Evaluate impact of Pre-Export Verification of Conformity

The negative reaction in the local press by the business community regarding the recent announcement by Uganda National Bureau of Standards (UNBS) to reintroduce the certification of imports from the countries of origin has prompted me to join the debate on this issue.

Whereas the measure is a positive step in controlling the inflow of substandard goods into the country, many issues seem to have been overlooked while re-introducing PVoC which has led traders to resist the programme again. UNBS introduced this measure in 2009 and in the course of implementing it; some areas of concern were identified by the business community and presented on their behalf by Private Sector Foundation Uganda (PSFU). Then, government decided to halt the programme and ordered for a review process. The issues then ranged from high fees to acquiring the companies being questioned.
In re-introducing PVoC, UNBS is expected to have addressed the issues raised by the private sector then. Therefore, it is surprising to see the same issues being raised this time, more so by the same stakeholders. So, who is fooling who?

I am proponent of PVoC mainly because this measure has been employed by many countries faced by the monster of substandard goods and it has greatly contributed to their reduction. I have also had a chance to learn a few things from some of those countries where PVoC has been implemented, and probably successfully. One of the key success factors of PVoC is the model to be used by a country, since several models exist. The appropriate model is decided by the architects of PVoC, agreed upon by stakeholders and negotiated by government, with the service providers while appointing them.

Each country has one or more unique characteristics of its trading system and these are very critical in designing a model that is suitable for the country. The Ugandan trading system has a significant component of small to medium scale importers. This particular segment has several unique characteristics. Among them is the nature of goods purchased, where they are sourced, how they are shipped, and their clearance on arrival in Uganda. Whoever wants to successfully implement PVoC must find a suitable model for this segment or else face stiff resistance.

Most importers do not buy goods from manufacturers but from the open market mainly from the People’s Republic of China and other Asian countries. They buy one or two different (call them assorted) items made by different manufacturers, from several shops and collect them in a warehouse. This makes it difficult for the Ugandan trader to establish the quality of products they purchase; hence, certification arrangements become almost impractical. This is on top of language complications and the multiplicity of manufacturers in China, with some of them being unauthorised by the Chinese authorities.

In terms of shipping, several importers decide on one name to be put on the Bill of Lading and the goods are shipped to Uganda in one container carrying toothpicks, toothpaste, tyres, name it. When they reach Uganda, each takes their share. That is the nature of the business segment and unless this changes or a suitable model for certification of these imports is designed, PVoC will remain a challenge for the implementers and the importers.

Consult relevant stakeholders
Therefore, there is an urgent need for implementers of PVoC to engage the stakeholders on this particular matter. Nobody (including those who import such items) enjoys spending their money on worthless products and all efforts should be made to ensure that the public accesses products fit for the intended purpose, economically.

On the other hand, the business community needs an improved business environment where goods are cleared faster at ports of entry, reduced congestion at the ports of entry that have hitherto been caused by consignments awaiting inspection and testing, which will eventually lead to reduced costs of doing business in Uganda.

The other issue to note is that the price of the goods will eventually increase as a result of the costs involved in the PVoC as well as the improved quality of products. Whoever wants quality products should be prepared to pay something extra. However, government may have to carry out a regulatory impact assessment to see whether the increase will affect the affordability of the products. This is important because a large section of Ugandan consumers is mainly driven by the price of a commodity rather than the quality of the product. That’s why counterfeit products have continued to have market in mainly growing economies such as Uganda. The demand exists. For that, empower the consumer as one of the strategies to fight substandard goods.

As this programme is being mooted for implementation, there should be some serious consultations to get answers for the many questions looming in the minds of Ugandans who are about to make orders for goods leaving the ports of loading after December 3, 2012 according to the press release from UNBS. The consultations need to involve the inspection firms who are quietly setting the terms the inspection scheme is following. Unless this is done, the regulator and the importers will continue playing a cat and mouse game as we the public continue to access worthless goods that do not perform; hence, becoming poorer.

The writer is a Quality Consultant. E–mail: gyaviira.musoke@gmail.com