The High Price of an Imported Habit

In the bustling markets and modern supermarkets of Dar es Salaam, a single, glossy apple represents a small luxury. Its price, approximately 1,500 Tanzanian Shillings (TZS), equivalent to about €0.50 or $0.60, is a stark data point in the daily economy.¹ For many, it is an affordable indulgence, but for the nation’s economy, it is a symbol of a much larger, more expensive habit: a deep-seated dependency on imported food. This single fruit, likely harvested thousands of miles away in South Africa, is the endpoint of a long and costly supply chain that culminates in a price signal powerful enough to spark an agricultural revolution.³

The scale of this dependency is staggering. Tanzania spends an estimated $75 million annually importing fresh apples and a variety of apple-based products, including juice, cider, and vinegar.⁵ This figure is part of a much wider regional trend. The East African Community (EAC) as a whole imports between $400 million and $500 million worth of fresh apples each year to satisfy a growing demand that local agriculture has, until now, been unable to meet.² This demand is fueled by the expansion of an urban middle class in cities like Dar es Salaam, Arusha, and Mwanza, where aspirational, health-conscious consumers increasingly seek out such “premium” fruits.⁴

The high retail price of an imported apple is more than just a number; it is a clear indicator of a significant market inefficiency and a latent economic opportunity. This price encapsulates the cumulative costs of production in a foreign country, international logistics, freight charges, import tariffs, the complexities of a fragile cold chain, and multiple layers of distributor markups. The substantial gap between the landed cost and the final consumer price creates a powerful economic incentive—an arbitrage opportunity for any entity that can produce a comparable product locally at a lower cost. The core question, which hangs over this entire proposition, is whether local production can overcome domestic hurdles to successfully undercut this import-driven price point.

Furthermore, the nation’s reliance on foreign apples for a growing segment of its population points to a broader phenomenon in many emerging economies. As dietary aspirations evolve, often influenced by global trends, they can outpace the capabilities of local agricultural systems. This creates a dependency on international supply chains for foods perceived as healthy or aspirational, leading to a significant and sustained outflow of foreign currency. In this context, the apple becomes a case study for a much larger challenge related to food sovereignty. The TZS 1,500 apple is not just a fruit; it is a recurring, multi-million-dollar debit on the national ledger, representing capital that could be invested in building a more resilient and self-sufficient domestic economy.

The Agri-Entrepreneur’s Gambit: A Vision for a Tanzanian Apple

At the forefront of the movement to challenge this status quo is David Alexander Runge, a German-born entrepreneur whose career has been forged in the demanding agricultural landscapes of Africa. His professional journey includes a formative period managing a catfish company in Nigeria—an experience he describes as a “real-life MBA”—and a growing conviction that Africa, unlike the saturated markets of Europe, is a continent of vibrant, fast-paced opportunity where new ideas can take root.³ After exploring and discarding ventures in e-commerce and seaweed in Tanzania, Runge identified the apple import dependency as a market failure ripe for disruption.³

Runge’s investment philosophy is articulated with a simple, powerful clarity: “Replace imports with local production” [User Query]. This is not merely a business slogan but a comprehensive strategy aimed at fostering economic autonomy, building domestic value chains, and achieving a greater degree of food independence for Tanzania [User Query]. He frames this mission through the lens of social entrepreneurship, arguing that true empowerment comes not from simple aid but from creating sustainable economic models. “Giving someone an apple might satisfy them for a day,” he remarks, “but providing them with the tools to cultivate an apple tree turns them into an entrepreneur”.⁷

This philosophy is the driving force behind Tamu Tamu Tanzania Ltd., a venture located in the Iringa region that claims to be East Africa’s first commercial apple farm and nursery.² The farm was originally established in 2016 by a different set of entrepreneurs, and was later acquired by Runge and his business partner, Peter Schuurs, who financed the purchase with their personal savings.² The partnership leverages their complementary skills, with Schuurs overseeing the complex farm operations while Runge directs the commercial strategy.²

Runge’s journey exemplifies how an external perspective can often identify and challenge market inefficiencies that have become normalized for local actors. His experience across different African economies provided him with a comparative framework, allowing him to recognize the region’s massive apple import bill not as an immutable fact, but as a glaring anomaly worth investigating. His earlier, unsuccessful business attempts in Tanzania were not failures but a form of deep market immersion, providing invaluable lessons on the country’s regulatory landscape, capital requirements, and the necessity of a tangible, scalable business model.³ This iterative process of trial and error ultimately guided him toward the more robust and compelling opportunity in agriculture.

Crucially, the “import replacement” philosophy is the central organizing principle of Tamu Tamu’s entire business model. It is not an abstract ideal but a concrete operational plan that informs every strategic decision. A simplistic approach might have been to merely grow apples and sell them into the existing market. Tamu Tamu’s strategy is far more sophisticated and systemic. Recognizing that they could not build an industry alone, they set out to create a platform. This involved first solving the genetic challenge by identifying locally adapted apple varieties, then the supply challenge by establishing a nursery to propagate them, and finally the market challenge by creating value-added products and a guaranteed offtake system for other farmers. This transforms a broad economic concept into a resilient, multi-faceted, and scalable enterprise.

From Experiment to Enterprise: Cultivating an Equatorial Apple

The central challenge to this entire enterprise is agronomic. Apples are temperate-climate fruits requiring a period of cold dormancy—or “chill hours”—to properly set fruit, a condition fundamentally at odds with the climate of equatorial Tanzania.³ The success of Tamu Tamu Tanzania, therefore, hinges on a combination of careful genetic selection and innovative cultivation techniques that effectively trick the trees into believing they have experienced a winter.

The foundation of the company’s success is its privately funded and exhaustive research and development program. Beginning in 2017, the farm imported over 50 different apple varieties from around the globe, subjecting them to years of rigorous trials to identify a handful that could thrive in East Africa’s diverse microclimates.⁷ This painstaking process has yielded a curated list of approximately 10 proven varieties, forming the core intellectual property of the company and its primary competitive advantage.⁷

Among the most successful varieties identified for Tanzania are ‘Anna’, a fast-growing and sweet apple ideal for the cooler, high-altitude regions like Njombe, Mbeya, and Iringa; ‘Golden Dorset’, a versatile variety that can tolerate occasional high temperatures; and ‘Winter Banana’, known for its general adaptability.⁴ These varieties are grafted onto the well-adapted and disease-resistant MM-111 semi-dwarfing rootstock, which ensures higher survival rates and robust growth.⁹ The agronomic innovation does not stop at genetics. Experts in tropical pomology have demonstrated that specific cultivation practices are essential. Techniques such as manually stripping the leaves from the trees at the end of a growing cycle can artificially induce dormancy, satisfying the tree’s need for a rest period. Simultaneously, bending branches into a horizontal position helps to calm the vigorous vertical growth typical of apple trees in the tropics and encourages the development of fruit-bearing spurs.¹²

This combination of the right genetics and the right techniques makes the venture not just possible, but potentially highly profitable. Tamu Tamu advises farmers on high-density planting models, with a medium-density orchard accommodating around 1,111 trees per hectare.¹¹ While it is a long-term investment, with commercial harvesting beginning in the third year and reaching full production by years six and seven, the returns are substantial.¹⁰ A single mature tree, under good management, can be expected to yield between 30 and 50 kilograms of apples annually.⁴ With farm-gate prices for apples ranging from TZS 3,000 to TZS 6,000 per kilogram, the potential revenue from a single well-managed hectare could reach between TZS 13.5 million and TZS 27 million per year.⁴

The financial case for establishing a one-hectare apple orchard, based on available data, presents a compelling investment profile, as summarized below.

Financial Consideration	Estimated Cost/Return (TZS)	Details
Initial Capital Expenditure (CapEx)
Land Preparation	500,000 – 1,000,000	Ploughing, levelling, and ensuring proper soil drainage.
Seedlings (1,111 trees)	3,333,000 – 5,555,000	Based on TZS 3,000-5,000 per high-quality grafted seedling.
Irrigation Setup (Drip System)	4,942,000 – 9,884,000	Calculated per hectare from per-acre estimates.
Total Estimated CapEx	8,775,000 – 16,439,000
Annual Operational Expenditure (OpEx)
Maintenance	3,706,500 – 7,413,000	Pruning, fertilization, pest control, and labor.
Projected Annual Returns (at maturity)
Average Yield per Tree	30 kg	A conservative estimate for a mature tree.
Total Yield per Hectare	33,330 kg	Based on 1,111 trees at 30 kg/tree.
Market Price per kg	3,000 – 6,000
Potential Annual Revenue	99,990,000 – 199,980,000

Note: Costs are derived from per-acre estimates in source material and converted to per-hectare for consistency with planting density recommendations. Revenue projections are based on a mature orchard and do not account for initial years of lower yield. Sources:.⁴

The most valuable asset of Tamu Tamu Tanzania is not its land or its equipment, but its proprietary knowledge. The years of R&D have created a significant barrier to entry for potential competitors, positioning the company as the primary knowledge hub and genetic supplier for an entire nascent industry. This is a classic competitive moat, built not on capital, but on hard-won, localized experience.

Furthermore, the investment extends beyond immediate financial returns. Runge has noted that apple trees in Tanzania have the potential to live for over a century.¹⁰ This introduces a profound shift in agricultural thinking, especially in a context dominated by annual crops like maize.¹³ An investment in an orchard is not about a single season’s profit; it is about the creation of a long-term, productive asset capable of generating intergenerational wealth. This offers a pathway from cyclical, subsistence-based farming toward long-term asset management, fundamentally altering the economic horizon for farming families who choose to embark on this journey.

Sowing the Seeds of a New Value Chain

Tamu Tamu Tanzania’s strategy extends far beyond its own 200-acre farm. The company is actively engineering an entire agricultural ecosystem, positioning itself as the “value chain captain” in a classic hub-and-spoke model designed to build a new industry from the ground up.

The company operates as the central hub, controlling the most critical upstream and downstream components of the value chain. Upstream, it maintains its position as the region’s primary large-scale nursery, propagating and supplying the high-quality, climate-adapted seedlings that are the prerequisite for any successful orchard.² It is through this channel that it has engaged with a network of approximately 2,000 farmers, with ambitious plans to expand this to 3,500 in the near future.⁵

Crucially, the company’s role is not limited to just selling trees. It provides comprehensive training and ongoing technical support, effectively de-risking the venture for smallholder farmers who would otherwise be ill-equipped to cultivate a novel and complex perennial crop.¹⁴ This includes a “train the trainer” model, where lead farmers are developed as community role models to demonstrate success and encourage adoption by more cautious neighbors.⁵ Downstream, Tamu Tamu is creating a guaranteed offtake market, committing to buy back apples from its network of out-growers to supply its own value-added processing operations.²

This focus on value addition is a key pillar of the company’s strategy. Rather than immediately attempting to compete in the fresh apple market—a segment that requires a sophisticated and capital-intensive cold chain infrastructure that the company currently lacks—Tamu Tamu is targeting the processed goods sector.³ It is producing a range of products that are new to the Tanzanian market, including 100% natural, cold-pressed apple juice, organic ciders, and dried apple chips.⁵ These products are designed to compete directly with expensive imported alternatives, leveraging a “locally grown” appeal.³ The primary markets for these goods are high-end supermarkets in urban centers, the country’s significant tourism and hospitality industry, and a burgeoning direct-to-consumer channel facilitated by social media platforms.⁵

This integrated model represents a private-sector solution to the systemic market failures that have long plagued Tanzanian agriculture. Smallholder farmers in the country consistently face a trifecta of challenges: a lack of access to high-quality inputs, a deficit of technical knowledge for modern cultivation, and the absence of reliable, profitable markets for their produce.¹⁵ Tamu Tamu’s model vertically integrates these missing pieces into a closed-loop system. The company provides the genetics and the knowledge on credit, and in return, it secures a stable and growing supply of raw materials for its processing facilities. In essence, it is building the market infrastructure that the public sector has historically struggled to provide.

However, this elegant solution carries its own inherent risks. While the hub-and-spoke model empowers farmers by giving them access to a lucrative new value chain, it simultaneously fosters a powerful dependency on a single corporate entity. The long-term livelihoods of thousands of farming families will become intrinsically tied to the commercial success of Tamu Tamu Tanzania, its pricing policies for raw apples, and its continued commitment to the out-grower model. This creates a significant monopsony risk, where a single buyer holds disproportionate power over many sellers. While the relationship is currently symbiotic and mutually beneficial, this power dynamic could, in theory, become exploitative if not managed with a strong ethical framework or balanced by the eventual emergence of competing processors and alternative market channels. The long-term sustainability of this new industry will depend on the “enlightened self-interest” of its pioneering company.

The Thorny Path to Harvest: Overcoming Tanzania’s Agricultural Hurdles

The vision of a thriving, locally sourced apple industry is a compelling one, but it is being cultivated in challenging soil. The story of Tamu Tamu Tanzania is an ambitious attempt to push back against the powerful headwinds that have historically constrained Tanzania’s agricultural development. As David Runge himself cautions, agriculture is “not for the faint-hearted—capital intensive, long payback period, low margins, politically and weather influenced”.⁸ Success requires not only a sound business plan but also deep pockets and a resilient “hustle” to navigate the myriad obstacles.³

Despite being the backbone of the national economy and employing three-quarters of the workforce, Tanzania’s agricultural sector has been characterized by decades of low productivity.¹⁶ The economic growth that the country has experienced has not translated into significant poverty reduction in rural areas, precisely because agricultural productivity has failed to keep pace.¹⁷

Any new agricultural venture must contend with a litany of systemic challenges. The country’s infrastructure deficit is severe; poor rural roads limit market access and contribute to staggering post-harvest losses, which can be as high as 30-40% for perishable goods like fruit.¹⁵ The overwhelming majority of farming is rain-fed, with only 4.6% of cultivated land under irrigation, making the entire sector acutely vulnerable to the increasing frequency of droughts and floods brought on by climate change.¹³ Access to capital is another critical bottleneck. An estimated 95% of agricultural households do not have access to loans, crippling their ability to invest in modern inputs such as improved seeds, fertilizers, or mechanization.¹³ This is compounded by complex and often bureaucratic hurdles related to land acquisition and tenure, which can deter large-scale commercial investment.¹⁶ Finally, a persistent lack of modern farming education means that many farmers remain locked in subsistence-level practices on small plots of land, which average just 2.5 hectares.¹⁹

These challenges are not independent but are deeply interconnected, forming a self-reinforcing cycle of underinvestment and stagnation. Poor infrastructure increases the risk and lowers the profitability of farming, which in turn makes farmers appear un-bankable to financial institutions. This lack of credit prevents investment in productivity-enhancing technologies like irrigation and high-quality inputs. The resulting reliance on traditional, rain-fed methods keeps yields low, which reinforces the initial problem of low profitability. The success of the apple venture hinges on its ability to use its own private capital to break this vicious cycle for its specific, curated value chain.

This creates a fundamental tension between the well-designed micro-level intervention of Tamu Tamu and the challenging macro-level environment in which it operates. The company can insulate itself and its network of farmers from some of these systemic weaknesses—it can provide its own high-quality inputs, deliver its own training, and build its own processing facilities. However, it cannot control everything. A severe regional drought, a sudden and adverse change in national trade policy, or the collapse of a key logistics route could still pose an existential threat. The entire venture is a calculated bet that the internal strengths and resilience of its business model can overcome the external weaknesses of the broader system.

Echoes of the Past, Seeds of the Future: Import Substitution in Modern Tanzania

The philosophy of replacing imports with local production, so central to Tamu Tamu’s mission, resonates deeply with Tanzania’s economic history. The country has a long and complicated relationship with the concept of self-reliance, and understanding this past is crucial to appreciating the novelty and the risks of the present endeavor.

Following the 1967 Arusha Declaration, Tanzania embarked on a bold and transformative path of “socialism and self-reliance” known as Ujamaa. A core pillar of this strategy was a state-led model of Import Substitution Industrialization (ISI), which aimed to achieve self-sufficiency in food production and build a domestic industrial base.²⁰ This era was characterized by extensive government intervention, including price controls, the proliferation of state-owned enterprises (parastatals), and highly restrictive trade policies designed to protect nascent domestic industries from foreign competition.²² However, this top-down, centrally planned model largely failed to deliver on its promises. Inefficiencies, coupled with a lack of market signals, led to chronic foreign exchange shortages, sharp declines in production, and broader economic stagnation.²⁰ Beginning in the mid-1980s, under pressure from international financial institutions, Tanzania underwent a painful series of structural adjustment programs that dismantled the old system, liberalizing markets, privatizing state assets, and removing most trade barriers and subsidies.²¹

In recent years, however, a modern, more market-oriented version of this philosophy has seen a resurgence. There is a renewed policy focus on boosting domestic production to meet local demand for strategic commodities, particularly those that drain significant foreign exchange, such as edible oils and sugar.¹⁶ The government’s “Agenda 10/30” initiative is a clear articulation of this ambition, aiming for 10% annual growth in the agricultural sector and a substantial increase in export earnings by 2030.²⁴

This makes Runge’s venture a fascinating evolution: it represents the privatization of the import substitution ideal. The goal—to replace foreign goods with locally produced ones—is identical to that of the Ujamaa era. Yet the agent and the method could not be more different. Instead of state control, central planning, and protectionist barriers, this new model is driven by private entrepreneurship, foreign investment, market incentives, and targeted, privately-funded R&D. It is a response to a clear price signal—the TZS 1,500 apple—and its success will be determined not by government decree, but by its ability to compete on quality and cost. This market-driven approach makes it a far more dynamic and potentially sustainable model than its state-led predecessor.

Nonetheless, the risks associated with the policy environment remain very real. The “unpredictable and unclear policy environment” that can destabilize agricultural investment is not merely a historical footnote.²⁵ In April 2024, this risk manifested dramatically when Tanzania engaged in a brief but disruptive trade dispute, abruptly banning all agricultural imports from Malawi and South Africa in a tit-for-tat retaliation for their restrictions on Tanzanian goods.²⁶ While the ban was reversed within days under diplomatic pressure, the incident served as a stark reminder of the potential for sudden, heavy-handed state intervention in agricultural trade. This policy volatility represents perhaps the single greatest non-agronomic threat to ventures like Tamu Tamu. An investor in this space requires not only a robust business plan and deep agricultural knowledge but also a high tolerance for political and regulatory risk. The ultimate success of this new, private-sector-led model of development is contingent not just on the entrepreneurs who drive it, but on the government’s ability to commit to and maintain a stable, predictable, and transparent policy framework for trade and investment. The seeds of a new, self-sufficient apple industry have been sown, but their ability to grow to a full and profitable harvest will depend as much on the climate in the halls of government as on the weather in the fields of Iringa.

Reference

1. Garden Market — Piki Tanzania | Online food, drinks & groceries …, accessed September 29, 2025, https://www.piki.co.tz/gardenmarket
2. Apples: The next big farming opportunity in Tanzania and beyond? – HowWeMadeItInAfrica, accessed September 29, 2025, https://www.howwemadeitinafrica.com/apples-the-next-big-farming-opportunity-in-tanzania-and-beyond/177799/
3. Why this German invested in Tanzania’s first commercial apple farm, accessed September 29, 2025, https://www.howwemadeitinafrica.com/why-this-german-invested-in-tanzanias-first-commercial-apple-farm/175920/
4. The Ultimate Guide to Profitable Apple Farming in Tanzania – Kilimo …, accessed September 29, 2025, https://kilimokwanza.org/the-ultimate-guide-to-profitable-apple-farming-in-tanzania/
5. Apple Farming in Tanzania Takes Root, Creating a New Market and …, accessed September 29, 2025, https://sagcot.co.tz/2024/10/30/apple-farming-in-tanzania-takes-root-creating-a-new-market-and-opportunities-for-farmers/
6. East Africa initiates fresh drive to grow apples, cut down on imports – The Citizen, accessed September 29, 2025, https://www.thecitizen.co.tz/tanzania/business/east-africa-initiates-fresh-drive-to-grow-apples-cut-down-on-imports-4537638
7. Fresh Produce Middle East & Africa- Issue 2 – Issuu, accessed September 29, 2025, https://issuu.com/foodworldmedia/docs/fresh_produce_mea_issue_2_digital
8. Tanzania: Agriculture is not for the faint-hearted, says entrepreneur – HowWeMadeItInAfrica, accessed September 29, 2025, https://www.howwemadeitinafrica.com/tanzania-agriculture-is-not-for-the-faint-hearted-says-entrepreneur/177231/
9. Tamu Tamu Tanzania: Nurturing Apples, Sowing Prosperity in the Tropical Tapestry of East Africa – The Farmer’s Journal Africa, accessed September 29, 2025, https://thefarmersjournal.com/tamu-tamu-tanzania-nurturing-apples-sowing-prosperity-in-the-tropical-tapestry-of-east-africa/
10. Apple Farming Emerges as a Promising Business Sector in Tanzania: Insights from SAGCOT Centre’s Zoom Meeting on February 1, 2024 – Kilimo Kwanza, accessed September 29, 2025, https://kilimokwanza.org/apple-farming-emerges-as-a-promising-business-sector-in-tanzania-insights-from-sagcot-centres-zoom-meeting-on-february-1-2024/
11. Export Apple Trees | High-Yield Equatorial Varieties – Tamu Tamu, accessed September 29, 2025, https://www.tamutamutanzania.com/
12. Growing Apples in Tanzania? – Fruit Forum – WordPress.com, accessed September 29, 2025, https://fruitforum.wordpress.com/2016/12/28/growing-apples-in-tanzania/
13. Tanzania’s Agricultural Backbone Insights from the 2022/23 Survey – TICGL, accessed September 29, 2025, https://ticgl.com/tanzanias-agricultural-backbone-insights-from-the-2022-23-survey/
14. How are farmers in Tanzania doing in growing apples? – Savio, accessed September 29, 2025, https://savio.sk/en/nezaradene-en/how-are-farmers-in-tanzania-doing-in-growing-apples/
15. How deep is the pain in Tanzanian Agriculture and livestock sectors …, accessed September 29, 2025, https://afrophilic.com/portfolio-item/how-deep-is-the-pain-in-tanzanian-agriculture-and-livestock-sectors/
16. Tanzania – Agriculture and Agricultural Processing, accessed September 29, 2025, https://www.trade.gov/country-commercial-guides/tanzania-agriculture-and-agricultural-processing
17. Current and future challenges and opportunities in Tanzania, accessed September 29, 2025, https://um.dk/en/danida/strategies-and-priorities/country-policies/tanzania/current-and-future-challenges-and-opportunities-in-tanzania
18. Tanzania – Farm Africa, accessed September 29, 2025, https://www.farmafrica.org/our-work/countries-we-work-in/tanzania/
19. Agriculture in Tanzania – Wikipedia, accessed September 29, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agriculture_in_Tanzania
20. Finance & Development, June 2000 – Tanzania’s Experience with Trade Liberalization, accessed September 29, 2025, https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2000/06/kanaan.htm
21. Tanzania: Agricultural Transformation and Policy, accessed September 29, 2025, https://www.tiki-toki.com/timeline/entry/1270548/Tanzania-Agricultural-Transformation-and-Policy/
22. Tanzania: – International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD), accessed September 29, 2025, https://www.iisd.org/sites/default/files/uploads/tanzania-agricultural-transformation-timeline.pdf
23. Reducing Edible Oil Import Dependency in Tanzania: A Computable General Equilibrium CGE Approach – MDPI, accessed September 29, 2025, https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/16/4480
24. Agriculture Annual Report 2023/2024 – Wizara ya Kilimo, accessed September 29, 2025, https://www.kilimo.go.tz/uploads/documents/sw-1747227277-Agriculture%20Annual%20Report%202023%20-%202024%20compressed.pdf
25. UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA AGRICULTURAL SECTOR DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY – II 2015/2016 – 2024/2025, accessed September 29, 2025, https://faolex.fao.org/docs/pdf/tan160643.pdf
26. Tanzania Agricultural Exports & Trade Disruptions In SADC, accessed September 29, 2025, https://farmonaut.com/africa/tanzania-agricultural-exports-key-changes-impacting-sadc-trade
27. Tanzania bans agriculture imports from South Africa, Malawi, accessed September 29, 2025, https://www.cnbcafrica.com/2025/tanzania-bans-agriculture-imports-from-south-africa-malawi/