AWINO: No reason why we can't revive textile industry

Recently, I have been listening to not only the different parties' views on issues that affect the state of the economy but also to public polemic (contentious rhetoric) aimed at mitumba (second-hand imported clothing) believed to have caused the collapse of Kenya's textile industry.

I remember the heyday of the textile industry from the 1960s to the early 1990s. The companies included Rivatex, Kicomi, Raymonds, Yuken, Kenknit, Taitex, Mountex and Heritage, among others. Their fall has always puzzled me since they produced beautiful products.

It is important that every politician and civil society should be made aware of the fact that imported products can constrain development, create fewer jobs and reify dependency theory

Raila is said to have told the Kenya National Chamber of Commerce and Industry:

"We are going to go into primary production as we also promote other products. We are to grow cotton, we do the ginning, the spinning and the weaving until we end up with the fabric. Then we can embark on secondary manufacturing of dresses, suits and so on."

These trends tend to increase the size or volume of trade, economic development and fix unemployment. This depicts Raila as not only a pragmatist but also a progress in his approach to reviving the textile industry.

As pragmatists and progressivists, the Azimio team is seen to have enunciated problem-solving dynamics to revive the collapsed textile industry. It seems that they have investigated the textile industry problem and established the ideal method and process for improving the textile industry as follows: conduct primary production, grow cotton, gin, spin, weave resulting finally in fabric.

As can be seen, Azimio emphasises problem-solving and the scientific method towards solving the problem of the collapsed textile industry.

Both Raila and his running mate Martha Karua are amenable to what works and value consultation on procedures and suggestions that can provide solutions.

In contrast, Ruto offers the bottom-up model but doesn’t really provide the conceptual framework of its operation and standpoint, especially on imports.

Even though UDA claims to be the voice of mitumba entrepreneurs, it fails to admit that it is the inflow of neo-colonial materials, the loss of rights to our own natural and physical resources and corruption that destroy our economy.

For that matter, I have an ideological suspicion of hustler capitalism and its dogmatic bottom-up model.

While it is true that dependency on foreign goods and services plus failure to love our indigenous/cultural materials are the real causes of our poverty, UDA has failed to comprehend this worldview. In the bottom-up model, it is always risky to rely on a decision-making process based on one model. In a complex system, one needs to be a mediator of multiple models.

It should be no surprise that Azimio is able to quickly grapple with one fallen sector. Raila and his team have pledged to alleviate this issue in a number of ways.

First, Raila is on record saying mitumba and the textile industry can both play a role in Kenya's economic transformation. 

Second, Raila doesn’t see why we cannot succeed quickly as has happened with some countries such as Britain, Germany, France, the US, Belgium and India, among others. Instead of smuggling/importing clothes from outside, can’t we smuggle expertise, engineers and technology from outside to help us make a head start beyond mitumba.

Third, he is catalysing Kenyans to learn from the British industrial revolution inventors to inspire our industry.

Fourth, the Azimio team predicts that Kenyans have a comparative and competitive advantage to redeem the fallen textile industry and redeem ourselves through the one county one product mantra.

Comparative advantage takes place when we can produce a product at a lower opportunity cost than other countries. This implies that we can produce a product relatively cheaper than other countries and redeem the industry.

This way of thinking revolves close to the Ricardian theory of comparative advantage. It postulates that if a country specialises in producing goods where there is a lower opportunity cost, then there is a great hope to have an exponential increase in the country’s economic welfare.

I can project that if we work hard to resonate with our old textile industries and profitable manufacturing, then we shall have more jobs. It was short-sightedness to have killed the valuable textile industry, the goose that laid the golden egg.

University lecturer

“WATCH: The latest videos from the Star”