Category: MIL-OSI

Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Marc Wegerif, Senior Lecturer, Development Studies, University of Pretoria

South Africa’s food system is a complex landscape where high levels of production coexist with severe food insecurity. In a 2024 survey, 63.5% of households were found to be food insecure and 28.8% of children stunted.

In this food system, fresh produce markets owned by municipalities are critical for food access and nutrition. The Agriculture Department reported that in 2023, the country’s 17 main municipal fresh produce markets sold over 3 million tons of fresh fruit and vegetables, worth R24.6 billion (US$1.37 billion). This is approximately 40%-50% of the fresh produce from farmers in South Africa.

The relationship between public markets and the informal sector, in particular, is fundamental to food security. Studies being carried out with support from the DSTI-NRF Centre of Excellence in Food Security in South Africa confirm that fresh produce sold by street traders who source from municipal markets is consistently cheaper than in formal supermarkets.

By selling at low prices in convenient locations, informal traders reduce the cost of food and the need for transport when shopping. They are key to making fruit and vegetables physically and economically accessible to the urban poor.

But this food system is under threat. Our research found that supermarket chains are buying more produce directly from farmers. Corroborated by the Competition Commission, there has been a steady decline in the share of national produce distributed through municipal markets.

We are social scientists who have been doing research on urban food systems in South Africa for the last seven years. We carried out research at the Johannesburg fresh produce market to better understand its role in food security.

We studied the market over three years, making observations during many visits and interviewing over 120 people in different roles. The market traces its origins back to Market Square in Johannesburg in the late 1800s, and is now the biggest of South Africa’s municipal markets.

It serves South Africa’s economic hub of Gauteng as well as selling some produce to other parts of the country and to neighbouring countries. The produce comes from the largest commercial operations and from small-scale farmers – anyone can sell there if they wish to.

The study provided clear evidence that the market is essential infrastructure for a more resilient, equitable and food-secure future.

To safeguard the role of markets like this, a concerted effort to protect and invest in them is required.

Johannesburg fresh produce market

The Johannesburg fresh produce market accounts for around 45% of the total value of sales from the National Fresh Produce Markets. Its annual sales exceed 1.3 million tons, valued at over R11 billion (more than US$610 million).

The City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality owns the property, and a state-owned company manages the operations and staff. Buyers and sellers have to register with the market to buy or sell through agents in the main trading hubs. All that’s required is a form of identity document.

All transactions in the main hubs go through agents and the market system, crediting or debiting the accounts of the sellers or buyers. The agents are registered and insured with the Agricultural Products Agents Council.

The majority of the agents are white men. Some come from families that have been agents in the market for generations. The continuity of these agents provides stability in the market. However, it also leaves the demographics little changed from the apartheid era.

Farmers send their produce to particular agents who then sell it for them, making their money from a commission on sales that is normally 7.5%. The market gets a 5% commission on all sales, which is how it covers operating costs. Anyone can also buy for cash, without registering, at the Unity or Tshiamo (formerly Mandela) markets that are on the same site.

Traders in these cash markets source produce from the main hubs, benefiting from the bulk prices and then breaking bulk to sell on in smaller quantities.

The most visible and profound impact of the Johannesburg fresh produce market is in its role as the primary source of stock for the vast informal retail sector. Thousands of the over 10,000 registered buyers stream through its halls every day, the vast majority being informal traders – street vendors, hawkers and small-scale retailers who form the backbone of fresh produce access in low-income neighbourhoods.

Read more: Street traders in South Africa play a vital role: how their rights can be protected

These traders rely on the market’s competitive wholesale prices. They buy in bulk from the main market hubs or in smaller quantities from the traders who break bulk at the Unity and Tshiamo markets.

In turn, they sell to the people of Johannesburg and wider Gauteng Province.

Benefits and challenges

The regulated agent system, while imperfect, ensures that farmers receive payment within five days and provides a competitive marketplace.

The National Fresh Produce Markets uphold a level of competition and choice. Without them, all farmers, large and small, would be in a weaker negotiating position when selling into supermarket supply chains.

As the Competition Commission South Africa concluded in a 2025 report, selling to independent retailers through the National Fresh Produce Markets helps to counter the downward pressure on farm gate prices exerted by powerful buyers.

But there are challenges. Despite their proven value, the future of markets like the Johannesburg fresh produce market is under threat from a confluence of challenges:

• loss of market share: large supermarket chains are increasingly buying directly from farmers through their own supply chains

• decaying infrastructure: market agents and traders report issues with overcrowded, poorly insulated halls and unreliable cold storage made worse by electricity cuts. These problems increase operational costs and risk spoilage, threatening the market’s competitiveness.

Other challenges include the dominance of white, male market agents and the entrenched, ethnically based networks that facilitate trade. These present a barrier to more equitable participation. Lastly, unstable municipal politics is also affecting the market.

Protecting the municipal markets

We suggest three ways to protect markets such as the Johannesburg fresh produce market.

First, modernise infrastructure, particularly cold storage, to reduce food waste and maintain the quality of perishable goods. The city may have to increase capital expenditure. Revenues generated by the market should be ring-fenced for reinvestment in its infrastructure and services.

Second, insulate market management from municipal politics. Operational efficiency and long-term planning are essential for stability.

Finally, foster inclusivity and transformation without disrupting the social networks that underpin the market’s functioning. This could include facilitating more interaction between all farmers and agents, and supporting groups like the women’s trader collectives, which share information and buy in bulk.

Makhanana Malungane, an economic researcher at the Gauteng Department of Economic Development, contributed to this article.

– Johannesburg’s produce market has supplied the informal sector for decades: a refresh is due
– https://theconversation.com/johannesburgs-produce-market-has-supplied-the-informal-sector-for-decades-a-refresh-is-due-268151

Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Thelma Obiakor, Postdoctoral Fellow, University of Cambridge

Nigeria’s basic education landscape consists of public (government) schools and a diverse private sector. Private schools in Nigeria refer to educational institutions that are run by private individuals, religious organisations, foundations or business enterprises. These schools are diverse in terms of size, cost, ownership models and target populations, ranging from low-fee neighbourhood schools to faith-based schools and “premium” schools. The number of private schools isn’t captured in official statistics.

Over the past year, many private schools have been closed across the country. Ebonyi State sealed more than 280 unapproved schools. Cross River officials shut down 69, and Akwa Ibom, Kogi and Delta states launched their own crackdowns on “rogue” schools operating without government approval or with substandard infrastructure.

These closures are being justified on safety and quality grounds, given that many of these schools, commonly referred to as low-cost private schools, operate without full registration.

Before a private school can open, owners must pay multiple inspection, registration and annual renewal fees. They must also meet infrastructure requirements and show evidence of qualified teaching staff.

The recent enforcement drives expose a fault line in Nigeria’s education system: the country’s growing dependence on low-cost private schools to fill the gaps that an overstretched public system can no longer cover.

Read more: Somalia’s education crisis: why so few children attend school and what could be done to change that

I researched the private schooling market in Nigeria for my doctorate, and my latest paper sets out some of the factors that shape enrolment in these schools in Nigeria.

I found two main factors: the proximity and accessibility of public schools, and affordability.

The implication for ongoing closure drives is significant. If low-cost private schools are concentrated in communities where public schools are unavailable or distant, or are the only affordable options, then wide-scale closures disproportionately threaten access for children from low-income households, particularly in hard-to-reach or underserved areas. Abrupt shutdowns without transition plans can interrupt learning and deepen existing inequalities.

More investment is needed to make sure every child can go to school.

Private school diversity

Across Nigeria, private provision has expanded rapidly. According to figures cited by the minister of education, the number of private schools grew by about 39% between 2017 and 2022, compared with only 3.5% growth in public schools over the same period.

In my research, I grouped private schools into three cost categories – low-cost, mid-cost and high-cost – based on mandatory educational costs. I used national survey data from 2015 (the latest data is from 2020, but is not publicly available yet), which showed that most pupils who were enrolled in private schools attended those in the low-cost category.

My analysis of the 2015 survey data found that 52% of private-school pupils in urban areas and 49% in rural areas attended low-cost private schools. A further finding was that public schools and low-cost private schools served similar populations: children from low-income households with limited schooling alternatives.

State-level evidence reinforces this. In Kwara State, a 2016 census found that 67% and 41% of urban and rural private schools respectively were low-cost private schools. More recent data from the Partnership for Learning for All in Nigeria (a UK-government-funded education programme operating in Nigeria) show that a high proportion of private schools are low-cost schools that operate without approval in some northern states: around 85% in Kano and 80% in Jigawa.

Taken together, these national and state findings show that low-cost private schools have become an important route to education for millions of pupils.

Access and affordability

Access

Although parental preference plays a role for some households, attendance in low-cost private schools is shaped by the availability and accessibility of public schools. My doctoral research shows that attendance is most prominent in areas where public-school provision is weak. In many parts of Nigeria, weak provision can take the form of overcrowded classrooms or limited school availability. Distance to the nearest public school also plays a key role. The further a low-income family lives from a public school, the more likely they are to enrol their child in a low-cost private school. This pattern is pronounced in areas where public provision is thin and mobility costs are high.

In practice, low-cost private schools operate as an access mechanism, stepping in where the state is absent or unable to meet local demand.

Read more: Why poor parents in Nairobi choose private over free primary schools

Affordability

Affordability further explains why these schools are widely used. My research found that their annual fees typically ranged from ₦8,000 (about US$18 in 2015, the year the data was collected) in urban areas to ₦5,000 (about US$11 in 2015) in rural areas. Paradoxically, the total cost of attending a public school was sometimes higher, with an average of US$43 in urban areas and US$24 in rural areas.

Recent data from the Partnership for Learning for All in Nigeria baseline study in Jigawa shows that about 40% of low-cost private schools charge no tuition, while 48% charge ₦10,000 or less per year (approximately US$22 in 2022). This confirms that they are either free or highly affordable for most families. Affordability matters because public education, although constitutionally free, is rarely without costs in practice.

Many states still permit partial fee regimes or informal levies, and parents often bear expenses for uniforms, learning materials and other charges. Policymakers have begun to flag this issue, with the Imo State House of Assembly recently urging the government to enforce free basic education and eliminate charges.

Regulating for inclusion

Closing down private schools without transition plans could prevent low-income families from educating their children.

Nigeria’s regulatory framework for private schools is among the most demanding in sub-Saharan Africa. An assessment of 22 countries found that Nigerian states ranked among the most restrictive for market entry.

Read more: South Africa’s no-fee school system can’t undo inequality

If the goal is to raise standards without undermining access, regulation must shift from punishment to support.

Tiered licensing would allow low-cost private schools to operate legally while improving over time. Oversight should be paired with practical assistance such as training or conditional waivers, an approach reflected in the 2025 National Policy on Non-State Schools. Every closure should include a plan for placing pupils in schools with capacity.

Nigeria cannot regulate its way out of reliance on private school provision. Stronger public investment is needed so families are not forced to pay privately for basic education.

– Nigeria’s low-cost private schools are the only option for millions: is closing them a good idea?
– https://theconversation.com/nigerias-low-cost-private-schools-are-the-only-option-for-millions-is-closing-them-a-good-idea-270097