South Africa’s small sugar farms are producing less than they could: study finds ways to boost them

South Africa has around 25,653 small-scale sugarcane growers, making the industry a lifeline for rural communities in Mpumalanga and KwaZulu-Natal provinces. By generating 65,000 direct and 270,000 indirect jobs, its agricultural and milling operations support more than a million livelihoods in these areas. But the productivity of many small-scale growers remains well below potential. Production constraints are limiting both farm profitability and the sector's overall contribution to rural economic development.

The growers face complex challenges that go beyond access to technical farming advice. A six-year research project by senior entomologist Lawrence Nkosikhona Malinga and his colleagues at the South African Sugarcane Research Institute in collaboration with the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development, South African Farmers Development Association and South African Canegrowers looked to identify and address some of the challenges. They found variations in growers' education levels, language barriers, lack of funding, lack of technical expertise and poor planning of crop production.

Some of the key findings are that issues such as weed pressure, weak planning systems, contractor dependence, limited access to seedcane and poor technical support undermine productivity and profitability. The project identified lessons for agricultural systems and smallholder farmer support programmes.

What are the 4 biggest challenges for small-scale sugarcane growers?

1. Weed pressure

Many growers struggle with choosing and measuring herbicide, applying it at the right time, and the cost. Due to financial constraints, they sometimes use less herbicide than is needed, or they delay application. They manage weeds after they appear instead of preventing them.

Poor weed control has major consequences. Weeds compete directly with sugarcane for water, nutrients and sunlight. The cane doesn't grow well but the labour and production costs are high. The incorrect dosage and inefficient application of products can also lead to herbicide resistance. Many of these growers are not familiar with these issues and good practices.

It's usually cheaper to manage weeds before they can affect cane yields.

2. Weak planning

Many farming decisions, including seedcane ordering, planting dates, weed control, harvesting schedules and fertiliser applications, happen later than is optimal. These delays are often linked to financial constraints, knowledge gaps, or dependence on others like service providers, input suppliers, technical advisors, and labour availability. One delayed decision triggers several others.

With sugarcane, which isn't planted every year, these delays can reduce productivity for multiple seasons and reduce overall profitability. Improved planning would allow growers to use inputs more efficiently and reduce avoidable losses.

3. Contractor dependence

Many small-scale growers rely heavily on contractors for planting, agrochemical applications, harvesting and land preparation. They don't have the expensive machinery and labour to do these jobs themselves. But too much dependence can reduce grower control over critical operations. Delays, poor communication, or inconsistent service quality affect production outcomes.

Some growers also reported limited confidence in supervising contractor activities or challenging decisions when work quality was poor. This is partly due to gaps in knowledge about what has to be done on the farm.

4. Limited access to quality seedcane and technical support

Growers sometimes get seedcane from neighbours, informal networks, or their own fields because certified or approved seedcane is expensive, unavailable locally, or ordered too late. As a result, they may end up with the variety that's available rather than the one best suited to the soil type or regional pest and disease pressures.

Growers said technical support was inconsistent from extension officers but they needed help with pest and disease diagnosis, variety selection and chemical use.

How should these challenges be tackled?

The findings suggest that farmers need stronger support systems, not just technical recommendations. A combination of practical learning, institutional coordination and improved access to resources would help.

Weed pressure

Weed management support needs to become more practical and continuous. Growers need extension officers to help them choose the correct products and time the application.

Demonstration plots, a small piece of land used to test and showcase new agricultural techniques, crop varieties, or technologies, would be useful. And growers should be able to learn by doing.

Low-cost practices like hand weeding and covering the soil with dried cane leaves to suppress weed growth would reduce the need for chemicals.

Weak planning systems

Seasonal calendars, simple budgeting tools and practical farm-planning templates could help growers improve the timing of planting, fertiliser applications, seedcane ordering and harvesting. Regular engagement is better than occasional workshops. Cost-benefit tools (methods to compare the costs of an action or decision with the benefits it produces) would help growers choose how to use limited resources more efficiently.

Contractor dependence

Small-scale sugarcane contractors are growers that provide mechanical (land preparation, crop maintenance and cane transportation) and labour (cane cutting) services to fellow growers. The productivity of these contractors is generally low and their services aren't always reliable. Delays can be costly. Improving contractor efficiency and productivity would benefit both contractors and growers. Growers would get quality services at competitive prices, and millers would receive a steady flow of quality cane.

Because contractors are deeply embedded within small-scale production systems, solutions should focus on improving relationships rather than replacing them. Growers need support to supervise contractor activities more confidently. Stronger communication between growers, contractors and advisory services would improve accountability and timing.

Limited seedcane access and technical support

Seed production and distribution should be done by a wider network, not a central scheme. This would promote varietal diversity and create rural employment.

Extension services need to move from just delivering information to more practical visits where farmers can learn by doing.

These challenges are interconnected. Isolated interventions are unlikely to succeed. Integrated support systems would combine practical learning, stronger extension services, improved coordination among industry stakeholders, better access to inputs and continuous collaborative engagement. The evidence suggests that growers are more likely to adopt recommended practices when support is practical and they can see that it works for them.

Why does solving these challenges matter?

Improving weed control, planning systems, contractor coordination and access to seedcane could do far more than increase yields. These changes could improve profitability, strengthen household incomes, reduce production risks, and increase the resilience of rural farming communities.

Experiences from countries such as Brazil, Kenya, Mauritius, and India show that small-scale sugarcane productivity improves when growers receive integrated support rather than isolated interventions. Practical extension services, timely access to certified seedcane, coordinated contractor and mechanisation services, and better farm planning have increased yields, profitability and resilience, demonstrating that strengthening the entire production support system can deliver lasting benefits for rural farming communities.

Perhaps the biggest lesson from this work is that productivity challenges are rarely caused solely by not accepting recommendations. Small-scale growers often know what should be done, but operate within systems that make it difficult to follow the advice.

The South African Sugarcane Research Institute team leaders including Lindani Mchunu (project manager), Khanyisile Buthelezi, Tholoana Mofurutsi, Surashna Jithoo, Siphumelelo Mbhele and other research and extension colleagues played a crucial role in the research and the article.

Lawrence Nkosikhona Malinga is affiliated with the University of KwaZulu-Natal.

By Lawrence Nkosikhona Malinga, Programme Manager (Crop Protection) & Senior Entomologist, South African Sugarcane Research Institute; University of KwaZulu-Natal

   Comments0