We have been reporting for some time that diamond trade figures released by Bank of Botswana are often at variance with ones issued by Statistics Botswana.
This was the case again with the June diamond trade data released in August.
First to release its set of data was the country’s central bank and their figures showed a 78 percent month-on-month in locally produced rough exports to BWP3.9 billion ($446 million) for the month of June.
However, three weeks later, Statistics Botswana came up with a complete different set of figures, which bamboozled keen followers of the country’s diamond trade.
It said that Botswana exported rough and polished diamonds worth about BWP1.9 billion ($217 million) during the month of June down from just over BWP4 billion ($457 million) realised in May this year.
Statistics Botswana attributed the decrease to weaker rough diamond exports during the month.
Unlike figures released by the central bank, Statistics Botswana noted that rough diamond sales included imports for aggregation and re-exports after aggregation.
Following the signing of a new marketing deal, diamonds mined by De Beers in Canada, Namibia and South Africa are now exported to Botswana for aggregation.
However, modalities for disaggregating diamond trade in future were being worked out.
Bank of Botswana’s figures on the other hand only included diamonds produced in the country but it reported good receipts.
So is that the source of confusion? Certainly, an unequivocal No!!
The problem started before Botswana started aggregating stones from other countries last year.
The answer to this confusion was tucked inside the June report released by Statistics Botswana towards the end of August.
“Statistics Botswana compiles international merchandise trade statistics using the United Nations Statistics Division Guidelines, whereby foreign trade is recorded as at the time the consignment crosses the border whereas Bank of Botswana compiles Balance of Payments from actual receipts in respect of sales made on exported commodities,” reads part of the report.
“Users can expect differences in figures reported by Statistics Botswana and those reported by Bank of Botswana. This is because the two reports may not necessarily be reporting on the same consignment, even though the same variable names and period of reporting are used.”
Statistics Botswana went on to state that values it reports are estimates made by exporters as at the time goods are dispatched, while those reported by Bank of Botswana are actual payments received by exporters for sales made during a particular period.
“As a result, these two values, though using the same variable names and the same period of reporting, are not necessarily values for the same consignment,” it said.
“The Statistics Botswana value is for the consignment that crossed the border during a particular period while the Bank of Botswana value is for sales that were made during that period.”
Mmegi reports that local economists and consultants had previously critiqued the absence of uniformity in reporting on diamond exports, noting that these were critical in accurately gauging the country's trade position and other indicators such as balance of payments.
Meanwhile, on the inclusion of diamonds from De Beers’ operations outside Botswana, the agency noted that the trade surpluses reported in previous reports were due to the fact that imports of rough diamonds that come to Botswana for aggregation followed by exportation were not recorded since they were taken as temporary trade.
"The intention was to record this trade only when those diamonds were bought by Botswana diamonds polishing companies. However, it became difficult to keep track of these diamonds and they ended up being captured as exports when they were leaving the country while they were never captured as imports when they originally entered the country," it said.
Mmegi quoted a local economist, Keith Jefferis as saying that the confusion around the treatment of aggregated diamonds was "quite unsatisfactory" as "this is one of the single most important economic variables in Botswana".
Mathew Nyaungwa, Editor in Chief of the African Bureau, Rough&Polished
