Update on South African Grain Fortification
JANICE HUNT
South African Food and Beverage Manufacturing Review
Official Journal of SAAFoST

South Africa’s proposed grain fortification programme is in the advanced stages of planning, and while it could significantly impact on the well being of South Africa’s population, there are some thorny issues to resolve.

Hilton Zunckel, financial manager of the Chamber of Milling and an industry representative on the government’s fortification task team, says international research from the Department of Health shows that vitamin A and iron fortification in maize meal and wheat flour at levels of between 25% and 33% over an approximate five-year period could:

• Prevent one out of four childhood deaths.
• Lower maternal deaths by one third.
• Increase the working capacity of the labour force by 40%.
• Raise the population IQ by 10 to 15 points.
• Increase the GDP by 5% at a cost of 0,3%.

The Department of Health also believes that iron deficiency costs this country an approximate US$1-bn/year.

Compulsory fortification, explains Zunckel, has never been legislated in this country, but regulations have existed since 1979 (Regulation No R2839, 21 Dec. 1979) on minimum levels of fortification allowable to permit the marketing of a maize meal as enriched, which specified only riboflavin and nicotinamide. Several mills believed that enrichment provided a competitive advantage and fortified their products accordingly. Then about five years ago, there was a move away from maize meal fortification as it appeared to provide little in the way of additional sales value.

This changed about three years ago. ‘We started getting involved in discussions on fortification, in response to government moves in this direction. Industry has looked favourably on government actions for two reasons: it’s backed by sound research and isn’t shooting from the hip; and it has adopted a consultative approach,’ he comments.

Fortification proposals

The South African fortification task team, hosted by government, comprises academics, nutritionists and representatives from the milling, sugar and bakery industries, as well as UNICEF. The team has determined that maize meal and bread flour would be the most appropriate and cost-effective products to be fortified as research shows that these offer acceptable levels of bioavailability and also reach the population sectors in direst need of fortification.

At this stage, with final decisions yet to be made, fortification will include Vitamin A at 33% RDA, iron at 25% RDA, and a multivitamin premix – including riboflavin, folic acid, zinc and niacin.

He says the milling industry is putting its full co-operation behind this programme, with the proviso that it in no way affects the taste and colour profiles of its products. To this end, sensory and stability evaluation trials of fortified products are being conducted at the CSIR.

While great progress has been made, details of technical and policy aspects of the programme will only be finalised when all the research has been thoroughly assessed by all parties. The most important research still outstanding is the Food Consumption Survey conducted by nine local universities, which will provide an in-depth look into what South Africans eat, when they eat and how much they eat, from urban areas right into the most rural of areas. A Department of Health spokesperson tells Food Review that the results of this survey will be released on 10 April.

Costs -- a barbed issue

Financing also remains to be finalised. Zunckel says the task team’s research shows that the fortification will cost about R17/t for both maize and flour, or about 3% of the cost structure. This includes capex on dosing equipment for the mills as well as monitoring costs. "We have to police the legislation as there’s a risk of some mills ignoring it,’ he adds.

The Chamber estimates that ‘bush millers’ -- small independent farmer/millers -- represent as much as 10% to 15% of the market and probably operate in the poorest areas of the country, where fortification is most needed. Monitoring of these mills would be essential for the programme’s success.

While government has yet to make its own position on fortification costing clear to the task team, industry has serious concerns. ‘We believe that the cost of fortification should not be passed on to consumers,’ asserts Zunckel. ‘We’re feeding the poorest of the poor. Any price increase, no matter how small, usually means that our customers eat less.

‘The consumption of maize is stagnant and that of flour has decreased. While this is partly the result of an increase in the consumption of other staples including rice, potatoes and pasta, as well as the reduction in the official mass of bread which means the same number of loaves are being produced using less flour, we’ve concluded that the main consumer of staple foods in this country is very poorly off.’

He continues: ‘This obviously means that the milling industry is also going through tough financial times, which is reflected in the number of recent mergers and acquisitions. The industry is under stress and it’s attempting to reduce costs and rationalise capacities.

So while a R17/t increase may be insignificant for some market sectors, for our industry it could be disastrous.’

The fortification programme is thus ‘on track’ albeit moving slower than its proponents might prefer. ‘The longer it’s delayed, the greater the levels of vitamin deficiency,’ Zunckel states. ‘We’re hoping that all the details of the programme will be finalised and the legislation date advised as soon as possible, as this significantly affects our planning.’

Industry has requested an implementation period of six months following legislation, to give the mills time to purchase and install dosing equipment and change its product labelling to reflect the fortification.

* Information courtesy of South African Food and Beverage Manufacturing Review, Official Journal of SAAFoST