Agriculture holds a unique double opportunity to reverse adverse climate change by reducing greenhouse gas emissions and removing carbon from the atmosphere. By adopting more sustainable farming practices, farmers can increase their profitability and significantly contribute to environmental goals. Rivulis is at the forefront of this transformation, providing farmers access to the carbon credit market, simplifying the process, and ensuring tangible benefits.
Voluntary Carbon Market
The Voluntary Carbon Market (VCM), valued at $2 billion in 2022, is projected to expand dramatically, potentially reaching $50 billion by 2030 according to Citi, driven by growing “net zero” corporate commitments. This market represents a largely untapped opportunity for farmers. Less than 1% of carbon credits originate from the agricultural sector, underpinning the relevance of the Rivulis Climate team.
Jon Baravir, Climate Director, Rivulis says farmers entering this market can create a new income stream without compromising their current operations.
“Rivulis makes it easier for farmers to participate in the VCM by handling all administrative and registration processes free of charge, in exchange for a small percentage of the carbon credit revenue. The estimated cost to register a carbon credit project over time is around $150,000, which Rivulis covers entirely,” Baravir says.
Transitioning to sustainable farming practices and obtaining carbon credits is a complex, long-term process that can take over 24 months. Rivulis supports farmers at every step, from advising on best practices to managing the registration process. Rivulis develops its scientific approaches to measure and model the carbon sequestration impact of such changes, especially in soils and trees, per the requirements of the VCM. Recommendations include switching to drip irrigation, reducing tillage, implementing cover crops, using fewer fertilizers, incorporating residues into the soil, and implementing agroforestry practices.
Rapid growth worldwide
The impact of Rivulis’ initiatives is evident in the rapid growth of their listed projects, covering over 4,000 hectares (doubling where it was just 6 months ago) globally. For example, a collective of row crop farms in Northern Italy that spans 3,000 hectares, and 150 hectares of farms in Israel, growing avocados more sustainably, have joined the program. Another farm in Portugal, that employs a broad set of sustainable farming practices, like using solar energy and enriching the organic matter in the soil, is replacing intensive corn cultivation with a native olive grove.
Rivulis is in advanced discussions with other growers globally, highlighting the growing awareness and adoption of carbon credits in agriculture.
“This achievement underscores our commitment to environmental stewardship and demonstrates our ability to advance complex agronomic solutions and climate-resilient models to drive meaningful environmental and economic benefits,” shares Baravir.
The European Union has begun placing conditions on sustainable farming for agricultural subsidies, and there is active discussion about similar measures in the U.S. Rivulis Climate gears farmers in anticipation of any changes that may happen.
Benefits for farmers include:
- New Income Source: Carbon credits provide additional revenue without disrupting operations.
- Sustainability: Adopting regenerative agriculture practices leads to healthier soil, increased biodiversity, and reduced chemical use.
- Recognition: Farmers are acknowledged for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and capturing carbon.
- Futureproofing: Stay ahead of regulatory and customer demands regarding environmental impact.
“We invite farmers, stakeholders, and the agricultural community to join in shaping the future of agriculture. Participating in the Rivulis Climate program means farmers benefit financially and contribute to global environmental efforts,” continues Baravir.
VCM offers increased profitability
The Voluntary Carbon Market offers a promising avenue for farmers to increase profitability while contributing to climate change mitigation. Rivulis is leading the charge by simplifying access to this market and supporting farmers in adopting sustainable practices. This partnership between farmers and Rivulis is not just talk—it’s a tangible and realistic path to a more profitable and sustainable future.
“By positioning your farm and customers at the forefront of sustainable agriculture, you can do good for both your business and the planet. Join Rivulis in pioneering a program that has the potential to revolutionise the agricultural sector and make a significant positive impact on our world,” says Baravir.
The Beaumont macadamia cultivar offers the advantage of high yields during “on” years. However, it does have some limitations, such as lower kernel recovery and generally lower prices compared to cultivars like 816 and A4. Additionally, in “off” years, the decline in global prices might not adequately cover the potential losses. Given that a large portion of South African macadamia orchards are planted to Beaumont, it’s crucial to find ways to manage this cultivar more effectively. Recent data suggests that cross-pollination could be a viable solution to this challenge.
Cross-pollination for macadamia refers to the transfer of pollen from the raceme of one cultivar to that of another cultivar. This evolutionary mechanism enhances genetic diversity and reduces the risks associated with inbreeding. While some plant species are self-compatible, meaning they can bear fruit through self-pollination, macadamias are largely self-sterile. The degree of self-compatibility varies between cultivars.
This article examines the role of cross-pollination in macadamia production and addresses the question: Can implementing cross-pollination practices enhance yields and decrease yield variability in Beaumont orchards?
Australian research
The potential benefits of cross-pollination on yield was investigated in Australia, where researchers found compelling evidence supporting its advantages.
- Trueman et al. (2019) conducted paternity testing on “816,” “Daddow,” and “A4” orchards. It was discovered that at least 80% of the 816 nuts, 90% of A4, and 88% of Daddow nuts resulted from cross-pollination, not self-pollination. This finding underscores the critical role of cross-pollination in successful nut set.
- Trueman and Wallace (2020) evaluated the yield in rows located at the centre of an 816 block and compared it to the yield in rows along the perimeter, adjacent to a bordering Daddow block. The yield in the centre of the 816 block was less than half that of the perimeter rows, suggesting that closer proximity to different cultivars significantly enhances yield potential.
- Additionally, hand-pollinated trees in the middle of a 816 block, lead to a 97% increase in yield. This study emphasized that cross-pollination was the key limiting factor in the mono-cultivar 816 block (Trueman & Wallace 2020).
South-African research
South African research also supports the significant benefits of cross-pollination for the local industry:
- Allsopp (2020) demonstrated that the number of nuts that set per raceme can significantly be increased by hand-pollinating Beaumont racemes with other cultivars. When pollinated by the A4 cultivar, Beaumont racemes produced six times more nuts compared to self-pollinated racemes. Figure 1 illustrates the increase in nut set for Beaumont flowers hand-pollinated by various cultivars.
Figure 1. Number of nuts per racemes after Beaumont racemes were hand pollinated by five different cultivars including Beaumont (self-pollination).
- In 2022, Bernhard Jordaan conducted a study similar to Allsopp’s, comparing Beaumont racemes hand-pollinated with A4 and Nelmak 2 cultivars to self-pollinated Beaumont racemes. The results showed that cross-pollinated racemes produced significantly more nuts than those that were self-pollinated (figure 2,3).
Figure 2. Number of nuts per racemes after Beaumont racemes were pollinated by A4, Nelmak 2 and Beaumont (self-pollinated).
Figure 3. Nut growth of a Beaumont raceme hand pollinated by a A4 raceme. A- 09/09/2022, B-19/10/2022, C-09/11/2022, D-16/01/2022.
Recommendations
- Incorporate pollinating cultivars at establishment: When establishing a new orchard, include cultivars that serve as pollinators. Some cultivars, like Beaumont, respond particularly well to cross-pollination and require pollen from other cultivars for optimal nut set.
- Introduce cross-pollinators in single-cultivar orchards: Consider introducing cross-pollinators into orchards planted with a single cultivar. This can be done by topworking existing trees. It is recommended that one third (33%) of the orchard be converted to a pollinator.
- Ensure adequate bee colonies: Introduce a sufficient number of bee colonies to flowering orchards to facilitate effective pollen transfer between trees. While the minimum is 2 colonies per hectare, it is recommended to place at least 4 colonies per hectare to ensure optimal pollination.
Conclusion
The research and data presented in this article highlight the critical role that cross-pollination can play in enhancing the performance of macadamia orchards. While Beaumont is widely planted in South Africa and capable of high yields during “on” years, its lower kernel recovery, inconsistent production, and susceptibility to global price fluctuations present significant challenges. To address these issues, it is essential to adopt practices that leverage the benefits of cross-pollination. By integrating pollinating cultivars, utilizing top working to introduce cross-pollinators, and ensuring adequate bee populations for effective pollen transfer, growers can potentially improve yield consistency, and make Beaumont orchards more resilient and economically viable.
Written by:
Bernhard Jordaan
TopNut: Technical manager
067 2141 800/ bernhardj@topnutgroup.com
Pictured above:Scouting is an important tool in biological controls in the macadamia orchard, helping farmers to better understand pest behaviour.
Thanks to more sustainable solutions for pest control, an improved regulatory environment and a growing body of expertise, a turnaround in crop management strategy is under way in the macadamia sector.
Alison Levesley, general manager at the South African Bioproduct Organisation (SABO), says in the space of just one year, both production dynamics and the regulatory environment around biological controls have vastly changed.
“We were in a different situation this time last year,” she says.
After relentless pressure by CropLife South Africa and SABO, new regulations linked to the registration of biological controls were published in August 2023.
A backlog at the Registrar’s office was also under review, which, Levesley hopes, will reduce the time to get new products registered and approved, and allow the domestic industry to introduce a more robust range of biological crop production solutions in line with markets like the highly regulated European Union.
“This is essential – South Africa’s ability to tap into the single market requires our maximum residue levels (MRLs) for crop protection chemicals to meet their criteria.”
Also on the domestic market, high-end retailer Woolworths is now driving a “zero residue” campaign on all of its products. While the focus is initially on fresh produce, all products will need to meet this criteria by 2035, including macadamias, which are sourced from local farmers.
Healthy nuts for healthy consumers
Worldwide, health-conscious consumers and those concerned about the environmental impact of the food they eat are a key base for the nut market. These consumers are averse to chemical residues on their food.
In a study produced by Australian research company Cavill & Associates, growth in the organic macadamia nut market is driven by increased awareness of the health benefits of organic foods and a growing demand for natural, sustainable products. The study pegs growth in organic macadamia nut production at 5.6% a year between 2024 and 2031.
Brigitte Zablocki, senior vegetable and salads technologist at Woolworths, says zero residue levels prevent continuous, low exposure to harmful chemicals, known to adversely affect human health. “This is true for both people ingesting the food, and those applying the chemicals,” she adds.
Wilma MacPherson, technical portfolio manager at Andermatt Madumbi, says macadamia nuts are promoted as a health food, implying that their production process should align with health-conscious standards.
Kobus Pienaar, technical manager for food security at Woolworths, says the zero residue dictate does not necessarily mean a complete ban on all synthetic crop protection products. “Crop production must make economic sense. Farmers are not expected to stop all pesticide applications to the point where they end up with no crop. Instead, our zero residue programme focuses on integrated pest management (IPM) programmes that rely on farmers having a comprehensive understanding of pest life-cycles and orchard health to ensure an environment where pests can’t thrive.”
MacPherson says using biologicals in collaboration with synthetic chemicals can help reduce the risk of the pest and pathogens becoming less susceptible or sensitive to those active ingredients over time, rendering them ineffective. This means hard-hitting synthetics are still appropriate to beat large infestations.
“The more modes of actions employed against a pest or pathogen, the lower the risk of decline in sensitivity over years of multiple use,” she says.
According to Pienaar, in-depth knowledge and understanding of pest behaviour are critical for the effective use of biocontrols in orchards. “If the pest is not fully understood, then it can’t be controlled,” he remarks.
With this in mind Woolworths and SABO are introducing education programme to help farmers understand the finer nuances of biological crop controls.
“There is already a wealth of knowledge and solutions available, so we just need to make sure farmers are fully aware of what those are,” Pienaar says.
Chemical crop protection is becoming increasingly restricted as consumers demand residue-free products.
Transfer of knowledge
MacPherson warns that farmers should be aware that biological controls are not the same as chemicals, where an application today means a pest has gone tomorrow. “Training, transfer of knowledge, and implementation are critical in helping farmers increase their uptake of biologicals.
“Biological crop production requires a mind shift – where farmers farm their land with nature rather than against it. For example, farmers need to start with the soil, making sure it is as fertile as possible. Some micro-organisms will assist in helping the plants access the nutrition in the soil, especially in some forms that are not directly plant-available. In some cases where soils are depleted, adding a biofertiliser will have a greater effect than when those biofertilisers are applied in optimal soils.”
Mostly, McPherson says, the will to successfully implement a biological crop protection programme on a farm is fundamental to success. “There are many examples of successful implementation. Here, farmers have comprehensive fact-finding missions in place (scouting) to investigate when and also why pests or diseases flare up, and what can be done to prevent this, rather than just spraying chemicals to get rid of every instance, or traditional calendar-based applications.”
The leap towards biological controls is not only being driven by MRL reductions but has become vitally important at a time when many active ingredients used in synthetic crop protection products are being removed from the market.
The Global Harmonised System, which came into effect in September last year, saw the restriction of a long list of ingredients and co-formulants. This includes many contact insecticides, like organophosphates and pyrethroids, and some neonicotinoids that have formed the basis of macadamia crop protection programmes for decades.
The industry, however, still has a long way to go to solve all of its problems biologically.
MacPherson says the sector is growing at a pronounced rate, with macadamias now being planted in areas where they were historically not grown. “We are seeing new pests, either due to invasion from elsewhere, or emerging. The latter includes insects that were traditionally not considered pests but were present in low numbers and are now causing problems in the orchards.”
That meant that each year presented new and different challenges.
“It takes considerable time to develop and register biologicals for a specific pest or disease, meaning we are playing catch-up on a continuous basis,” adds MacPherson. “Many of the chemical actives that have traditionally been registered and used on macadamias are also able to affect those insects which assist the farmers. With many of these being removed from the market, and the time it takes to develop biological controls, we don’t have the full arsenal we need.”
Dr Nico van Vuuren, director of Soiltech, believes it is viable to exclude between 60% and 70% of all synthetic chemicals by implementing a biological-focused IPM programme.
And while some entomologists say having a complete arsenal of biological products might never be feasible considering the changing nature of the natural environment, Van Vuuren says South African macadamia farmers could make good progress with what is already available on the domestic market. “We have a 15ha farm where no chemicals for pest and disease control have been used for the past four years. It’s small in comparison to the industry average, but it gives a good indication of what is possible,” he says.
Double benefit
Active ingredients showing promise in biological macadamia production include a host of bacteria, fungi and plant extracts. It is important to know that most of the beneficial species also promote overall tree health and growth, providing a double benefit.
Growers not only have an expanding list of biological products available, but many organisations in the pest control space are starting to develop tools able to find the right product for a particular pest.
Macadamias South Africa (SAMAC) offers a list of registered products on its online platform SAMAC Integrator, where MacShield provides direct access to a list of options registered against a specific pest or disease on macadamia.
CropLife SA also developed the Agri-Intel database that lists all products registered for use on macadamia trees. Some of the biological insecticides have fungi (Beauveria bassiana, Metarhizium anisopliae), viruses (nucleopolyhedorviruses and granuloviruses), plant extracts, sterile insect technology, and various macrobial predators and parasitoids as active ingredients.
Much progress is being made on beneficial insects like parasitic wasps, which destroy the eggs of stinkbugs, one of the macadamia’s fiercest pests. SAMAC research around controlling stinkbugs by eliminating a bacteria symbiont crucial to their development is showing promise and research is ongoing to determine the best chemicals and sterilisation times for the removal of this bacteria from the egg surfaces.
With the increasing number of solutions on hand, and availability of research, experts agree that farmers have the tools they need to produce a crop capable of competing in a market focused on better human and environmental health.
Written by Lindi Botha
Although phosphorous acids/phosphites (H3PO3) are registered in South Africa for the control of Phytophthora nicotianae and Phytophthora citrophthora in citrus, and Phytophthora. Cinnamomi in avocado crops, the compound is not approved for use in macadamia orchards.
However, The Macadamia understands that out of desperation to control phytophthora infestation, some farmers are applying phosphonates and fosetyl-AI as foliar spray, stem paint or spray, or soil drench to control the disease, regardless of the outstanding approvals.
Experts warn that this means the industry could be in contravention when exporting the crop – particularly to the European Union – and that it is illegal to use the product out of its registration within the South African context.
The Macadamia also understands that applications for registration of products for use on macadamia trees were lodged in 2020 and 2021 and are being reviewed by the Registrar at the Department of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development, in line with the Fertilisers, Farm Feeds, Agricultural Remedies and Stock Remedies Act (Act 36 of 1947).
However, the process can take 10 years or more, which means thousands of farmers who planted more than 10 000ha to macadamias in 2021 and 2022 alone at a cost of about R60 000 per ha are having to watch their trees being decimated by phytophthora, with little or nothing to fight off the threat.
The Macadamia approached the department for comment but none was forthcoming.
Domestic farmers disadvantaged
A macadamia tree showing evidence of phytophthora. It can take anything up to one to three years for the tree to die.
Dr Schalk Schoeman, an independent research expert and Director at Sonbesie Consulting, said while the law (Act 36 of 1947) governing product registration in South Africa was a very good piece of legislation, the slow bureaucratic approval process was putting domestic farmers at a real disadvantage. “In Australia and the United States, for example, these products have been registered for use in macadamia orchards for years already. The slow process of approval here is effectively pulling the competitive rug out from under our farmers’ feet,” he said.
Francois van Deventer, the CPD Technical Lead – Fungicides at Syngenta South Africa, agreed that farmers were in a difficult position. “Unfortunately, by law one cannot make a recommendation on an unregistered (Act 36 of 1947) product, and given the regulatory cost associated with bringing and keeping a new product to market – just one of the aspects to consider – a business case must make sense before a company will make the investment.”
From the discovery and research phase to final commercialisation could take 10 years or more for registration. and the estimated development cost of the active ingredient (discovery to the first commercially available product) is around US$250 million.
A patent is granted for 20 years once an active ingredient is discovered, but then all of the development work still needs to be done. “If the commercial release in the target markets is delayed for some reason, the impact on the potential return on investment is significant,” Van Deventer said.
For generic products with exact active ingredient loading, he added, only a portion of the technical data was required for registration.
“However, the original research and development company remains responsible for maintaining the maximum residue levels or MRLs and registration of the active ingredient efficiency.
“If a company wants to add a target crop or dose that is not on the original label, it has to prove that in efficacy trials and phytotoxicity and residue trials, or anything else applicable to the claim. There are no shortcuts.”
Anthony Maina, Head of Communications at Bayer in Africa, said the reason the Bayer product Alliette® – the first phosphonic acid-based product to come to market – was not registered for use in the domestic macadamia industry was that at the time of its registration, the macadamia hectares in South Africa did not meet the threshold needed to register a new molecule on the crop. He did not respond to whether the current hectares under orchards met the required threshold.
However, Wilbri Vorster, Bayer Crop Science Horticulture Go-to-Market Lead for Africa, said while he could not divulge information of registration processes under way, there were “some products planned for launch within the next one to two years”.
Barry Christie, Group Agriculture Technical Manager at the Green Farms Nut Company, said what was attractive about phosphorous acids/phosphites (H3PO3) was if they were used in low dosages, they galvanised the macadamia tree into using its own defences, whereas in high concentrations, the fungicide would effectively suppress the soil-dwelling pathogen.
Soil-borne pathogen
Phytophthora (P.cinnamomi) – a soil-borne pathogen of Southeast Asian origin – usually attacks the macadamia tree’s feeder roots, or if there is a wound on the bark or branches, the fungus will then develop a “true” canker. The tree can take between one and three years to die, depending on the management of the orchard.
In a paper titled The Occurrence and Impact of Phytophthora on the African Continent authored by Jan Nagel, Marleka Gryzenhout, Bernard Slippers and Michael Wingfield in 2013, a total of 23 species of the pathogen were known on the African continent, 20 of which were known in South Africa.
It is estimated that at least 10% of yield losses and 10% of the annual gross value loss in the domestic industry could be attributed to diseases caused by the pathogen.
In essence, P.cinnamomi invades the tree’s feeder root system, and over successive growing seasons, the tree health continues to decline with a reduction in yield until it dies off completely. Early evidence of the pathogen includes yellowing or wilting leaves, a decreased nut set, and early nut drop, and it spreads easily to younger trees.
Once the pathogen is in the soil, treatment is necessary to remedy the soil. Severely affected trees should be removed so that the soil can be adequately treated to contain the spread of the disease.
A review authored by Professor Elizabeth Dann from Australia’s University of Queensland, Queensland Alliance for Agriculture and Food Innovation, and Professor Adéle McLeod from the Department of Plant Pathology at Stellenbosch University, titled Phosphonic (phosphorous) acid: A long-standing and versatile crop protectant, reveals that phosphonic acid-based fungicides have been used extensively as crop protectants since the late 1970s.
“Discovering that phosphonates are effective against foliar and soil-borne oomycete disease, such as Phytophthora, Pythium and Plasmopara, was a significant breakthrough, especially for soil-borne pathogens that are notoriously difficult to manage,” the review said.
Phosphorous acid-containing crop protection compounds comprise the metal salts of phosphonic acid and esters of phosphonic acid.
Effective use in native ecosystems
As the first phosphonic acid-based fungicide to come to the market, Alliette® contained aluminium tris (ethyl phosphonate), which is the aluminium salt of ethyl hydrogen. “Subsequently several other formulations were registered as fungicides, mainly potassium phosphonate – as a mixture of potassium hydrogen and dipotassium – and more recently sodium and ammonium phosphonates,” the review says.
Of interest, the compounds are also being used off-label in native ecosystems and forestry, particularly to protect indigenous species susceptible to the disease.
One example is the use of the phosphorous acids/phosphonates to treat Phytophthora (P.cinnamomi) collar rot by scientists at Kirstenbosch Gardens in Cape Town to protect the rare, highly endangered Sorocephalus imbricatus (Thunb.) R.Br. – a shrub in the Proteaceae family.
In the McLeod and Dann review, pure phosphorous acid is described as “white crystalline, hygroscopic solid (flakes), and in aqueous solution exists at equilibrium with its tautomeric form, phosphonic acid H2PO3. The latter is a very stable liquid, though very acidic, so preferred fungicide formulations have been neutralised with metal salts (e.g., potassium hydroxide – KOH) to reduce phytotoxic effects”.
The review confirms that phosphonic acid is “truly ambimobile”, which means it can move both upwards and downwards within the plant. As a result the compound can be applied as foliar sprays: from the ground, from the air, as a soil drench, a trunk spray and by injecting the trunk of the tree.
Timing critical
Night spraying underway in a macadamia orchard in the Mpumalanga area. Experts are warning growers who might be using phsophonates and fosetyl-AI off-label that the practice is illegal
Debbie Matteucci, an independent product development and regulatory specialist, said phosphonic acid moved in accordance with the highest movement of flow by the plant. For example, during flowering or fruiting, high concentrations will end up in the tree canopy, whereas during other growth cycles, the active ingredients will collect in the roots. “This means, depending on the type of disease, the application timing is critical,” she said.
The review describes how quickly the compound moves through a tree – a “trunk-injected” avocado tree showed traces of the compound in its leaves within 24 hours, with accumulation in the roots and the bark several days later.
“It has been 40 years since the release of the first phosphonic acid-based fungicide and it remains highly effective, which shows it is ‘low risk’ for resistance,” the scientists say.
In their review, McLeod and Dann suggest that the research and experts they quote were comfortable that phosphonic acid-based crop protectants would continue as an “extremely valuable tool” for farmers but, they cautioned, extensive research was still under way to assess its efficacy and ideal application in domestic orchards.
What are Phosphonates?
Phosphonates break down in plants to phosphonic acid and their salts (potassium or ammonium), whereas fosetyl-Al breaks down to fosetyl and phosphonic acid. Phosphonic acid, phosphorous acid and phosphite are, in principle, all referring to the same active compound in plants to which fosetyl-Al and phosphonates break down, and which are responsible for controlling Phytophthora diseases.
Timeline:
Francois van Deventer, who is the CPD Technical Lead – Fungicides at Syngenta South Africa, detailed for The Macadamia the estimated timeline for the registration and commercialisation of a product containing a new active ingredient:
- Discovery and Research (two-10 years): This phase involves identifying and developing a new active ingredient, including initial screening, synthesis, and formulation. The timeline can vary widely based on the complexity of the molecule and the need for additional research to understand its efficacy and safety.
- Regulatory Approval (five-10 years): Obtaining regulatory approval for a new crop protection product is a lengthy and costly process. It involves extensive testing for efficacy, environmental impact, and human and animal safety. The timeline can vary based on the region and the specific requirements of regulatory agencies. Usually done simultaneously in all relevant main target markets such as the EU, USA, Latin America and some other regulatory authorities, such as CODEX etc.
- Field Trials and Development (two-five years): Once regulatory approval is obtained, field trials and further development are necessary to optimise application methods, dosages, and product performance under real-world conditions.
- Commercialisation (one-three years): This phase involves scaling up production, establishing distribution channels, and launching the product in the market. This is usually in selected first wave countries. Other countries will follow later. In South Africa this process i.e. the formal registration application after all the field efficacy trials have been conducted, should take two years, but in reality, this timeframe is not readily being met.
It’s important to note that these timelines and costs are general estimates, and actual timelines and expenses can vary widely based on the specific product, regulatory environment, and market conditions. Additionally, the process can be influenced by factors such as technological advancements, changes in regulatory requirements, and unforeseen challenges during development.
Requirements:
For new active ingredient registration in South Africa, the following requirements among others must be submitted for all agricultural remedies, whether new molecules or generic. The only data that is waived for a generic product are studies on the active ingredient and some efficacy and residue data requirements when the product is shown to be equivalent to the original product and claiming uses are already on the original product label.
- Detailed composition and specification of active ingredient
- Certificate of active ingredient manufacturer and product formulation plant
- Analytical method validation and the manufacturing process (known as the 5 batch report)
- Pharmacology and toxicology studies of the active ingredient
- Environmental impact studies of active ingredient
- Pharmacology and toxicology studies of the formulated product
- Environmental impact studies of the formulated product
- Risk assessment reports (effect of exposure on vulnerable groups/children)
- Physical properties and storage stability of formulated product
- GHS rationale and declaration
- Efficacy and phytotoxicity data and reports
- Residue reports for both field and lab data
- Bee toxicity studies for formulated product and active ingredient
South Africa’s macadamia processors are driving growth while farmers deliver a lower-than-expected harvest on the back of extreme heat during peak flowering in 2023.
The industry’s representative body, SAMAC, has released its latest crop estimates which represent a cut of as much as 15% on early season estimates.
In a statement released in mid-July, SAMAC told members that the estimate published in March at 90 135 tonnes dry nut in shell at 1.5% moisture content was now more likely at 76 753 tonnes dry nut in shell at 1.5% moisture content.
This estimate also represents a 1.74% drop in production against the 2023 crop, which totalled 78 110 tonnes.
William Davidson, who farms macadamias outside Empangeni on the KwaZulu-Natal North Coast, said extreme heat and early southerly winds had affected production significantly in the province. “On September 30 we had extreme heat at 43° and then again on October 6. That knocked our Beaumonts and A4s. Lots of farmers have Beaumonts and the A4s are starting to come through as quite a significant percentage of the crop now,” he said.
The heat had impacted heavily on pollination, as had an earlier than usual southerly wind, which brought cooler midday temperatures to the South Coast.
Barry Christie, Group Agricultural Technical Manager at Green Farms Nut Company, said similarly in the Lowveld, extreme heat was somewhat to blame for the cut in predictions.
In the SAMAC statement Marnus Erasmus said despite the reduction in the total crop expected, the quality of the nuts would assist in price recovery.
Industry in delicate balance
According to Christie, the country’s macadamia sector is in a balancing act between recovery from three years of rock bottom prices and increased production, which was putting massive pressure on processing capacity.
“Our industry is in a sensitive place at the moment. When times are tough, farmers tend to think that while they are struggling the processors are still making a lot of money. We aren’t, and the thing is that the growth in South Africa’s crop – regardless of prices – is requiring us to invest heavily in more processing capacity.”
Industry statistics indicate South African macadamia farmers planted more than 15 million trees between 2011 and 2023, with new orchard development peaking when prices went through the roof between 2016 and 2018. Those trees are coming into full production now, exerting exponential pressure on processors.
Expansion under way
Christie confirmed that Green Farms had acquired land near Tinley Manor on the North Coast for the construction of a depot, initially, and then later, the development of a processing plant. “It’s no secret that we have bought the land and what our plans are. Our growers know that it’s coming. But it’s early days so we are still deciding how we will proceed. I don’t think the depot will be ready for next year’s harvest,” he said.
The Macadamia is aware that a second processor has broken ground on land earmarked for a processing plant near Darnall, also on the North Coast.
A spokesman for the company said it was still too early to give details of the project.
The proposed macadamia processing facilities present a welcome fillip for the economy of the North Coast, which suffered a significant blow when embattled sugar group Tongaat Hulett mothballed its Darnall sugar mill in 2020. This put at least 400 people out of work, with a significant number of businesses e.g., logistics and maintenance companies in the value chain, having to shut up shop.
It’s anecdotal, I know. But sometimes a story can help paint truth in such a way it makes it easier for us to see it and therefore to believe it.
Long-standing SA Canegrowers board member Dave Littley and the head of Technology and Innovation at the organisation, Andy Church, recently attended the Bonsucro Global Week in Mexico.
For those of you who don’t know, Bonsucro is considered the leading global sustainable platform for sugarcane production aimed at greening the industry, so to speak.
And like macadamia production, sugarcane is a monoculture spreading over thousands of hectares of what was once pristine grasslands and coastal forest – particularly in the case of KwaZulu-Natal. In Mpumalanga the irrigated sugarcane has replaced what can only be imagined as spectacular bushveld teeming with wildlife not that long ago.
But I digress.
The Bonsucro conference was attended by sugar millers, commercial and small-scale growers, NGOs, sugar buyers and processors from across the globe – about 300 delegates all in one place mapping out a more supportable industry in the face of the climate crisis, biodiversity loss and the accelerating mass extinction.
One of the key priorities now in South Africa’s sugarcane-producing industry is to align on-farm operations with the domestic industry’s best practice management tool SUSFarms. This alignment is a start towards achieving crop certification able to meet international production standards such as the European Union’s Green Deal.
Put simply, if the South African crop is not certified, export markets could dry up.
Littley said that before he attended the conference, he was sceptical of the value of the Bonsucro certification. He has farmed sugarcane successfully the same way for years, why should he change that now?
But he heard, he saw and now, he believes.
Similarly, macadamia farmers are beginning to see and to believe.
Scientists say they are moving at pace to develop and produce biological pest control regimes in an industry that has a reputation for the over-enthusiastic use of chemicals.
And the message of more biodiverse orchards, where cover crops keep the remaining integrity of the soil intact and provide resting, nesting, feeding and breeding sites for pollinators and pest predators, among many others, is taking hold.
But the copy book has a blight. And I am not sure that macadamia farmers are entirely to blame. Information has emerged from various sources – as reflected in our article in this edition of The Macadamia – that desperate to control phytophthora infestations, some farmers are applying phosphonates and fosetyl-AI to control thrips in their orchards, regardless of the outstanding regulatory approvals.
To stand by and do nothing when a pest, which is responsibly controlled in Australian mac orchards, for example, destroys millions of rands in investment and hard work, is a tough conundrum.
South Africa’s legislation in this regard is considered world class – if you see it, you will believe it. However, what is unbelievable is the slow pace and efficacy of officialdom.
Like never before, farmers are in hand-to-hand combat with Mother Nature. An example of her fury is the tornado that ripped through a macadamia orchard in the KwaZulu-Natal North coast earlier this year. Seeing was believing.
Perhaps the words by Charles Dickens in his epic Tale of Two Cities describe best the days in which we live:“It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of light, it was the season of darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair”.
