By Collins Mtika
Tobacco farming in Malawi is a golden cage—promising wealth and security while trapping farmers in relentless cycles of debt. For smallholder farmers, it dangles the allure of quick profits. But the reality is far harsher.
Once inside, farmers are locked into binding contracts that force them to take loans and restrict how they use their land—leaving them burdened by debt and dependent on tobacco.
As global tobacco consumption falls, the 95% of Malawian tobacco producers who are smallholder farmers remain trapped in a system designed to keep them there. Tobacco remains Malawi’s largest export, yet falling cigarette consumption worldwide hits these farmers the hardest.
A 2024 investigation by the Sustainable Development Initiative (SDI), in partnership with STOP—a global tobacco industry watchdog—reveals that tobacco companies’ much-publicized crop diversification programs are deepening, not easing, farmer dependence.
The findings, published in the February 2025 report “Sowing the Status Quo: How Crop Diversification Is Failing Tobacco Farmers in Malawi,” expose how these programs—marketed as a lifeline—push farmers deeper into debt while reinforcing their reliance on tobacco contracts.
The report also reveals how corporate giants like Universal Corp., Pyxus International, Philip Morris International (PMI), and British American Tobacco (BAT) benefit from these initiatives. It accuses these companies of using front organizations to fund research and shape policies that serve corporate interests rather than helping farmers break free.
None of the companies responded to questionnaires nor requests for interviews.
“Our research suggests that tobacco companies oblige farmers to grow other crops without providing a stable market,” said Maynard Nyirenda, Executive Director of SDI. “This means more labour, less income, and deeper reliance on tobacco, while tobacco companies get to claim they’re promoting diversification.”
“Farmers lose, and cigarette companies win,” added Jorge Alday, Director of STOP at Vital Strategies. He criticized the gap between corporate claims and on-the-ground realities, arguing that while tobacco companies gain government approval and favorable media coverage, farmers remain stuck in a cycle of poverty.
“It’s just another example of the tobacco industry’s dishonesty and how injustice drives its enormous profits,” Alday said.
Tobacco companies like BAT, PMI, Japan Tobacco International (JTI), and Imperial Brands present themselves as champions of diversification—highlighting programs that offer seeds and fertilizers for alternative crops like groundnuts and maize.
But the SDI report dismisses these initiatives as public relations exercises that entrench farmer dependence rather than offering real alternatives.
For the 2024–2025 growing season, Malawi’s tobacco production is expected to increase by 31%—from 133 million kilogrammes the previous season to approximately 174.4 million kilogrammes, according to initial projections from the Tobacco Commission.
Despite this surge, production will still fall short of the 213 million kilogrammes the country is expected to need in 2025. This supply gap suggests a more competitive market, which could raise prices and offer farmers some relief.
Yet, for many farmers, the rising numbers offer little hope.
In 2020, law firm Leigh Day filed a lawsuit representing over 10,000 Malawian tobacco tenant farmers—many of them children—against British American Tobacco and Imperial Brands. The case accuses these companies of complicity in forced and child labor on Malawian tobacco farms. Both companies deny the allegations, and the case is ongoing.
“They say it’s a choice, but taking the loan is mandatory. It pulls us deeper into debt we can’t escape,” said a farmer from Mchinji, speaking to SDI investigators.
These loans—whether for tobacco or alternative crops—carry steep interest rates and no guarantee of buyers. Without reliable markets for non-tobacco harvests, farmers are often left with unsold produce and mounting debts. With no viable alternatives, they return to the one crop with a guaranteed buyer: tobacco.
“If the government and other stakeholders found us reliable markets for other crops, things would improve,” said a farmer from Lilongwe. “But for now, we buy inputs and grow crops without any assurance that we’ll be able to sell them.”
For farmers like Yohane Chikuse from Kasungu, the costs go beyond financial hardship. Though he doesn’t smoke, Chikuse absorbs as much nicotine as a chain smoker through skin contact while working the fields—sacrificing his health just to survive.
A decade ago, Chikuse began cultivating a 100-square-meter tobacco field, hoping to secure a better future for his wife and five children. In ten years, he has turned a profit only once. His struggle mirrors the reality faced by more than 400,000 tobacco farmers across Malawi.
Rather than empowering farmers, tobacco leaf-buying companies like Limbe Leaf, Alliance One, and JTI Leaf Malawi keep them trapped—offering seeds and fertilizers under rigid contracts that force farmers to dedicate most of their limited land to tobacco, leaving little room for alternative crops.
“Tobacco leaf-buying companies do not provide the same market support and extension services for other crops as they do for tobacco,” said a senior official from Malawi’s Ministry of Agriculture, who requested anonymity. “Most farmers lack the land and resources to invest in other crops without assistance.”
Despite the clear conflict of interest in allowing tobacco companies to shape policy, President Lazarus Chakwera endorsed continued collaboration with these companies in his 2020 State of the Nation address—further entrenching corporate influence over Malawian agriculture.
“By working with tobacco companies, we can help blend other crop types into the farmers’ mix over time,” Chakwera said.
Ironically, Malawi is a signatory to the World Health Organization’s Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC)—a treaty requiring tobacco-producing nations to help farmers transition to alternative crops. Yet, the SDI report argues that current diversification programs tighten, rather than loosen, the industry’s grip on farmers.
Critics say the government’s collaboration with tobacco companies deepens this dependence. The SDI report accuses these companies of using diversification as a corporate social responsibility (CSR) smokescreen—polishing their public image while doing little to address the root causes of farmer exploitation.
Millions of dollars from PMI’s front group, Global Action to End Smoking, have yielded few tangible benefits for farmers. Rather than supporting farmers directly, the report alleges, these funds often flow to universities and policy institutions—enhancing the industry’s reputation while farmers remain trapped.
“We don’t know of any programs that genuinely help us leave tobacco,” said a farmer from Ntchisi. “All we hear is that tobacco companies encourage us to grow other crops alongside tobacco.”
Without decisive government action to create real alternatives, the illusion of diversification will continue to deepen poverty and tighten the tobacco industry’s grip on Malawi’s farmers.
The SDI report calls for urgent reforms to break this cycle. At the heart of their recommendations is the demand to remove tobacco companies from diversification efforts and place full responsibility in the hands of the Malawian government.
In alignment with the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), the report urges the Malawian government to take decisive action by demanding that the Malawi government assume full control over helping farmers transition to alternative livelihoods.
It calls for clear governmental roles with ministries held accountable for supporting farmers and ensuring their transition to alternative livelihoods.
To facilitate this shift, the report emphasizes the need to invest in infrastructure and extension services that promote the cultivation of alternative crops. Additionally, it advocates for the creation of viable markets to guarantee fair prices for non-tobacco produce, reducing farmers’ dependence on tobacco.
As a path forward, the report suggests that Malawi learn from successful models, such as Kenya’s tobacco-free farms initiative, to shape and guide future policy changes.
“Shifting away from tobacco farming won’t happen overnight, but Malawi must act now to start the transition,” the report emphasizes. Without these measures, farmers will remain shackled—exploited by an industry that thrives on their suffering.
