Tonga Kava Committee Calls For More Support For Growers
Kava growers in Tonga need more facilities and resources to improve production in the kingdom, according to the island's National Kava Committee chariman Fe'ilokitau Tevi, who says the negative impacts of climate change are affecting the industry.
The wet season in Tonga typically runs from November to April, but Tevi told RNZ Pacific that they have been experiencing more rainfall than expected in the kingdom at this time of the year.
"So that does have an impact on harvesting of kava and the whole processing of kava," Tevi said.
"Kava is very finnicky with regards to the humidity levels in the air."
Processing kava in this kind of environment requires additional resources and machinery.
Ariana Trading's Mele Vea, who has been growing kava for over 10 years, said that because there has been a lot of rain, they have had to use a kava dehydration machine.
However, she said this racks up enormous power bills.
"For a month, it's almost TOP$3000 (approx US$1200). It depends on how many (sic) kava we process," she said.
Vea said they were looking for donors or funds to assist them in purchasing a solar-powered kava dryer.
She said the electricity power supply was also very unreliable.
"The electricity here in Tonga is like, on and off, so we need to have our generator in place, just in case, for the time of a power outage." Vea said.
And that is only the first of the hurdles Mele Vea and her company have to overcome.
Ariana Trading's main export market is the United States, which means that on one hand there is the uncertainty of Trump's trade policies, and on the other is FDA requirements.
"And one of the requirements [is] we have to be hazard certified. So we still are working on our kava processing facility at the moment," Vea said.
The kava produced by Vea's business is one of Tonga's high grade kavas which includes varieties such as: Lekahina, Kava Uli, Kava Fulufulu, Kofe Hina, Kofe Kula, Kava Kula and Valu, all of which vary in texture and taste.
Support for kava growers large and small
Fe'ilokitau Tevi is of the view that all kava growers in Tonga deserve support, not just those who grow the most kava.
"You've got families planting, one-acre plot or half-an-acre plot, to farmers who are doing 8,16, 32, acres of kava and then having access to many more acres of kava," Tevi said,
Tevi said the family that plants a small amount of kava is just as important as farmer that plants acres of kava.
"So as a country we need to look at the needs of this 10-to-15-plants kava grower as well as the 15-to-20-acres kava grower," Tevi said.
As far as pricing goes the national kava committee chair said Tonga is also catching onto what neighbouring countries like Fiji and Vanuatu are doing in grading kava based on quality.
"You know Fiji...the people are paying upwards of FJ$140 per kilo (approx US$61) of high grade kava. Vanuatu is the same. So Tonga is just getting there as well," he said.
Tevi said people are quick to link high kava prices to a shortage in supply but he thinks that is just one piece of the puzzle.
"We can get any type of kava at a cheaper price, that's not an issue.
"It's the supply of quality [high] grade kava that is now an issue with regards to pricing," Tevi said.
Legislating to protect Tongan kava
As well as the challenges with growing and exporting Tongan kava, Tevi said there is ongoing work to try and protect the cultural drink from commercialisation.
He said some people have been exploiting kava by diluting it and mixing it with other products.
In his opinion this doesn't qualify as true kava and he said there are efforts being made to draft a kava bill aimed at safeguarding Tongan kava via the noun "kava".
"The many aspects of: protecting, standards, definition of kava these are elements that are going to be incorporated into the kava bill," Tevi said.
He said Tonga is in a unique position to do this because it does not have many other indigenous names for kava like yangona in Fiji or malok in Vanuatu.
Tevi said if they can successfully argue the word "kava" is etymologically linked to the Tongan language then there is an opportunity to protect it.
"And so once we begin the processes to protect the word 'kava' we can then protect the products that use the word 'kava'," he said.
Tevi said the question is if you begin to extract kava using other things like CO2, pressure or methane extraction, is that still kava?
"And we are saying 'no' it is a Piper methysticum based and extracted product. It is not kava," he said.
"Because kava we mix it with water and we drink it. That's kava".
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Techday NZ
5 hours ago
- Techday NZ
US-China chip export debate highlights risks for AI leadership
DeepSeek. TikTok. Taiwan. And a White House shake-up on AI rules. The spiralling US-China technology rivalry landed at the heart of Johns Hopkins University last week, as a panel of top experts and policymakers took to the stage to debate whether restricting exports of advanced semiconductors to China can help the US maintain its edge in the race for artificial intelligence. The discussion, hosted by Open to Debate in partnership with the SNF Agora Institute, comes at a critical time. In Washington, the Trump administration has announced plans to roll back the Biden-era AI Diffusion Rule and introduce new chip export controls targeting China – a move seen by many as a signal that the technology contest between the two superpowers is only intensifying. On one side of the Johns Hopkins debate were Lindsay Gorman, managing director at the German Marshall Fund's Technology Program, and former CIA officer and congressman Will Hurd. They argued the answer is yes: semiconductor controls can give the US a real advantage in the AI race. Gorman pointed to DeepSeek, a Chinese AI model whose CEO has publicly lamented the impact of advanced chip bans. "Money has never been the problem for us. Bans on shipments of advanced chips are the problem. And they have to consume twice the power to achieve the same results," she quoted, highlighting how China's AI advances still depend heavily on imported hardware. "The United States has significant hard computing power advantages – the ability to produce high-end chips, designed specifically for training AI models," Gorman told the audience. She argued that, together with its allies, the US controls a "strategic choke point" on computing power. "Properly implemented controls can have an effect and also have an increasing and compounding effect over time in retarding China's AI advantages and giving the United States a head start," she explained. Will Hurd, who also served on OpenAI's board before running for US president, compared the AI contest to the nuclear arms race. "Artificial intelligence is the equivalent of nuclear fission. Nuclear fission controlled gives you nuclear power… uncontrolled, nuclear weapons can kill everybody," he said. Hurd emphasised the importance of first-mover advantage, warning that the US cannot afford to lose its technological lead. He also highlighted a lack of reciprocity in the tech relationship between the two countries. "Chinese companies like Baidu, DJI, and TikTok operate freely in the US, but American companies are not allowed to operate in China," Hurd pointed out. "If there was a level of reciprocity between our two countries, we wouldn't be here having this debate about chip controls." Yet, on the opposing side, former senior US diplomat Susan Thornton and technology strategist Paul Triolo insisted the US could not outpace China in AI simply by tightening export controls. Triolo argued that the controls are "not working and will not lead to US dominance in AI", describing them as a blunt instrument that creates confusion for industry and disrupts global supply chains. "Most experts believe that Chinese companies are only three months behind US leaders in developing advanced AI models," Triolo said, suggesting any technological gap is vanishingly slim. Thornton, who spent decades at the heart of US-China diplomacy, warned of unintended consequences. "The main thing we should be asking ourselves about this question… is what is the cost benefit of US policy actions?" she said. "We have to face the reality that China is already building AI… a third of the world's top AI scientists are Chinese. China is one third of the entire global technology market. So it's clearly a player." She cautioned that blocking China from critical technology could backfire, hurting US companies, alienating allies and raising the risks around Taiwan, the global centre of advanced chip manufacturing. "Certainly, the one thing we need to do is avoid going to war," Thornton warned. "Taiwan, the most sensitive issue in US-China relations, has now been dragged right into the middle of this AI issue because they're the place that produces all the cutting-edge chips that we're trying to control." Audience members pressed the panel on whether international collaboration on AI safety was possible, and whether the US could ever match China's data advantage, given the size of the Chinese population and its permissive data environment. Hurd conceded that "the US will always have less data because we have a little thing called civil liberties," but argued that superior algorithms and privacy-protective machine learning could level the playing field. For Triolo, the dynamic nature of the technology means that attempts to wall off China are self-defeating. "There are many ways to get to different ends. The controls have forced Chinese companies to work together, develop innovations, and become more competitive both domestically and globally," he said. Gorman, in closing, rejected what she called "a defeatism that says America can't out-compete China or slow its progress". "Our companies are doing well. There isn't an issue here with demand, it's with supply. Doing better means that we have to throw what we can at this problem now with a smart application of tools," she argued. But Thornton had the last word, urging caution. "Making the AI competition with China a zero-sum game, not only will not work, it is dangerous," she said. "We should focus on the things that are going to matter to our children and their children, which is the long-term AI competition, which if not constrained and bounded by international agreements and by cooperation among countries… it'll be a very dangerous world."
NZ Herald
a day ago
- NZ Herald
On the campaign trail, Elon Musk juggled drugs and family drama
As Elon Musk entered President Trump's orbit, his private life grew increasingly tumultuous and his drug use was more intense than previously known. As Elon Musk became one of Donald Trump's closest allies last year, leading raucous rallies and donating about US$275 million ($455m) to help him win the presidency,
Kiwiblog
a day ago
- Kiwiblog
Will Stuff staff get their 10%?
Stuff owner Sinead Boucher has sold 50% of Stuff Digital to Trade Me, which in turn is 100% owned by Apax Partners, a British private equity firm with around US$77 billion in assets. Good on Boucher. I have no issue with foreign investment in media companies. The discipline they may bring to Stuff Digital could be very good for them. In 2021, Stuff reported: Stuff owner and chief executive Sinead Boucher is gifting a 10 per cent share of the media firm to the company's close to 900 staff. The stake in the company will be transferred to a trust controlled by employee representatives, rather than the shares being directly owned by staff members. The arrangement means staff would receive through the trust a share of any dividends Stuff pays out, and 10 per cent of the sale proceeds if Stuff was later sold or listed, she said. This never happened, as it was later modified to happening if any shares were sold or exited. Presumably this has happened, so we will see 10% of Stuff Digital transferred to a staff trust? Radio NZ report: After Boucher bought Stuff for $1 in 2020, she told staff that a 10 percent stake of the company would be put into a staff trust in the event that the business was sold or listed. A spokesperson said that, while there was still some time until the deal was to be completed, it was Boucher's expectation that a payment would be made into the staff trust. A payment? Would it be a payment equal to one fifth of what Trade Me paid? Shouldn't it be non-voting shares of 10% of Stuff Digital, rather than a payment? After all, that is what was promised?
