South Africa is racing to contain foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) by importing emergency vaccines from Argentina. Blessing Zitha from the Agricultural Research Council (ARC) explains that while it may seem to clash with self-sufficiency goals, it’s a vital move to protect farmers, exports, and rural livelihoods.
When outbreaks of foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) flare up, the consequences move far beyond the farm gate. Livestock markets freeze. Export partners close their borders. Rural livelihoods tremble.
South Africa is facing this reality, prompting the country to import emergency FMD vaccines from Argentina while simultaneously rebuilding its own manufacturing capacity.
At first glance, importing vaccines may appear to contradict the goal of agricultural self-reliance. However, in the complex world of animal disease control and global trade, the decision reflects a calculated balance between urgency, economics, and long-term strategy.
A disease with huge economic consequences
FMD is one of the most contagious viral diseases affecting cloven-hoofed animals such as cattle, sheep, and goats. Although it rarely threatens human health, its economic impact can be devastating.
Countries that lose their FMD-free status often face immediate export bans, cutting off access to high-value international markets.
The standards governing such trade are set by the World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH). To regain or maintain “FMD-free with vaccination” status, countries must demonstrate effective disease surveillance, rapid response, and reliable vaccine supply.
For South Africa, a country where livestock production supports thousands of farmers and contributes significantly to agricultural exports, the stakes are high.
Why Argentina?
Argentina is widely regarded as one of the world’s leading producers of FMD vaccines, with companies such as Biogénesis Bagó manufacturing large volumes that meet international regulatory standards. Decades of experience, strong biosafety systems, and established export certification processes make Argentina a dependable supplier during emergencies.
When outbreaks occur, time is everything. Vaccination campaigns must begin immediately to contain viral spread. Waiting for local production to ramp up could allow the disease to spread further, increasing livestock losses and prolonging export restrictions.
In that context, importing vaccines becomes less about dependence and more about damage control.
The cost of delay
Although imported vaccines may be more expensive per dose than locally produced alternatives, the broader economic calculation tells a different story.
An uncontrolled FMD outbreak can trigger:
- Export bans on beef and other livestock products
- Sharp drops in livestock prices
- Production losses for commercial and smallholder farmers
- Downstream effects on feed suppliers, transporters, and processors
The economic loss from even a short-term export suspension can run into billions of rand. By contrast, the cost of importing vaccines, while substantial, may be significantly lower than the losses avoided by rapid containment. In other words, imports function as an economic stabiliser during crisis periods.
Related stories
- Turkish FMD vaccines set to boost national vaccination drive
- Dairy industry slams govt over ‘inconsistent’ FMD regulations
- Meat is safe to eat despite FMD outbreak, assure experts
- South Africa’s FMD crisis exposes veterinary system failures
Rebuilding local capacity
At the same time, South Africa is not abandoning domestic production. The Agricultural Research Council (ARC), based at Onderstepoort, has been working to restore local FMD vaccine manufacturing after years of limited activity.
Historically, South Africa produced its own FMD vaccines. However, ageing infrastructure, biosafety upgrades, and regulatory compliance costs contributed to a decline in production capacity. Recent outbreaks have renewed political and scientific commitment to rebuilding this strategic capability.
Scaling up domestic production, however, is not an overnight process. It requires:
- High-containment biosafety facilities
- Good manufacturing practice (GMP) certification
- Skilled technical personnel
- Quality control and batch testing systems
- Reliable cold-chain distribution networks
These investments take time and money.
Import today, produce tomorrow?
What is emerging is not a simple choice between importing and producing locally, but a phased strategy. In the short term, imports from Argentina provide immediate security. They ensure that vaccination campaigns can proceed without delay and that South Africa can demonstrate decisive outbreak management to its trading partners.
In the medium to long term, strengthening ARC’s production capacity could reduce reliance on foreign suppliers, lower exposure to currency fluctuations, and enhance national biosecurity sovereignty.
A hybrid approach, combining short-term imports with gradual domestic scale-up, may offer the most stable pathway forward.
Beyond borders: Regional implications
South Africa’s decision-making also has regional dimensions. FMD does not respect borders, and outbreaks in one country can affect neighbouring states. By building stronger domestic production capacity, South Africa could eventually support vaccine supply across the Southern African Development Community (SADC).
Such a shift would not only improve regional disease control but could also position the country as a continental leader in veterinary biotechnology.
A question of sovereignty and resilience
The broader debate touches on a global theme that gained prominence during the Covid-19 pandemic: vaccine sovereignty. Many countries realised the risks of depending entirely on external suppliers during health emergencies.
In the animal health sphere, similar lessons apply. While importing vaccines during emergencies is economically rational, long-term resilience may depend on local capacity.
Yet resilience does not mean isolation. Global supply chains and international cooperation remain essential components of disease control.
The road ahead
For now, South Africa’s vaccine importation from Argentina represents a pragmatic response to immediate risk. Rapid vaccination protects farmers, stabilises markets, and reassures trade partners.
At the same time, renewed investment in local production suggests a longer-term vision, one aimed at reducing vulnerability and strengthening agricultural biosecurity.
The real challenge lies in maintaining momentum once outbreaks subside. Historically, urgency fades when crises recede. Sustained funding, regulatory support, and public-private collaboration will be necessary to transform short-term reaction into long-term capacity.
In the end, the question is not whether South Africa should import or produce vaccines. It is about balancing speed, cost, sovereignty, and trade security in a world where animal diseases can reshape economies almost overnight.
For farmers watching the movement of cattle across provincial lines and exporters monitoring international markets, that balance is more than policy; it is survival.
- Blessing Zitha is a PhD student under the economic analysis unit at the Agricultural Research Council (ARC). The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views or positions of Food For Mzansi.
READ NEXT: Why a JSE soymeal contract is critical for South African feed
