The government’s plan to reform the coffee sector is off to a rocky start, with the two chambers of parliament appearing to read different scenarios on the sector’s recovery, while industry players have opposed key proposals from both chambers.

The National Assembly and the Senate are currently debating two bills on coffee, which should ultimately contribute to the governance of the sector.

Both bills aim to reintroduce key agencies such as the Coffee Board of Kenya (CBK) and the Coffee Research Institute (CRI) to improve the overall governance of culture.

However, they disagree on key issues such as the licensing of coffee sector players by counties and the national government as well as how the products should be marketed.

The bill presented to the National Assembly by the Ministry of Agriculture appears to give more power to the CBK and CRI in licensing and governance of the industry.

The coffee bill that has been introduced in the Senate, on the other hand, calls for more licensing functions to be taken over by county governments, arguing that agriculture is a decentralized function and regions should have more say in how the sector governed.

It is sponsored by Njeru Ndwiga, chairman of the Senate Agriculture Committee.

The bill drafted by the ministry, for example, allows county governments to issue only two categories of licenses – for a pulp station and a warehouse. It leaves most of the other licenses needed by industry players to the Coffee Commission.

On the other hand, the Senate wants the majority of licenses to be issued by the county governments, leaving the CBK to oversee functions such as the export and import of coffee, the licensing of buyers as well as the issuance. of coffee liquor and warehouse licenses.

Both bills were read for the first time in the respective chambers and were recently submitted for public participation.

“It is necessary to harmonize the two bills, because there cannot be two bills to legislate on a crop whose production is decreasing,” said Peter Gikonyo, president of the Coffee Growers Association of Kenya (KCPA).

“Review them and develop one that will help farmers play their role in coffee. ”

The KPCA also dug holes in the two laws, saying they did not have the best interests of farmers at heart and had been excluded from agencies that would manage the sector.

Among the areas they have contested with are the proposed CBK, IRC and the management of the Nairobi Coffee Exchange, where although there are slots reserved for farmers, they will be appointed by the Cabinet Secretary. for agriculture.

Mr. Gikonyo said the representatives of the farmers should be chosen by the farmers. “Government appointees will in no way serve the interests of the farmer but those of the appointing authority,” he said.

“Does this mean that the farmer is not able to make decisions about the coffee growing business, but is he able to make decisions to put the product on the table for sale? No one is going to help the farmer with decision making at the farm level when he is struggling to produce coffee.

“The farmer is the primary owner of the coffee and must be respected, valued and consulted on all matters from production to market for the growth and sustainability of the industry. ”

The Commercial Coffee Millers and Marketing Agents Association said the bills add to other recent proposals and laws that carry the risk of over-regulating the industry.

He noted that there had been vigor to introduce new laws to monitor the cultivation, which could end up strangling the sector.

Even then, many laws failed to establish mechanisms to reverse the decline in coffee production.

“In the recent past, especially over the past three years, the coffee industry has had to contend with at least six pieces of legislation, all targeting the coffee trade and leaving out all critical aspects,” said the association in a memorandum to the Senate on agriculture. Committee.

“All of these bills have not sufficiently taken into account the views, challenges and expectations of coffee stakeholders throughout the value chain due to little or lack of public participation, and there is therefore no solution to the real problems facing the coffee sector in the bills. ”

“The bills (including Senate Coffee Bill 22 of 2020) seek to introduce too many government appointments to farmer organizations. There is also implicit over-regulation through the suggested enactment of county-specific coffee laws. ”

The association is also concerned that the proposed laws do not respond to the country’s declining coffee production.

“The bill does not provide any mechanism that will help farmers increase the production and productivity of their coffee business,” the memorandum said.

“We believe that as long as the 2020 Coffee Bill does not address the issues of productivity and climate change … it will not be closer to meeting the challenges facing coffee producers. today.”

According to the International Coffee Organization (ICO), Kenya produced 790,000 60-kilogram bags of green coffee during the year 2017-2018, or about 0.5% of the total world production of over 158, 56 million bags.

East African countries produced 14.71 million bags of green coffee during the period, with Ethiopia producing 7.65 million bags (52%), followed by Uganda with 5.1 million bags (35%).

Kenya contributed only about 5% of East African production.

This is different from the 1970s and 1980s, which were boom years for culture and saw the product become Kenya’s main source of foreign exchange.

The country is estimated to export more than 1.5 million bags per year at its peak in the 1980s.

This declined, however, and production rose to 650,000 bags in 2020-21. The harvest has seen steady declines, with production reaching 775,000 bags in 2018-19 and falling to 725,000 bags in 2019-20.

According to the millers association, Kenya has been reduced to accepting prices offered by coffee buyers due to lower volumes.

The country’s production is too low to give Kenya a say in global coffee issues.

“Due to the production limitations it has, Kenya’s bargaining power in pricing is also limited and as a result it becomes a price taker. Indeed, 0.5 percent of global coffee is not large enough to influence global coffee prices, ”the association said.

Despite the problems, coffee still rises above other industries when viewed from certain parameters and is not beyond salvation, according to millers and marketers.

The product sells for higher prices per unit compared to major sources of foreign exchange such as tea and horticulture, as well as coffee produced elsewhere.

It is also a high-end product, with great demand in the global market and buyers willing to pay a high price for it.

“Compared to other agricultural sectors in Kenya or to comparable coffees from other producing countries, pound for pound, coffee from Kenya consistently fetch higher prices,” the millers and marketers said in their submission. in the Senate.