CORONATION market — a collage of colours assembled with just about everything from ackee to yam, gungo peas, otaheite apples, cho-cho and dasheen. While the variety of choices is definitely not limited, one may argue that its boundless nature may just be a colourful facade as many farmers lament that after a long day of hawking wares, “not a quatty wud sell”.

Beyond the busy market scene and other hustles and bustles of city life, lay the hidden gems of Jamaica’s agriculture — farms, which, according to the Central Intelligence Agency’s (CIA) World Factbook, account for over 15.83 per cent of the country’s land. With such extensive acres of arable land, it is hard for farmers not to get “gluttonous” for profit. And with Tropical Storm Nicole eroding their earnings by roughly $531.63 million last year, it’s no wonder that farmers sought to ramp up production and quench the current food scarcity in the markets.

In theory, while this may sound like a recipe for success, every farmer had the same idea at the same time resulting in vast produce becoming available to consumers. Not surprisingly, an excess supply of produce flooded the market. The question is now — how long can this increased production continue until supply exceeds demand or purchasing power? In another era, this availability of food would call for a feast. However, amid the current inflationary background with the unemployment rate looming at 12 per cent, consumers cannot ably share in the farmers’ abundant production. As a result, there is a glut in agricultural produce, echoing historic events and forcing farmers to sell crops such as tomato, lettuce, carrots, callaloo and cabbage for little or nothing — when they can be sold, that is.

The recent headaches due to this overproduction have most certainly been felt before. It was just about three years ago that Hurricane Gustav resulted in widespread devastation and, of course, farmers felt the brunt of it. During the hurricane relief effort in the aftermath of Gustav, fertiliser and seeds were distributed to farmers as a form of subsidy. However, tomato seeds were issued in excess resulting in a glut of tomatoes on the market.

Now, just three months into 2011 and here we are mirroring the events of 2008 with the surplus promising to rise to heights previously undreamed of. But is there really an overproduction of goods? Or can this conflux of goods be absorbed? The possibility exists, however, often at painfully lower prices. The phenomenon, however, is very ancient one wherein the consumer often secures some advantage but the nationwide “policy” of hand-to-mouth buying reduces the negative effects of overstocked shelves at the sacrifice of sales.

With the Country’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita at US$8,400.00 (approximately $721,560.00) according to the CIA World Factbook, ever so often, the average consumer must forego some discretionary expenditure. In that respect, it is possible that the daunting situation is not so much overproduction but underconsumption because as a nation we are capable of producing far more than we can purchase. Consequently, this presents a money and credit system dilemma which does not “throw off” purchasing power as fast as farmers can throw out cash crops. But while average income creeps slowly upward, potential output may increase exponentially, bringing yet another piece to the puzzle.

Say we “ride the overproduction bandwagon”, then the most immediately critical factor would be the country’s excess production capacity. Interestingly, while farm resources are almost always in excess of purchasing power, quite frequently, it is also in excess of consumption requirements. And granted unlimited purchasing power, one can consume so much and no more.

But whether it be a case of overproduction or underconsumption, the glut continues to headline the media, leading the Government to implement several schemes in an attempt to keep the surplus from crushing farmers altogether. One such initiative is the One-Day Farmers’ Markets which have been hosted in several parishes in a bid to absorb the glut in the markets. St Ann, St Mary, St Catherine, St Elizabeth, Clarendon, and Manchester have all reaped benefits from this venture.

While this effort can only ease short-term pains, the Government has begun the development of a more long-term comprehensive programme and fund for effective glut management and response. The $50-million Glut Management Fund will seek to address problems agro processors experience, including the shortage of raw material and the inability to purchase additional quantities when supplies are abundant.

In addition to the aforementioned and with food prices soaring on the international scene, the Government and the Opposition have united to form the “Grow What We Eat And Eat What We Grow” campaign to boost consumption of local produce. Imported food is so prevalent in our country, and one can relate to how increasingly accustomed we have become to having it as part of our normal consumption patterns and, of course, the challenge in trying to reduce our intake.

Whether it be abnormally low costs when everything is humming or abnormally high costs when everything is slack, as more plants saturate the field, the chances in favour of slackness are bound to grow unless, of course, purchasing power increases equally as fast. However, it is not so much the fluctuation from scarcity to glut that is the concern but more the rationale behind the flux. As farmers anxiously await to see the light after the storm, they dig a deeper hole as they often produce more than we can consume — in the case of overproduction, or more than we can afford to consume — in the case of underconsumption. Till then, one can only hope that the initiatives currently being implemented by our nation’s leaders will bear fruit as we seek to achieve sustainable growth.

Sutanya Chedda is the Research Administrator at Stocks & Securities Ltd. You may contact her at schedda@sslinvest.com.