwa ina-function vizuri. Wakati huo mazao ya biashara yalikuwa ni Kahawa, Chai, Mkonge, na Pamba; yalikuwa yanalimwa kwenye mashamba makubwa (plantations) ambayo yalikuwa yanamilikiwa na kampuni za nje. Kampuni hizo za nje ndizo ambazo zilikuwa zinafanya biashara ya ku-export hayo mazao, na kama kulikuwa na wazawa ambao walikuwa na vishamba vyao basi walikuwa wanaunza kwenye vyama vyao vya Ushirika kama KNCU, Nyanza, Ngoni-Matengo na vinginevyo, then hivyo vyama vya ushirika viliuza kwa hizo kampuni za wazungu.

Azimio la Arusha lilipokuja lilivunja hiyo marketing system na ku-introduce a new marketing system ambayo iliishia kuwaumiza wananchi kwa kuwapunja bei za mazao. GAPEX, Mamlaka za Mazao, Vyama vya Ushirika chini ya Ujamaa viligeuzwa kuwa miradi ya ulaji. Kuna kipindi Nyerere alivunja vyama vyote vya ushirika sababu ya huo ulaji na baadaye tena akaja kuvirudisha lakini vikawa chini ya CCM kama Jumuiya ya Chama [WASHIRIKA]. Kwa hiyo ni CCM ndiyo ambayo ilikuwa ina-impose viongozi wa hivyo vyama vya ushirika. Sasa kama CCM ndiyo ime-impose viongozi, je, viongozi wanawajibika kwa nani? Kwa CCM ama kwa wanachama wa chama cha Ushirika?

Baada ya kuanza kufuata mfumo wa soko huria [kama siyo soko holela], serikali imeshindwa kuweka marketing system ambayo inaweza kumpa mkulima bei nzuri. Ukifika msimu wa kuuza mazao inabidi serikali iweke masharti kibao as if wao walikuja kukupa pembejeo za bure. Mahindi nilime mimi, ikifika wakati wa kuvuna serikali inasema hakuna kuvuna mahindi mabichi, na hakuna kuuza mahindi nje ya Tanzania.

Nenda Karagwe, ukivuka mpaka ukaingia Uganda unakutana na bei nzuri ya kahawa kuliko ile ambayo unapewa na wanunuzi wa Tanzania. Mwaka 2003 nilikuta FFU wametanda mpakani kuzuwia kahawa isiuzwe Uganda, wakati huo vyama vya ushirika vya Karagwe na Bukoba vilikuwa hoi vikiwa havina hela na vinaomba mkopo toka CRDB ili vikanunue mazao hayo, na CRDB walikuwa wamegoma kutoa mkopo kwa kuwa hivyo vyama vya ushirika vilikuwa ni wadeni sugu na collateral walizokuwa nazo hazikuwa zina-qualify kupewa mkopo mwingine.

Je, ina maana Uganda wao huwa wanauza kwenye soko gani hiyo kahawa yao? Wakulima wakiacha kulima mahindi ama kahawa, utawalaumu? Je, exports za mazao zikipungua bado utasema ni sababu ya Ujamaa kwamba una discourage exports?

 

[Mzee Mwanakijiji]

nimeisoma hiyo essay inavutia sana na inathibitisha kile ambacho mwandishi tayari alikuwa ameshakiamua.

 

[Companero]

Hatimaye mwana Mpotevu kaibuka! i was eargly wondering where is Zakumi? Karibu bwana utupe fresh perspective!

Kama kawaida alikuwa anasubiria fursa ya kuupiga madongo Ujamaa na Muasisi wake!

 

[Companero]

Hakuna kijiji cha Ujamaa Tanzania kilichofikia development sustainability level ambayo ilidumu kwa zaidi ya miaka 10. Hakuna kijiji cha Ujamaa Tanzania kilichoweza kufikia level ya kulipa mishahara ya wafanyakazi wa kijiji hicho kama walimu, manesi au mabwana shamba.

Hakuna kijiji cha Ujamaa kilichoweza kufanya mabadiliko ya uongozi na kuwa na awamu zaidi ya moja ya uongozi.

Hakuna kijiji Tanzania kilichofikia level ya kuweza kununua machinery kwa mkopo na kulipa. Hata hivyo vijiji bora ilibidi Nyerere atoe zawadi.

Bado hujaacha kuungopea umma tu? Nini uthibitisho wa hizo 'hakuna' zako hapo juu? Hebu rejea nukuu ya PhD kutoka kwenye mada iliyopo hapo juu:

They [RDA Ujamaa Villages] thus achieved “self-sufficiency in food supply; the buying of a maize-mill which was owned by an expatriate so as to process the food they sold; establishing their own dispensary and attempting to send a villager to learn from a local hospital; purchasing a saw-mill from a capitalist for wood processing; and attempting wool processing – washing, cording, dyeing, knitting and weaving – as a form of cottage industry while at the same time keeping sheep.”

 

[Waberoya]

Tanzania used to be the granary of East Africa. Between 1961 and 1970, Tanzania has the highest domestic food production rate, it increased about 7% per year according to the United Nation figure, whereas in Kenya, it is about 5% (U.N: 1972). By my understanding, from the end of W.W.I to the late 1960’s, Tanzania had a booming and healthy agriculture sector. As Lofchie suggests (1988: 144) Tanzania had the highest rate of increase in domestic food production for the entire African continent during the decade of the 1960’s. And according to Uma Lele (1984: 161) by the end of W.W.I, subsistence peasant agriculture sector began to commercialize, export oriented corps are not only tea and coffee, but also tobacco, cotton, pyrethrum, oilseeds etc. Those corps were grown by peasants mostly and the production raised by about 3.5% from 1930’s to 6% until late 1960’s. However, since the beginning of the 1970’s Tanzania is consistently importing food in order to meet a persistent food gap. As a matter of fact, between 1973 and 74, Tanzania imported Maize, Rice and Wheat for a total of 410,200 metric tons of grain, and have produced only 58,100 metric tons. This is remembered as the food crisis of 1974/75. Although the volume of importation and domestic production of corps fluctuates form one year to another, nevertheless, on the average it is about 200,000 metric tons of grain per year during the late 70’s and 300,000 metric tons in the early 80’s. The failure of Tanzanian socialist is an obvious fact for all, but ironically, for Julius Nyerere who was the engineer, after he announced in 1985 that he would not run for the office again, his international reputation raised even higher! You are my

visitor

EMAIL ME PLEASE​

HOME ME, MOI



This page support

Rwanda​

Congo
China
Japan
Somalia
World Politics​

The failure of agriculture production is not due to climate factor, according to president Nyerere it is principally a problem of implementation. However, critics argue that in fact, just like any other Tanzanian economic sectors, the deterioration is caused by government’s basic economic strategy. Finally starting in 1975, Tanzanian government begins to reform its economic policy gradually, which is known as the Dar es Salaam Spring.
In my view, the misfortune that Tanzanian had to experience was another historical experimentation for a non democratic socialism. The goal for Nyerere was to make a poor nation economically independent with an equalitarian society, unfortunately, just like any other social experiments of such nature, it became a failure. In this essay, I am going to briefly analyze the issues that in my view could be considered as the major causes, and then I will examine the economic policy and practice of Tanzania with three different economic theories.

Historical Cause​

Tanzania was once a colony to Germany; at that period, German intensified the Sisal corps production which is only good for industrial use. After the W.W.I, Tanzania became a British mandate, technically it means that Tanzanian could become an independent sovereignty at any time; therefore, unlike in Kenya, British never invested on the infrastructure and economic foundation of the country. Road is a means to connect people, without it, people of rural world could not do commerce between them and could hardly to go to Dar-es-Salaam. From a political perspective, this factor undermined the Tanzanian farmers to become unified as a single political unity or interest group. Later this factor became the key cause for the failure of Tanzanian economy, not because the road scarcity but because its consequence. Tanzanian government implemented consciously harmful policy toward agrarian world because the decision making in the government is uniquely composed by urban elite, they favored industrial development which takes place in the urban area, because that is where they live. They also believed that by lowering the official price of food crops, the demand would rise subsequently and the farmers would continue to produce the same quantity of corps. As farmers are unorganized; therefore, they are not recognized by the urban elite. The fact is Tanzanian elite unlike in the case of Kenya, they do not have personal economic interest in agriculture activities; consequently they become insensitive to rural problems. As the result, because the poor profit and discriminatory policy, farmers lost the interest on large production, and engenders a situation of “Administratively Generated Rent” as the result. It means due to government policy, foodstuff becomes a scarcity, a large gap exists between official price and black market price, and urban people have to buy the food on the black market pay the higher price because the government’s food could not suffice .
Unlike in Kenya who has the system of Mixed Farm, farming industry in Tanzania at the time of independence was poorly developed. De facto Tanzanian farms were small of size, production was not so intensified, badly concentrated between them and cities. Nevertheless, Tanzania is a large African nation, at the period it had a relatively small population, hence rural people had no problem with scarcity of land or job, and agriculture provides 80% of employment (same as for today). In sum, Tanzanian agriculture sector at the time of independence was the core of nation’s economy, although it was not as advanced as the Kenyan one, but it was increasing, healthy and earning foreign currency.

Government Policy


The malaise in Tanzania has evoked a voluminous academic commentary. Most of Africanist argue that the causes of its failure are both internal and external; it is a response that; however, in my view lacks academic credibility for the reason that such answer could be used at any circumstance and apply to any issue. I am very interested with the explanation of Uma Lele (1984: 160) who suggests that external influence such as the drought of 1973-74, the break up of East African Community in 1977, the war with neighboring Uganda in 1979, two oil crisis of 1973 and 1979 had indeed contribute to the failure of Tanzanian economy. But, she argues, it is also necessary to “blame on failure of the government’s own economic policy”, because Tanzania is one of the largest African recipients of foreign aid, it received $2.7 billion from 1971-81. Therefore it exceeds the external factor cost. Lofchie (1988: 14 exemplifies that the nature of failure is a result of long series of harmful policy, a social political dilemma between concentration of capital and redistribution of wealth. As a matter of fact, external factor must to be considered with attention, but I believe internal cause should be studied with even closer consideration. The fact is the socialist Tanzanian government opposed to any substantial admixture of capitalist practices in the Tanzanian economic development, it was against the use of market incentive system as means to excite agriculture production or any other mercantile sectors, such policy also discouraged foreign investments. Overall, it eliminated the possibility of to use market competition as stimulus of economic growth.
Observers who are sympathetic to Tanzanian socialism generally seek to blame on the external economic effect in order to exonerate Nyerere’s socialist policies, which are in my own perception the ultra cause of economic failure. Other academics argue that if the export volume of agriculture corps remains the same during the 70’s, Tanzania would not have to face to such economic catastrophe. As a developing country, Tanzania needs foreign currency badly, but if the export volume of crops fall, and at the same time major import goods price such as for oil, and expenditure increases, it is normal that the government went bankrupt financially an faced balance of payments crisis during the early 1980’s.

Ujamaa Villages


Tanzanian government attempted to implement a nationwide system of collectivized agriculture. Due to geographical problem, Nyerere thought by putting peasants to live together they would benefice fully the social infrastructure such as school or clinic, another goal for the latter was to see the agriculture production increases subsequently. Ujamaa is the word in Swahili to describe such village. The technique of Ujamaa is to replace individual farms with a network of village communities in which land should be collectively held and production collectively organized. In the analysis of Arkadie ( 6), the project of Ujamaa was:
To transform the pattern of rural settlement by congregating the rural population with previously had been resident predominantly on dispersed family smallholding – in nucleated villages of sufficient size to be efficient units for the delivery of services.
Of cause, no one, especially for the peasantry would like to give up their traditional habitat, the resistance of villagers was common, both in terms of to give up the farms and to move. The villagization became even more intense after 1969 (during the period of second Five Year Plan). In two occasions, because the policy was so unpopular that Tanzanian government had to use military force, it happened in the region of Dodoma and Kokuma. According to Lofchie (1988: 153) before the collectivization, merely 5% of rural population lived in villages, but by the end of 1975 Ujamaa policy had forced more than 60% of rural population to live in settled villages.
After different academic researches, the collectivization policy contributed directly to Tanzanian agriculture crisis of 1974-75. For instance, the marked agriculture production in the 1970’s differs extraordinarily with the previous decades, thought, the population growth was about 2.5%, but the 6% growth realized in agriculture sector from 1950’s and 60’s indicates without doubt that it was increasing. But in contrast, during the 70’s different export corps are either decreased or stagnated. Worth, according to Lele (1984:166) during the 1980’s export volumes were less than half those of 1970. She argues that if the export volumes had been maintained as the 1970’s, the balance of payments crisis clearly would not as this bad.
On the other hand, in my view, if the industrial sectors had performed as great as Julius Nyerere had expected, although the food production decreased, the financial crisis could not happen either. Therefore, the poor economic performance including agriculture and industrial sector was the result of policy implemented by the socialist government.

Arusha Declaration: Between 1967 and 1975


In February 1967, president Nyerere declared in Arusha that Tanzania is a socialist country, his policy will pursuit the realization of self-reliance and egalitarian society (Arkadie: 1995). From 1961 to 65, politically Tanzania enjoyed a period of Open Society, with a multiparty and free civil association system. People are free to elected local officials and join any political association they want. However, due to the economic policy of that time, which was the USSR style of Central Planning system and Import Substituting Industrialization, the political environment changed gradually.
Like any other Third World countries of that period, Tanzanian leaders are looking for an economic development model that promises to promote a fast industrialization, which believed wrongly as the key to economic success. After 40 years of socialism, Soviet launched Sputnik, it demonstrates the successfulness of Russian economic model. Hence, the socialite Central Economic Planning, which opposes to the free market system was the one preferred by most new leaders of Third World. However, the Central Planning System, regardless five years or seven years plan has an objective to achieve. In order to realize the objective, it can not allow any different voices to challenge the plan. Therefore, to ensure the process, it requires as in Russia an authoritarian government. Nyerere as the result declared in Arusha that for the well being of the people, Tanzania is a socialist country, and embrace one party state system.
Tanzanian version of socialism development was an unbridled program of state regulation and control (Lofchie: 198. It was accompanied by implacable governmental opposition to any substantial admixture of capitalist practices in the nation’s development and; therefore, refused to use the Free Market Incentives as a means of improving agriculture and industrial growth. Capitalism was considered as imperialism and profit seeking was evil doing. The socialism of Julius Nyerere carries out three major policies that caused the economic failure. 1. overvaluation of currency, 2. suppression of agriculture price 3. the determination of to pursuit ISI.

Overvaluation of Shilling


In 1967, Tanzanian government creates Tanzanian shilling, it was an over valuated one. The purpose to over valuate the currency is to allow the government to import foreign good, such as technology, at a cheaper price. The state also control the banking system, so the government could decide to which economic sector the loan will be provide, and at what interest rate, such practices are known as mandatory interest rates and guaranteed Letters of Credit. The overvaluation of currency significantly reduced the real producer price received by Tanzanian farmers because they are paid with the local money. But the profit they received are calculated with the official exchange rate between the U.S dollar and shilling; therefore, they received fewer shilling as by comparing with the shilling of real free market exchange rate. At the same time it also means that the food produced in Tanzania is much more expensive than the free market price, consequently it is more interesting to buy the food from international market, and the Tanzanian government encouraged such practice because it believes that by allowing food to be imported, it reduces the internal food price (World Bank: 1981), and provides cheaper and more food for urban population.

Suppression of Agriculture Price


The state establishes Marketing Board, which controls the buying and selling of all agriculture products. This system permits the government to setup a purchase price which does not reflect the real market price. Hence the government can offers to the urban people low cost food and at the meantime makes further profit on the export oriented corps such as coffee. The profit made with the Marketing Board in theory will go to finance the growing urban industries and other social expenditure such as school and clinics. The idea sounds excellent, but technically, the government made a mistake. The members of the Marketing Board were chosen by the government, not by the farmers like in Kenya, those officials represent; therefore, the interest of government not farmers. In addition because members are not elected by the farmers, they are insensitive to their issues. In contrast, in the neighboring Kenya, the members of Marketing Board are farmer elite elected by farmers, they are responsible to their constituency, and therefore farmers’ economist interest is protected.
In Tanzania, government legally controls prices for basic foodstuffs; Nyerere argues that by doing so, people’s interest is been protected. For the farmers, regardless the price of international market they will always receive the same tariff for their products, and for urban population, food will always be cheap. Hence, the government monopolized the buying of crops nationwide, the prices are fixed at below real market price, and agriculture producers could not negotiate the price with the government officials. When the cost of local food becomes too high, subsidies are provided to the urban people by selling the import food at below landed coast. Yet, the fact is in addition of import food and international aide, urban people still do not have enough food!
The socialist government’s strategy was a to be self sufficient; however, ironically it could not even maintain a normal ability of food production. The collectivization policy in the agrarian world was to promote a social equality among farmers; hence, larger farmers were called as “Kulaks” or exploiters, and had land confiscated. If to produce more food is; therefore, an act of capitalism and subject to punition, no farmer is willing to produce any extra food. This is the reason of way Tanzania experienced food crisis and had to import food from international market, which exhausts its currency reserve.

The Determination of to Pursuit I.S.I


The Advantages of Import Substituting Industrialization


The world leading development economists suggest that firstly, different branches of economics for different economic condition. Market system of Ricardo and Smith is only looking for profits and does not invest in industries with future potential; therefore, the government needs to take initiative to plan and intervene in the economic development. As far as the agriculture is concerned, farmers have low demand elasticity as consumers, and at the meantime they present also low supply elasticity as producers. In sum, for the development economists, it is not likely that agriculture will promote any economic development.
The agriculture sector was considered as the Gold Egg, and farmers as the price takers, by taxing agriculture sector, the government earns revenue and invests it into the industrial development. As the industrial sector develops, government earns more revenue and then reinvest into agriculture sector. The idea seemed very good because it promises not only an escape from the poverty and most importantly, an escape from the western domination.
It permits a rapid industrialization, and because you will produce the basic merchandise locally in lieu of importation, the government is going to saves money from importation.

Why Tanzanian Adopts I.S.I and Socialism?


The reason for Tanzanian to adopt I.S.I is because its independence occurred during a period in which trade is believed as pessimistic. Economists suggest that private sectors do not invest where they do not have interests, hence the capital will only concentrate in certain area among few people. Secondly Import Substituting Industrialization was a dominant economic idea of that time. The success of Soviet model convinced new Third World leaders and numerous world leading economists that Russian’s strategy of industrialization is the key solution for the deprived poor nations. In addition, it was also a period of nationalism, newly independent states were looking badly to escape for the shadow of the past. In Tanzanian, it had also a racial factor, because Tanzanian economy was mainly dominated by the Asians, and the anti-capitalist Tanzanian government decided to Africanize every thing in Tanzania. In accordance with Keynesian theory, the government took initiative on nation’s social economic development. A series of measure was adopted, and it was backed by foreign academics and journalists, Tanzanian government as the result felt confident by implementing I.S.I strategy.

How to achieve I.S.I


Firstly, the state is the responsible for the design and implementation of policy, it will be based upon Central Planning system, the government will protect local industries from exterior competitors under forms of tariffs and quantitative restrictions, and at the meantime the government constructs small industries that produce basic consumption goods such as beverage, shoes, clothing etc. After the small industries become successful, the development will concentrate on heavier production and transportation field. The financial wherewithal will come from international loan and taxation on agriculture sector.

Taxation


In Tanzania, the taxations on agriculture sector were under two forms, the explicit and implicit one. Explicit taxes are the legitimized taxes, it includes export duties tax, local tax, development tax and marketing and processing tax. For instance, Tanzania government imposes tax on exports which are the main export oriented corps such as coffee, tea or sisal, and the price paid by the government is much lower than the free market price. In order for the farmers to sell their crops, they have also to paid marketing and processing taxes as an obligation. In addition farmers are required to pay development and local taxes. The means for government is to create the Marketing Board which monopolizes the purchasing process.
Implicit taxes including overvaluation and inflation tax. Those are more hidden taxes that diminish farmers’ revenue further. Basically because the Tanzanian government overvalued the Shilling, producers receive a profit that is lower than the international price. And at the mean time, the government pays to the farmers their credit after certain duration, so the government can takes advantage of inflation’s effect on the formers profit.

Bureaucracy


As the central government in Dar es Salaam is the single player in the Tanzanian economy, in order to do so, it needs a huge bureaucracy army for the purpose of to execute its policy. Consequently, Tanzanian government copied from other socialist countries, for the purpose of to control rural farmers the system known as cooperatives. However, by the mid-1970’s it was evident for the government that neither the extensive of corruption nor the increased political manipulation of cooperatives by the rural elite could be avoided, so the cooperatives were replaced by a public sector monopoly of agricultural Parastatals. (Lele: 1984). Parastatals received a complete legal monopoly over the purchasing, storage, processing and marketing. There are one dozen major assigned Parastatals. According to Lofchie (1988:160) “these organizations have exhibited pervasive patterns of inefficiency.” There are mismanaged and corrupted, after a study made by the Tanzanian government (United Republic of Tanzania: 1983) these authorities absorbed a large part of profit and as the result, they contributed significantly to the downward pressure on producer prices. Sometimes the bureaucracy overhead coast was so high that there has been no cash remainder for the farmers. As the result of the growing disenchantment with the quality of Parastatals and their uncontrollable financial losses, the government was once again considering to give the power back to cooperatives.
Such organization engenders the public expenditure to increase faster than the revenue of government; therefore, economically speaking it is wrongdoing. Nevertheless, it was believed that although inefficient, it would produce more social equality than if private trades and merchants were allowed to operate.

Explanation on the Failure of I.S.I and Tanzanian Economy


According to Uma Lele (1984: 159), between 1971 and 1981, per capita income declined nearly by half. Although because the strategy of I.S.I, the Tanzanian industrial sector expended at the same time; however, in 1980, the Tanzanian fifteen major industries utilize only 45% of its’ capacity of production. Way I.S.I did not work in Tanzania? In this part of my essay, from three economic perspectives, which are the Left Dependency School, Centrist and the Orthodox School, I am going to examine on the nature of I.S.I, the process of this theory by the government, and why it resulted in such consequences.
The Left Dependency School would argue that first of all, the failure of Tanzania is due to Neo-Colonialism and Core Periphery system. Tanzania and the Third World states in general are the victims of exploitation from the North. Capital earned by Tanzanian government went back to the core western states to purchase machineries; Tanzanian is the victim of this vicious capitalism circle. Secondly, the government of Tanzania is too corrupted itself, and in order to maintain such insufficient bureaucracy, the young developing industry as well agriculture sector are over loaded by formal and informal taxes. In sum the Left Dependency School would blame the failure of Tanzanian economy on the industrialized countries and the incompetence of Tanzanian government.
The Centrists would argue that the Tanzanian government should have higher criteria on the selection of industries in which it is going to invest. The process of industrialization should be done step by step; however, in Tanzania every thing was built within a very short period. The failure is also due to the poor implementation of government policy at local level, and the nature of enterprise ownership should be private not public, so the enterprises will face to external challenge consequently become efficient and competitive. But in Tanzania; however, it was public and the productivity was low. Tanzanian have a limited financial resources, strategically speaking the government should help only the healthy growing industries not the non-profitable ones. On the other words, to help the fittest to grow faster and let the uncompetitive ones disappear. But Tanzanian government in contrary helped the not competitive one with the means that should go to the better-formed industries. The insufficiency and weakness of Tanzanian economy is also largely due to the protectionism, the Centrist thinks tariffs should be temporary duration, with a timetable to be phased out; therefore, the industries will be competitive by facing the international competition. And finally the Centrists would suggest that the ultimate cause of failure is the Tanzanian government’s insensitivity to develop its agriculture sector and thirstier economy.
In concordance with Classical Orthodox School of David Ricardo and Adam Smith, agriculture sector is the most important one, they would definitively oppose to Nyerere’s economic policy, which in favors only the urban industries. Classical Orthodox School believes that in order to have a healthy economy, a balance must be made between the state’s interference and market influence. Neither the influence of free market nor government is prefect; they think both side have to work together. The market must be open because the free trade is the best system of economy with a lot of advantages, whereas in Tanzania under I.S.I, the market is closed, industrial production is only for the purpose of self-sufficiency and not export oriented. Technically, it could not be profitable if the machineries do not stretch to its maximum of productivity, and in Tanzania, as demonstrate by Uma Lele, in 1980 the Tanzanian industries utilize only 45%.

Conclusion


The Tanzanian intelligentsia was always in favor of socialism even in the early 80’s. But with the arriving of new generation of professionals who have being schooled in the western countries, new ideas influence the political sphere of Dar es Salaam. The food crisis was like a detonator; it blows up all hidden social criticism. As early as 1975, a struggle within Tanzanian government was going on between elements who favored liberal economic system versus the other side who wanted to continue the old economic model, the political leadership was shrinking and at disarray. After the food crisis of 1974/75, government begin to liberalize the agriculture sector. In cities, government also allowed small businesses such as grocery stores, restaurants or bookstores to operate under private ownership. Prices as the result increased naturally to inline with the regular market consideration. The collectivization was officially over, Ujamaa villages are replaced by new law of villages and villages cooperatives act of 1975. The old cooperative model based upon Chinese model, cultivated every thing collectively, has been changed to Israeli model of Mushade, collective farm but single-family farm unite. However, obviously it did not work very well, or perhaps it was too late, Tanzanian government went bankrupt.
In nowadays, the economic grow about 4% annually and the population increases 3.5%. According to economist prediction, by year 2020, the economy of Tanzanian will catch back its stage of 1950’s. As a student, it is hard for me to make comments on the policy of president Nyerere who is now even being called as the “Teacher”.

Source: http://www.empereur.com/tanzania.htmlhttp://www.empereur.com/tanzania.htmlhttp://www.empereur.com/tanzania.html

These are articles that we need to receive with many thanks!

Ok, kwa wale wapenzi wa ujamaa kuna mwenye kuikosoa hii article.?

I insisted learning from failure is always good if heroes are out there to stand and go..

In other words, wakati kuna watu wanamwona Mwinyi ni failure na style yake, kuna watu wanamwona Hero!

Mwinyi naye akianza kuwa evaluated ni wapi amekosea, tutaishia kupigana vibao!
failure za Mwinyi na system yake inataka kuwarudisha watu in 1960s and 70s, article kama hii inaeleza wapi we had mistakes and I believe is an art of intelectual to challenge and to be challenged!

 

[Msanii]

In-short
Vijiji vyote vya ujamaa vilikufa baada ya zazibar version kuwa established.

Kama kuna mtu anafikiri kuna kijiji cha ujamaa aniambie wanapata wapi supply zao za kila siku and wanapeleka wapi products zao kwani hakuna zite RETCO tena....

Just tell me

 

[Waberoya]

In-short
Vijiji vyote vya ujamaa vilikufa baada ya zazibar version kuwa established.

Kama kuna mtu anafikiri kuna kijiji cha ujamaa aniambie wanapata wapi supply zao za kila siku and wanapeleka wapi products zao kwani hakuna zite RETCO tena....

Just tell me

How?

 

[Zakumi]

Hatimaye mwana Mpotevu kaibuka! i was eargly wondering where is Zakumi? Karibu bwana utupe fresh perspective!

Hakuna kipya hapa zaidi ya selective nostalgia. Na haya yote yanatokana na ukweli kuwa tuling'ang'ania ushamba kujenga nchi.

Hapa USA business ventures zinayoanza, zaidi ya nusu zinakufa. Ukichukua kuwa vijiji vya ujamaa vilikuwa ni Business Ventures, hivyo failure rate ya vijiji kushindwa ilikuwa kubwa sana.

Watu wanatoa maelezo ya maendeleo ya vijiji kwa kutaja matrekta. Nikiwauliza leteni vitabu vya account vya hivyo vijiji tuangalie mapato na matumizi, hakuna anayetokea. Hayo ni maendeleo gani yasikuwepo kwenye daftari?

 

[Zakumi]

Kama kawaida alikuwa anasubiria fursa ya kuupiga madongo Ujamaa na Muasisi wake!

Mimi sipigi madongo Ujamaa na Mwasisi wake. Ukiondoa Nyerere, others didn't know what they were doing.

 

[Zakumi]

Bado hujaacha kuungopea umma tu? Nini uthibitisho wa hizo 'hakuna' zako hapo juu? Hebu rejea nukuu ya PhD kutoka kwenye mada iliyopo hapo juu:

They [RDA Ujamaa Villages] thus achieved “self-sufficiency in food supply; the buying of a maize-mill which was owned by an expatriate so as to process the food they sold; establishing their own dispensary and attempting to send a villager to learn from a local hospital; purchasing a saw-mill from a capitalist for wood processing; and attempting wool processing – washing, cording, dyeing, knitting and weaving – as a form of cottage industry while at the same time keeping sheep.”

Mkuu unatakiwa uone aibu. Vitu vyote ulivyotaja hapo juu vilikuwa vinawezwa kuwa achieved na effort ya mtu mmoja tu. So what is the point of putting people together?

wool processing – washing, cording, dyeing, knitting and weaving: Hii ni sayansi kimu tu ambayo haina value yoyote katika industrial age.

 

[jmushi1]

Mkuu Mushi,

Hapo kwenye maneno niliyopigia mstari naomba nitofautiane na wewe. Ina maana wakulima wetu walipokuwa wanalima mazao ya biashara [pamba, mkonge, tumbaku, kahawa, chai, na pareto] walikuwa wanalima ili watumie wenyewe? Ni kwa vipi Ujamaa una-discourage export?

Kwanini shirika kama GAPEX na Vyama vya Ushirika vilianzishwa? GAPEX ilikuwa ina deal na exports za sector ya kilimo kama sikosei.

Ujamaa hauna uhusiano wowote na closed or open economy. nchi inaweza kuwa ya kibepari na bado ikawa closed. Kinacho-close/open economy ni tariffs pamoja na urasimu mwingine ndani ya nchi, na huo urasimu sio lazima utokane na Ujamaa. Marekani na Nchi zilizoendelea kila siku wakienda kwenye WTO nchi masikini zinalia kwamba hazina fair competition kwenye mazao yao ya kilimo kwa kuwa nchi tajiri zinatoa ruzuku kubwa kwa wakulima wao na hivyo wakienda kwenye soko la dunia wanavuruga bei na nchi masikini zinaishia kuuza kwa bei ya chini while wananunua pembejeo kwa bei kubwa sana, at the end of the day wakulima wa nchi masikini wanapata hasara.

Ninadhani tatizo kubwa liko kwenye marketing system ya mazao yetu. Wakati tunapata Uhuru, mkoloni aliacha marketing system ambayo ilikuwa ina-function vizuri. Wakati huo mazao ya biashara yalikuwa ni Kahawa, Chai, Mkonge, na Pamba; yalikuwa yanalimwa kwenye mashamba makubwa (plantations) ambayo yalikuwa yanamilikiwa na kampuni za nje. Kampuni hizo za nje ndizo ambazo zilikuwa zinafanya biashara ya ku-export hayo mazao, na kama kulikuwa na wazawa ambao walikuwa na vishamba vyao basi walikuwa wanaunza kwenye vyama vyao vya Ushirika kama KNCU, Nyanza, Ngoni-Matengo na vinginevyo, then hivyo vyama vya ushirika viliuza kwa hizo kampuni za wazungu.

Azimio la Arusha lilipokuja lilivunja hiyo marketing system na ku-introduce a new marketing system ambayo iliishia kuwaumiza wananchi kwa kuwapunja bei za mazao. GAPEX, Mamlaka za Mazao, Vyama vya Ushirika chini ya Ujamaa viligeuzwa kuwa miradi ya ulaji. Kuna kipindi Nyerere alivunja vyama vyote vya ushirika sababu ya huo ulaji na baadaye tena akaja kuvirudisha lakini vikawa chini ya CCM kama Jumuiya ya Chama [WASHIRIKA]. Kwa hiyo ni CCM ndiyo ambayo ilikuwa ina-impose viongozi wa hivyo vyama vya ushirika. Sasa kama CCM ndiyo ime-impose viongozi, je, viongozi wanawajibika kwa nani? Kwa CCM ama kwa wanachama wa chama cha Ushirika?

Baada ya kuanza kufuata mfumo wa soko huria [kama siyo soko holela], serikali imeshindwa kuweka marketing system ambayo inaweza kumpa mkulima bei nzuri. Ukifika msimu wa kuuza mazao inabidi serikali iweke masharti kibao as if wao walikuja kukupa pembejeo za bure. Mahindi nilime mimi, ikifika wakati wa kuvuna serikali inasema hakuna kuvuna mahindi mabichi, na hakuna kuuza mahindi nje ya Tanzania.

Nenda Karagwe, ukivuka mpaka ukaingia Uganda unakutana na bei nzuri ya kahawa kuliko ile ambayo unapewa na wanunuzi wa Tanzania. Mwaka 2003 nilikuta FFU wametanda mpakani kuzuwia kahawa isiuzwe Uganda, wakati huo vyama vya ushirika vya Karagwe na Bukoba vilikuwa hoi vikiwa havina hela na vinaomba mkopo toka CRDB ili vikanunue mazao hayo, na CRDB walikuwa wamegoma kutoa mkopo kwa kuwa hivyo vyama vya ushirika vilikuwa ni wadeni sugu na collateral walizokuwa nazo hazikuwa zina-qualify kupewa mkopo mwingine.

Je, ina maana Uganda wao huwa wanauza kwenye soko gani hiyo kahawa yao? Wakulima wakiacha kulima mahindi ama kahawa, utawalaumu? Je, exports za mazao zikipungua bado utasema ni sababu ya Ujamaa kwamba una discourage exports?

Mkuu hizo cash crops ulizozimention zilikuwa zinazalishwa kabla hata ya uhuru,nitashukuru kama tukiendelea kuelimishana kwasababu ninavyoelewa,chini ya ujamaa,kinachozalishwa ni kile kinachokuwa consumed,ndio maana nikazungumzia a closed economy ambapo Agregate expenditure equals total output,at least ujamaa ndivyo unavyoonekana ku imply(Naomba kusahihishwa kwenye hili)tueleweshane taratibu inawezekana na mimi kama wengine sijauelewa ujamaa in a right way.

Kama ni kweli ujamaa hau encourage kuzalisha ziada (ili kuwezesha export) then ni wazi kuwa hizo ni characteristics za a private closed economy(no net export)

Tumekuwa na tatizo kubwa sana,mara nyingi kwenye makaratasi tunachofuata si kinachofanyika....Mzee Mwinyi alisema bado tunapractice siasa za ujamaa na kujitegemea lakini on the ground reality ni tofauti..
Siasa za ujamaa na kujitegemea zina charactereristics nyingi sana no wonder kuna missunderstandings nyingi sana....Cha msingi tulichotakiwa kufanya ni kuplay smart kwa ku encourage open economy bila ku jeopordize maslahi ya Taifa letu.

Na kwahiyo basi unaposema kuwa hakuna uhusiano wa ujamaa na either open or closed economy unakosea kwasababu unachotakiwa kuelewa what makes an economy closed or open is net export...Kama kuna sera za nchi ambazo zina discourage export basi zina mwelekeo wa a closed economy na kinyume chake ni an open economy ambapo export inakuwa encouraged.

Ni wazi kwamba wakoloni walituachia system ya mainly cash crops na Raw materials processing specifically for exportation,na siasa za mwalimu zilikuwa ni kujaribu kuzitumia sisi wenyewe rasilimali hizo kwa uzalishaji,na kwa kukubaliana na mwalimu na pengine kupingana na wewe na wengine,huwezi kuwa na open economy ukawa una export primarily Raw materials halafu ukapata maendeleo.

Naomba niisihie hapa kwasasa kutokana na muda.....Nakaribisha counter argument ambayo ni contsructive for the benefit of all of us....Naomba pia nikusahihishe kwa kusema kwamba pointi yako uliyoitolea mfano kuhusiana na hayo mazao uliyoyataja ie pamba,mkonge,tumbaku,pareto ambayo yalikuwa kwa ajili ya ku export hapo nyuma,yani kabla ya uhuru,ndiyo mazao hayo hayo mwalimu chini ya ujamaa alitaka yatumike kwa uzalishaji hapa nyumbani,na ndio mwanzo wa viwanda mbali mbali vlivyoanzishwa nchini.

Na pia usisahahu kuwa chini ya ujamaa tulikuwa regarded as an unopen market economy na ndio maana watu wanahusisha soko huria na mwanzo wa kwenda kinyume na sera za ujamaa....
I am standing to be corrected.