Agribusiness Organization and Management Seminar

7/28/2019 Agribusiness Organization and Management Seminar

1/24

i

DRIVING FORCES OF YIELD DIFFERENCES IN

SMALL SCALE FOOD CROP FARMING SYSTEM IN

ETHIOPIA

Bizualem Assefa (MSc. 06568/05)

Gashaw Guben (MSc.06570/05)Metages Belete (MSc.06572/05)

A Seminar Paper

Submitted to the Department of Agribusiness and Value-Chain

Management, College of Agriculture and Veterinary Medicine,

Jimma University, in Fulfilment of the Requirements for the

Course Agribusiness Organization and Management (ABVM 521)

Jimma, Ethiopia

June, 2013


2/24

ii

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

First of all, we would like to serve our great thank for our lovely instructor, Dr. Ravi, who

arrange such a kind of opportunity by integrating this seminar as a part of assessment in thecourse. We also would like to thank our department staffs who have been giving us

important inputs for the accomplishment of this paper. Next to this, we are interested to thank

the Department of Agricultural Economics and Agribusiness and Value Chain Management

head who allowed us to use different facilities. Finally, as a whole, we are not interested to

pass the computer centre workers, libertarian workers and our best classmates without giving

our deep thanks and respect that have been helping us in completing this seminar paper

effectively.


3/24

iii

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

ADBG African Development Bank Group

AIDS Acquired Immune Deficiency SyndromeAISE

CSA

CUFHs

CUFHs

DA

EEA

ESEFAO

GDP

GoE

ha

HIV

Kg

MoA

MoARD

SNNPR

t

UNCTAD

UNDP

UNEP

USDA

WB

WFP

African Institute of Seed Enterprise

Central Statistical Authority

Credit Constrained Farm Households

Credit Unconstrained Farm Households

Development Agent

Ethiopian Economic Association

Ethiopian Seed EnterpriseFood and Agriculture Organization

Gross Domestic Product

Government of Ethiopia

Hectare

Human Immune Deficiency Virus

Kilogram

Ministry of Agriculture

Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development

Southern Nations Nationalities and Peoples Region

Tones

United Nations Conference on Trade and Development

United Nations Development Program

United Nations Environment Program

United States Department of Agriculture

World Bank

World Food Program


4/24

iv

TABLE OF CONTENT

Contents

ACKNOWLEDGMENT ...................................................................................................................................... iiLIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS .......................................................... ................................. iiiTABLE OF CONTENT ...................................................................................................................................... ivLISTS OF APPENDEX........................................................................................................................................ vSYNOPSIS............................................................................................................................................................ vi1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................ 12. DRIVING FORCES OF YIELD DIFFERENCES IN SMALL-SCALE FOOD CROP FARMING

SYSTEM................................................................................................................................................................ 42.1 Associating Yield Differences with Farming Inputs and Management Practices ................................. 4

2.1.1 Use of improved or/and certified Seed variety ...................................... ................................................ 42.1.2 Use of inorganic fertilizer technology ......................................................................... .......................... 52.1.3 Use of animal droppings ................................................................ ........................................................ 52.1.4 Use of vegetal waste (compost) ............................................................................................................. 52.1.5 Forms of residue management and effects on yields ........................................................................ ..... 62.1.6 Choice of crops to cultivate and intercropping implications on yields .................................................. 72.1.7 The use of Agro-Chemicals ........................................................... ........................................................ 72.1.8 Impact of access to credit....................................................................................................................... 82.1.9 Constraints facing agricultural extension in Ethiopia ............................................................. ............... 8

2.2 Change in Rain Fall Amount and Patterns .............................................................................................. 92.3 Associating Yield Difference with Irrigation .......................................................................................... 102.4 The Impact of Agro-Ecological Variation .............................................................................................. 102.5 Yields in Relation to Farm Ownership and Level of Farm Management ............................................ 112.6 Impact of HIV/AIDS on Small-Holder Agriculture............................................................................... 122.7 Yields and the Socio-Cultural Dimension of Households ......................................................... ............. 12

2.7.1 Gender perspectives of yields ........................................................ ...................................................... 122.7.2 Other socio-cultural factors ................................................................... .............................................. 13

2.8 Constraints to Agricultural Productivity in Ethiopia ............................................................... ............. 133. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................... 144. RECOMMENDATION.................................................................................................................................. 155. REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................................... 166. APPENDIX ..................................................................................................................................................... 18


5/24

v

LISTS OF APPENDEX

Appendix Page

Appendix 1 Expected production & distribution of improved seeds by ESE in 2010 (quintals) .......... 18Appendix 2 Ethiopian Seed Enterprise (ESE) and its sales in the year 2006, 2007, and 2008 ............. 18


6/24

vi

SYNOPSIS

This paper is prepared to review the driving forces of yield differences in small-scale food

crop farming system in Ethiopia. Agriculture is the backbone of Ethiopian economy which

determines the growth of all other sectors and consequently, the whole national economy.

Small-scale crop farming is production on a small-piece of land without using advanced andexpensive technologies. Unlike large-scale commercial agriculture, it is characterized by

using family pieces of land, traditional lands and smallholdings on the periphery of urban

areas, intensive labour and in most cases, animal traction, limited use of agro-chemicals and

supply to the local or surrounding markets. In Ethiopia, small-scale farmers make up the

majority of food producers. Recognizing that the yields per hectare for main food crops are

generally low in small-scale food farming systems, there are considerable differences in yield

among individual farmers. The objective of this seminar paper, therefore, is to review the (1)

Impact of input, socio economic, climatic and agro ecological forces for food crop yield in

Ethiopian small scale farming system, and (2) Constraints of Ethiopian small-scale food crop

farming system. Accordingly, the use of inputs, techniques of crop cultivation and socio-

cultural characteristics of farming households which are factors making a difference in foodcrop yields are the general issues discussed. The use and appropriate application of basic

inputs such as inorganic fertilizers, animal droppings, vegetal waste (compost) improved

seeds, herbicides, and pesticides with their proper management do significantly improve

yields and determine yield differences. The usage of improved seeds is one of the most

efficient ways of raising food crop production. Increased and efficient use of inorganic

fertilizers can be considered as a more plausible alternative in Ethiopia to bridge the wide

gap of food shortage at least in the immediate future. The use of animal droppings or crop

residues helps to improve the soils moisture-retention capacity and provides room as well as

favourable conditions for the growth of beneficial soil microbes thereby reducing erosion and

prevents nutrients from leaching which in turn improves crop yields. Intercropping is the

practice of growing more than one crop simultaneously in alternating rows of the same fieldin aiming at an increase in yield per area of land. Tools such as herbicides, insecticides, and

fungicides reduce crop losses both before and after harvest, and increase crop yield. Climate

changes affects crop yield through direct impacts on the biophysical factors such as plant

and animal growth and the physical infrastructure associated with food processing and

distribution. Rain-fall variability causes variations in crop yield in small scale agriculture so

that development of irrigation and agricultural water management holds significant potential

to improve productivity and reduce vulnerability to climactic volatility. It can also be

revealed that crop production in the small-holder farming varies across different agro-

ecological settings. The impact of HIV/AIDS is quite visible in districts that have been hit by

the epidemic. The cultural and religious practices and institutions affect interactions of most

small-holder farmers. Farmers with informal trainings in farming will obtain higher yields

than those that have not. Key constraints to agricultural productivity include low availability

of improved seed, lack of seed multiplication capacity, low adoption of fertilizer, lack of

transport infrastructure and market access, and lack of irrigation and water management.

Therefore, extension services like marketing, agricultural credits, and extension advices

directly or indirectly benefit the local communities in increasing the yield if properly applied.

Key words

Commercial Agriculture, Compost, Improved Seed, Inorganic Fertilizer, Intercropping, Rain-

Fed Farming, Small-Scale Farming, Subsistence Farming


7/24

1

1. INTRODUCTIONAgriculture is the backbone of the Ethiopian economy. This particular sector determines the

growth of all other sectors and consequently, the whole national economy. According to

World Bank 2007, as cited by Shumet Assefa, 2011), agriculture has accounted for about 30% of Africas GDP and 75% of total employment. According to World Food Program (2009)

economic growth of the country highly depends on the agricultural sector, which accounts for

47% of the GDP and more than 90% of exports, and 83% of the total employment, followed

by the service and the manufacturing sectors with a share of 39% and 14% of GDP,

respectively. On average, crop production makes up 60 percent of the sectors outputs,

whereas livestock accounts for 27 percent and other areas contribute 13 percent of the total

agricultural value added. The sector is dominated by small-scale farmers who practice rain-fed mixed farming by employing traditional technology, adopting a low input and low output

production system. The land tilled by the Ethiopian small-scale farmer accounts for 95

percent of the total area under agricultural use and these farmers are responsible for more

than 90 percent of the total agricultural output.

Small-scale farmers produce 94 percent of the food crops. Private and state commercial farms

produce just 6 percent of food crops. These commercial farms use about 5 percent of the total

cultivated land (Atsbaha & Tessema, 2011). With these statistics, one can easily infer to what

extent the small-scale farmers are the key element in strengthening the effort towards

agricultural growth and consequently to the overall economic growth.

Small-scale farming is the production of crops and livestock on a small-piece of land without

using advanced and expensive technologies. Though the definition of size of these farms is a

source of debate, it can be argued that farming on family pieces of land, on traditional lands

and smallholdings on the periphery of urban areas fall in this category. This type of farming

is usually characterised by intensive labour and in most cases, animal traction, limited use of

agrochemicals and supply to the local or surrounding markets. Unlike large-scale commercial

agriculture, it plays a dual role of being a source of household food security as well as income

from sale of surplus. Although some claim small-scale agriculture is less efficient in output as

compared to commercial agriculture (Kirsten & Van Zyl, 1998), it is ecologically friendly in

that less land is cleared for cultivation, there are fewer emissions due to less use of fuel-

driven machinery and the market is usually local implying less carbon miles. On the other

hand permaculturalists and others claim that per unit of area small-scale agriculture is far


8/24

2

more productive than commercial agriculture in terms of total output from the piece of land.

On traditional lands, the produce is first meant to feed the household thereby contributing to

food security.

Small-scale farming involves growing crops, at least in part, to be used by an individual

family, with farming being a significant source of their livelihood. Subsistence farming:

however, implies that farm production is solely for the familys livelihood and farmproducts

are not sold at a market; most small farmers do sell their crops at local or national markets.

Subsistence farming system in Ethiopia could be identified as small and often fragmented

land, primitive tools and implements, production geared to personal needs rather than to

market, lack of alternatives or seasonal employment opportunities and almost total absence of

reserves of either grain or cash (Mertz et al. 2009).

Crop Yield or crop productivity is identified as one of the essential indicators for agricultural

development and defined as the amount of harvested product per crop area and is normally

expressed as kilograms (kg) or metric tonnes (t) of product per hectare (ha) (World Bank,

2010).

According to the USDA (as cited by Brenda Dawson, 2011) a small farmer is defined as one

that grows and sells between $1,000 and $250,000 per year in agricultural products.

In Ethiopia, small-scale farmers make up the majority of food producers. While recognizing

that the yields per hectare for main food crops are generally low in small-scale food

production systems of Ethiopian agriculture, there are considerable differences in yield output

among individual farmers (Atsbaha & Tessema, 2011). At the very local scale, why do these

differences exist? By examining factors that are associated with yield differences, policy can

be better informed and tailored to respond to challenges of food production among this

important group of small-scale farmers.

Generally the objective of this seminar paper is to review those driving-forces of yield

differences in small-scale food crop farming system in Ethiopia and to give the

recommendation as how to policy intervention has to be implemented in lessening those

challenges. Specifically this paper aims to review the (1) Impact of input, socio economic,

climatic and agro ecological forces for food crop yield in Ethiopian small scale farming

system, and (2) Constraints of Ethiopian small-scale food crop farming system.
http://www.extension.org/pages/USDA_Small_Farm_Definitionshttp://www.extension.org/pages/USDA_Small_Farm_Definitionshttp://www.extension.org/pages/USDA_Small_Farm_Definitions


9/24

3

So to what extent the small-scale farmers producing food-products are the key element in

strengthening the effort towards agricultural growth there by alleviating the food-insecurity

and consequently to the overall economic growth, we are initiated in paying attention to study

our seminar paper on the major driving-forces of yield differences in small-scale food crop

farming system in Ethiopia. Accordingly, inputs to agriculture, techniques of crop cultivation

and socio-cultural characteristics of farming households which are factors making a

difference in food crop yields are the major issues which are going to be discussed.

The purpose of this paper is, therefore, very important since it equips us for the future

scientific research project. The study of this seminar is also important for the government and

other concerned bodies to have information about driving forces for yield differences in small

scale food crop farming systems. The paper is organized by having introduction, discussion,summary, conclusion and recommendation. Based on this; we have prepared such kind of

paper by revising different research results as follows.


10/24

4

2. DRIVING FORCES OF YIELD DIFFERENCES IN SMALL-SCALE

FOOD CROP FARMING SYSTEM

2.1 Associating Yield Differences with Farming Inputs and Management Practices

AccordingtoYengoh (2012), the use of these inputs is neither uniform among small-holder

farmers nor constant from one agricultural season to the next. The use of basic inputs such as

inorganic fertilizer, animal droppings, vegetal waste (compost) and improved seeds do

significantly improve yields. The method of residue management and the control of pests and

crop diseases are important in determining yield differences. Small investments that are

properly targeted to improve basic techniques of farming can make an appreciable difference

in food crop yields and food security at the local level. In small-scale farming systems, themethods of plant residue management and the practice of intercropping are important in

determining the availability of nutrients for plant growth.

Various studies made in Ethiopia have recognized that an appropriate application of modern

farm inputs such as chemical fertilizers, improved seeds and herbicides would increase crop

yield and productivity in smallholder farming system (Degefa, 2006).

2.1.1 Use of improved or/and certified Seed variety

Farmers who use improved seeds experience substantially better yields relative to those that

do not use them. Farmers depend considerably on the quality of seeds for viable crops and a

good harvest. The traditional method of saving some of the previous harvest as seed for next

years planting has gone on forseveral generations. The usages of improved seeds is one of

the most efficient ways of raising food crop production, but in Ethiopia less than 10 percent

of farmers use improved seeds. This is partly a supply problem due to the inability of the

various suppliers (the Ethiopian Seed Enterprise and other suppliers including internationalfirms such as Pioneer Seed Company and cooperative seed producers) to meet the demand. It

is also said that farmers have little working capital and uncertain access to credit, they often

cannot afford the cost of improved seed and the fertilizer it requires to achieve its maximum

genetic potential and yield. Hence, most farmers use second or later generation seed, thereby

reducing harvest potential. Due to this difference in the amount of income farmers owned and

the type of seed farmers employed can be factors that vary food crop production by small

scale farmers (Yengoh 2012).


11/24

5

2.1.2 Use of inorganic fertilizer technology

Despite its highest share in the countrys economy, the performance of the small-holder

agricultural sector is found to be very poor due to the very low land productivity that gives

only an average yield of 1.23 tones/ha for food grains (CSA, 1998b). The short-term means to

increase agricultural productivity per unit area is to adopt package of agriculture technologies

of which fertilizer is among the main component (Bekele, 2000). According to Berhanu

(2000), farmers crop production, without doubt, varies due to the variation of the adoption of

inorganic fertilizer. Therefore, intensifying small holder agriculture through the use of

fertilizer is considered to be a strategic component to boost crop production and productivity.

Hence, increased and efficient use of fertilizer can be considered as a more plausible

alternative in Ethiopia to bridge the wide gap of food shortage (at least in the immediate

future). Recognizing the role of fertilizer in increasing crop yield, the government of Ethiopia

has given top priority to the fertilizer this small holder sub-sector

2.1.3 Use of animal droppings

According toYengoh (2012), the use of animal droppings has the most substantial association

with high yields. Animal wastes bring benefits to the poorly structured, low-nutrient soils.

Besides providing more nutrients per unit volume relative to other organic fertilizer sources,animal droppings improve the soil structure through enhancing aeration and preventing

compaction. The use of animal droppings therefore helps improve the soil s moisture-

retention capacity and provides room as well as favourable conditions for the growth of

beneficial soil microbes. Such improvements in structure, microbial composition and

chemistry reduce erosion and also help to prevent nutrients from leaching. Therefore, the

application of residues can also show variations in the yield of food crop production in small

holder farming systems. A report by the United National Conference on Trade andDevelopment (UNCTAD) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), (2008)

found that organic agriculture increases yields in African countries.

2.1.4 Use of vegetal waste (compost)

Techane (2002) reported that, using organic manure to the required level will probably reduce

the chemical fertilizer adoption.

While the use of animal droppings may be seen as insufficient with limited access to

chemical fertilizers, the use of plant residues in terms of compost is even lower. Farmers have


12/24

6

the potential of generating appreciable amounts of vegetal waste products that can serve as

inputs to farming activities through a variety of means. Vegetal matter with potential use as

farm inputs can be derived from accumulated household kitchen debris and from farms after

weeding and harvesting of crops. By converting these products into compost and using it on

farms, farmers may reduce and in some cases even provide all of their fertilization needs so

efforts by local authorities and local farming organizations at promoting the production and

use of compost as a source of farm fertilizer brings in yield difference in small holder food

crop farming Yengoh, (2012).

2.1.5 Forms of residue management and effects on yields

I. Burying of plant material below crop-bearing ridgesIn this case, cleared vegetation is allowed to partially decompose at the surface of the farm.

The decomposed vegetation is then gathered and laid in lines that eventually serve as ridges

for seasonal crops. Soil from between these lines of decomposing vegetation is used to cover

them, thereby forming the ridges. The vegetation continues to decay within these ridges for

another 1 to 2 months before crops are planted on them. The lines of furrows from where the

soil has been taken to form ridges for one season become ridges in the next planting season

when crop residues are placed in them and soil from previous ridges is used to cover the

residue.

II. Localized surface burning of plant materialThis is a localized process of burning plant residue on the farm with the goal of temporarily

increasing fertility on a small patch and exploiting it for particular crops. Surface burning is

more predominant where plant residue is plentiful and the process of burying all of it before

burning is time and labour demanding. This is the case among small-scale farmers in the

equatorial regions and its fringes, where above-ground biomass is usually plentiful. Burning

is also the preferred choice for clearing the farm when farmers have limited time to prepare

the farms for planting before impending rains.

III. Burying and burning of plantIt is the process of burning dry plant residue under a thin layer of soil. It is a localized process

practiced mainly among small-scale farmers and may involve either one ridge or a few ridges

of a farm. Farmers see it as a process of concentrating plant nutrients on limited spots tooptimize their use in high nutrient-demanding crops. The burning of plant residue


13/24

7

underground resulted in significantly higher yields when compared with other methods of

residue management at all fertilizer levels

2.1.6 Choice of crops to cultivate and intercropping implications on yields

Mixed cropping is the practice of growing more than one crop in a field at a given time.

Intercropping is the practice of growing more than one crop simultaneously in alternating

rows of the same field (Jonathan & Carlson, 2008). Intercropping is therefore a type of mixed

cropping. It explains that intercropping in Ethiopian is a way to grow crops while obtaining

several benefits from the additional crop. One of the main benefits of intercropping is an

increase in yield per area of land. It is a common feature of smallholder agriculture in

Ethiopia. While the crop combinations with which intercropping are practiced differ from one

agro-ecological zone to the next, many characteristics of this practice are the same

nationwide.Most intercrop mixes contain one leguminous crop. Crops within an intercrop are

selected based on their importance for household consumption; the more market-oriented the

farming, the less the variety of crops in the intercrop. While there are cases where food crops

are intercropped with cash crops, the practice is predominantly carried out by food crop

farmers.

2.1.7 The use of Agro-Chemicals

According to the FAO, some 20 to 40 percent of the world's potential crop production is

already lost annually because of the effects of weeds, pests and diseases. Even after harvest,

crops are subject to attack by pests or diseases. Bugs, rodents or molds can harm grains. In

addition to increasing crop yields, crop protection used in stored products can also prolong

the viable life of produce, prevent huge post-harvest losses from pests and diseases, and

protect food so it is safe to eat. Tools such as herbicides, insecticides, and fungicides reduce

crop losses both before and after harvest, and increase crop yields. The use of herbicides andother agro-chemicals is still very low in Ethiopia.

According to AISE (2009), the total sales of 2,4D, the main herbicide, by the AISE in 2009

were 340 013 liters, while sales of Malathion and Endosulfan were only 1 917 and 7 384

liters, respectively. Among the benefits of using pesticides for crop protection is that these

products are vital to increasing food production.
http://www.croplifeamerica.org/crop-protection/benefitshttp://www.croplifeamerica.org/crop-protection/benefits


14/24

8

2.1.8 Impact of access to credit

According to the Ethiopian Journal of Economics Vol. 15 (1) 2006, credit constraint in

agriculture affects not only the purchasing power of producers to procure farm inputs and

to cover operating costs in the short run, but also their capacity to make farm-related

investments as well as risk behavior in technology choice and adoption. These, in turn,

influence technical efficiencies of the farmers. By estimating technical efficiency of credit-

constrained (CCFHs) and unconstrained farm households (CUFHs) by employing a

stochastic frontier technique on farm household survey data from Southeastern Ethiopia;

the Credit Constrained Farm Households had mean technical efficiency score of 12% less

than that of the Credit unconstrained farm households. Given the largest proportion of

CCFHs in Ethiopian farming population, this gap implies considerable potential loss inoutput due to inefficient production. Improving technical efficiency of all farm households

in general but more of particularly the CCFHs is desirable.

2.1.9 Constraints facing agricultural extension in Ethiopia

A recent report from the FAO (1996) indicated that many small-scale farmers were not being

reached by agricultural extension, although approximately 75% of the worlds' farmers are

small-scale, resource poor farmers. The report suggested that in some instances agricultural

extension services reported reaching one out of three farmers in Africa. In other areas such as

the Near East, the report stated that one out of seven farmers had been reached by the

extension services.

According to Biratu, Gizachew Kebede (2008), a good agricultural extension system accepts

and incorporates farmers traditional knowledge in research processes and sees farmers as

partners during decision making. However, in most cases the problem with science in

agriculture and extension is that it has a poor understanding of the knowledge from very poor,indigenous rural people. For many scientists, in order to develop those rural people, formal

research and extension has to transform their knowledge into another knowledge system,

because their knowledge is considered as unscientific and primitive. This is true when it

comes to the case of agricultural extension in Ethiopia (Roling and Pretty, 1997).

Agricultural research in Ethiopia is poorly linked to extension (Belay, 2003; EEA, 2006;

Wale and Yalew, 2007) because of the fact that extension and research activities have been


15/24

9

carried out under different institutions with zero or minimal coordination between them

(Belay, 2002).

Agricultural extension agents in Ethiopia are involved in different activities which are not

necessarily related to their normal work such as collection of fertilizer credit, being

government spokesmen, or agents for other government bureaus and this will highly affect

their relation with the farmers. When agricultural extension is in place in one area, more or

less there are some basic elements that come together for agricultural development. Some of

these are marketing, agricultural credits, and extension advices (Belay, 2003). Therefore such

elements of agricultural extension directly or indirectly benefit the local communities in

increasing the yield if properly applied.

2.2 Change in Rain Fall Amount and Patterns

Climate changes affects crop production through direct impacts on the biophysical factors

such as plant and animal growth and the physical infrastructure associated with food

processing and distribution (Schmidhuber and Tubiello, 2007). Accordingly some impacts of

climate change are occurring more rapidly than previously anticipated (Parry et al., 2007 as

cited by Oyiga Benedict Chijioke et al., 2011).

Ethiopian agriculture is mostly rain-fed, whereas inter-annual and seasonal rainfall variability

is high and droughts are frequent in many parts of the country. According to Svein Ege, et al.,

(2009), inter-annual and seasonal variability of rainfall are a major cause of difference in

production of cereals in the small-holder farming system of Ethiopian agriculture. The

patterns of inter-annual variability in productions of the six major cereals (teff, barley, wheat,

maize, sorghum and millet) cultivated in the region show similar patterns of inter-annual

variability in the seasonal or annual rainfall amounts. Productions of teff, barley and wheat

show stronger correlations with the kiremtrainfall while sorghum production is more stronglycorrelated with belg rainfall. Maize appears to require a more even distribution of rainfall

throughout the belgand kiremtseasons. Sorghum shows the largest year-to-year variability as

it is cultivated in semi-arid and arid parts of the region where rainfall variability is high.

Productions of the cereals also showed statistically significant correlations with each other,

suggesting that rainfall is the common yield-limiting factor as use of chemical fertilizers and

other agricultural inputs is limited. The fact that there are high correlations between cereal

production and rainfall suggest that farmers are vulnerable to food insecurity related torainfall variability. Thus there is a need for water resources development including household


16/24

10

level rainwater harvesting for crop production. In 2009, due to poor belg rains, it proved

difficult to maintain supplies of sweet potato vines in SNNPR, which reduced the amount of

this high-yielding crop that could be planted. Enset or false banana is an important crop in

Gurage and other areas south of Addis Ababa. Due to a succession of poor seasons, over-

harvesting of this staple food was reported.

Sesame crops in Amhara and Tigray were generally good, as this crop has low rainfall

requirements. Some wind damage was reported from the Humera area and this caused

shelling of the crop close to harvest. The high quality of Ethiopian sesame is widely

recognized on international markets (Woldeamlak, 2009).

According to MoA (2000), rain-fed crop production is the basis of all subsistence farming in

most parts of the country and accounts for more than 95% for the land area cultivated

annually. In general the rain-fall variability causes a variation in the crop yield in small scale

agriculture.

2.3 Associating Yield Difference with Irrigation

Although Ethiopia has abundant rainfall and water resources, its agricultural system does not

yet fully benefit from the technologies of water management and irrigation. According to

(Demese, et al., 2009), the current yield levels by rural smallholders is not able to produce to

fulfill their minimum food requirements since one-third of the rural household owns less than

0.5 ha of farming land that are dependent on rain fed agriculture system.

The international Water Management Institute explains that the development of irrigation and

agricultural water management holds significant potential to improve productivity and reduce

vulnerability to climactic volatility in any country. Therefore, improved water management

for agriculture has many potential benefits in efforts to reduce vulnerability and improve

productivity (Sileshi & Awulachew, 2010).2.4 The Impact of Agro-Ecological Variation

Ethiopia has diverse agro-ecological environments in which that are defined based on

temperature and moisture regimes (MoA, 2000). Accordingly, Ethiopia has 30 agro

ecological zones.

Around 55 percent of the total land area constitutes moisture-stressed arid, semi-arid and sub-moist areas with less than 120 days of crop growing period. These drier areas are commonly


17/24

11

low in soil fertility and high in rainfall variability and drought risk. Areas with a longer and

dependable period with minimum of 120 crop growing days are found in the remaining 45

percent of the total land area, particularly in the highlands (ADBG, 2008). Though the

diverse agro-ecological setting permits diverse farming and livelihood systems, crop

production is by far the largest component of the agricultural economy.

Out of the total arable land of 50.5 million hectares, close to 16.4 million hectares are suitable

for producing annual and perennial crops. Of this estimated land area about 8 million hectares

(nearly 50%) are used annually for rain-fed small holders crops (Tadesse et al, 2009).

According to this report the existence of diverse agro-ecological conditions enables Ethiopia

to grow a large variety of crops including cereals (teff , maize, sorghum, wheat, barley,

millet, oats, etc), pulses (horse beans, field peas, lentils, chick-peas, haricot beans, vetch, etc),oil seeds (linseed, Niger-seed, fenugreek, rapeseed, sunflower, castor bean, groundnuts, etc),

spices & herbs (pepper, garlic, ginger, mustard, etc), stimulants (coffee, tea, chat, tobacco,

etc), fruits(banana, orange, grape, papaya, lemon, menderin, apple, pineapple, mango,

avocado, etc), sugarcane, fibers (cotton, sisal, etc), vegetables (onion, tomato, carrot,

cabbage, etc), root and tuber crops (potato, inset, sweet- potatoes, beets, yams, etc). The 1994

agricultural sample survey, as cited in the report, indicates that the average yield of all crops

at the national level was about 10 quintals per hectare while the average yield of cereals,pulses and other crops was about ten, nine and three quintals per hectare respectively (CSA,

1995). From this it can be revealed that agricultural crop production in the small holder

farming varies across different agro-ecological settings.

2.5 Yields in Relation to Farm Ownership and Level of Farm Management

Yield differences are mirrored in the system of farm ownership and management. Land, the

most basic resource for peasant life, is under the hands of most government officials (land

lords) and at the same time this officials directed development where they had a great deal of

land. However, the majorities of the peasants were landless or use a small and fragmented

farm lands. Most peasants cultivate an area of land that is too small, often less than one

hectare. Even this small holding is fragmented in to two or four or even more plots. The small

holdings are limited by either inheritance or the peasants capacity which in turn is

determined by the available labour and oxen-power. Most of the households included in

northern Ethiopia are small holder farmers who have on average less than two hectares of

land. Land is of highly different quality in different districts of northern Ethiopia. Besides


18/24

12

land is state owned and farmers are not allowed to buy and sell land. They can only obtain

land from the local peasant associations (Yezihalem, 2012). Therefore variation of the land

ownership by small-holder farmers will bring a difference in the yield of the food crop

production.

2.6 Impact of HIV/AIDS on Small-Holder Agriculture

According to Lori Bollinger et.al, 2007 the impact of HIV/AIDS can also be seen on the

agricultural sector. In Ethiopian economy, agriculture is the largest sector accounting for a

large portion of production and a majority of employment. This study has shown that AIDS

will have adverse effects on agriculture, including loss of labor supply and remittance

income. The seriousness of the HIV/AIDS epidemic in Ethiopia is widely acknowledged. The

disease is taking its toll on life expectancy and is undermining the countrys efforts to reduce

poverty.

The impact of HIV/AIDS on the agricultural sector is quite visible in districts that have been

hard hit by the epidemic. Since most agricultural activities take place in rural areas, where

farmers mainly using labor intensive techniques live, and have been much vulnerable to

HIV/AIDS, it has resulted into decline of agricultural production in general, and food

production in particular. Many communities whose source of income, food and general

livelihood is agriculture have registered negative growth due to HIV/AIDS (Yezihalem,

2012).

2.7 Yields and the Socio-Cultural Dimension of Households

2.7.1 Gender perspectives of yields

Women form an important population among small-scale farmers and play an indispensable

role in food crop production. Addressing constraints to their access to food production

resources (physical, financial, cultural, legal) would be a vital step towards sustainably

improving food production. There has been an encouragement for the inclusion of elements

of gender into the framework of systems to support the development of Africas Green

Revolution. The mean yield from male-managed farms was 1.8 tons/hectare of maize relative

to just below 1 ton/hectare from female-managed farms Yengoh (2012). Accordingly, the

mean yield of 1 ton/hectare for female-managed farms has to be appreciated within the

context of the overall data spread: about 60% of female farmers have yields that are at or


19/24

13

below the 25th percentile. These lower yields on female managed farms are a reflection of the

differences in factors of agricultural production (inputs and management) between genders.

2.7.2 Other socio-cultural factors

There is an Ethiopian saying that: No crown without the poor, No food without the peasant.

From this saying, one can simply understand that, in Ethiopia agriculture has been simply a

way, for many the only way, of life and not a business enterprise. Ideally, the farmer is

supposed to produce everything that he requires for himself and others (Mesfin, 1984).

However, it should be borne in mind that farmers productivity is associated with a number of

different factors.

According to Yezihalem Tesfa (2012), the following are, therefore, the major critical

religious factors that jeopardize agricultural productivity in Ethiopia. Strong and deep-rootedreligious and cultural practices by the bulk of Ethiopian farmers are one of the serious factors

for low agricultural productivity. These cultural and religious practices and institutions

negatively affect the overall interactions of most of the small-holder farmers in a subsistence

production system of Ethiopian agriculture. Variation in the educational level of farmers can

also make a yield difference in small holder farming. Education that can have a meaningful

impact on agricultural productivity may not necessarily be formal. Opportunities for learning

and skills development can make a difference. Farmers that have undergone some informaltraining in farming will generally obtain significantly higher yields than those that have not.

2.8 Constraints to Agricultural Productivity in Ethiopia

According to Leigh Anderson, Mary Kay Gugerty, (2010), Key constraints to agricultural

productivity in Ethiopia include low availability of improved or hybrid seed, lack of seed

multiplication capacity, low profitability and efficiency of fertilizer use due to the lack of

complimentary improved practices and seed, and lack of irrigation and water constraints. In

addition, lack of transport infrastructure and market access decrease the profitability of

adopting improved practices. Investments in productivity increases higher up the food value

chain, such as through marketing and transportation infrastructure, would increase prices

farmers receive for output while also putting downward pressure on urban food prices.

Higher producer prices would create incentives for farmers to invest in productivity

increasing technologies since output increases would offer substantial gains. Lack of reliable

data also poses a critical constraint to understanding the potential for productivity gains in

Ethiopia.


20/24

14

3. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

At the local level, food crop yields in small-scale farming systems are determined by a

number of factors. These include inputs to agriculture, techniques of crop cultivation and

socio-cultural characteristics of farming households. These factors work in union to

determine yield levels in a number of ways. Yield differences among farming households are

associated with the use of some basic inputs and practices. By proliferating and optimizing

these technologies, so that more farmers can use them more efficiently, the productivity of

many farming households can be improved. Other technologies such as inorganic fertilizers

and improved seeds are used in small-scale local settings, albeit neither widely nor optimally,

and contribute to yield differences among farmers. The production of these technologies

especially inorganic fertilizers and their market dynamics are beyond the control of small-

scale farmers at local level. While the use of inorganic fertilizers can be essential in

replenishing macro-nutrient deficiencies among many nutrient-poor soils, access to them is

constrained by high financial costs for small-scale farmers.

Being a human-managed system, the socioeconomic dimension of food crop production is as

important as the management dimension. A key factor in this dimension is the place for and

role of women in food crop production among small-scale farming communities. Achieving

and sustaining food security in the long run will not be feasible without addressing the gender

imbalance in access to land rights, agricultural inputs and investment opportunities. Such

initiatives can be complemented by the import of agricultural production skills at the local

scale through available technologies and tested processes.


21/24

15

4. RECOMMENDATION

In general, the following recommendations and/or policy implications are assumed to be

helpful for improvement of Ethiopian small-scale food crop farmers.

We would like to positively recommend to the concerned bodies the availability of improved

seed, awareness about profitability and efficiency of fertilizer use, complimentary

management practices, irrigation, transport infrastructure and market access which increase

the profitability of adopting and application of local and improved technologies and avoiding

those challenges of the agriculture sector in increasing the productivity of food crop

production in the small-holder farming system. Therefore, agricultural extension services like

marketing, agricultural credits, and extension advices should be given to the local farmers.

Intensifying small-holder agriculture through the use of fertilizer and other inputs should be

considered to be a strategic component of Ethiopian agriculture to boost crop production and

productivity. Hence, increased and efficient use of fertilizer can be considered as a more

plausible alternative in Ethiopia to bridge the wide gap of food shortage at least in the

immediate future so that recognizing the role of fertilizer in increasing crop yield, the

government of Ethiopia must give top priority to the fertilizer sub-sector and should

distribute sufficient amount of fertilizer for the farmers on time with full awareness abouthow to use it through training.


22/24

16

5. REFERENCES

Abesha, D., Waktola, A. and Aune, J. B. (2000). Agricultural Extension in the Dry-lands ofEthiopia. Drylands Coordination Groups (DCG).

Atsbaha Gebre-Selassie, Tessema Bekele 2011. A Review of Ethiopian Agriculture: Roles,Policy and Small-scale Farming SystemsBelay, K. (2003). Agricultural Extension in Ethiopia: The Case of

ParticipatoryDemonstration and Training Extension System. Journal of socialDevelopment inAfrica, 18(1): 49-83

Belay, K. (2002). Constraints to agricultural extension work in Ethiopia: the insiders

view.South African Journal of Agricultural Extension 31Biratu, Gizachew Kebede (2008). Agricultural Extension and Its Impact on Food Crop

Diversity and the Livelihood of Farmers in Guduru, Eastern Wollega,Ethiopia.

Birkhaeuser, D., Evenson, R. E., and Feder, G. (1991). The Economic Impact of Agricultural

Extension: A Review. Economic Development and Cultural Change 39(3):607-650.Degefa, T. (2006). Combining household qualitative data and quantitative data in food

security research. Working paper on population and land use in centralEthiopia, no-5, 17p.

Degefa, T. (2006). Household Food Insecurity Seasonality in Oromiya Zone in Ethiopia.Addis Ababa: Organization for Social Science Research in Eastern andSouthern Africa, Research Report no.26

Demese, et al (2009). Comprehensive Africa AgricultureDevelopment Program EthiopiaStudy. Addis Ababa: MoARD.

EEA, (2006). Evaluation of the Ethiopian Agricultural Extension with Particular Emphasis on

the Participatory Demonstration and Training Extension System (PADETS).Ethiopian Economic Association/Ethiopian Economic Policy researchInstitute, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

EEA, (2005). Transformation of Ethiopian Agriculture: Potentials, Constraints and Suggestedin Measures. Report on the Ethiopian Economy. Ethiopian EconomicAssociation, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

FAO, (2007). Global Information and Early Warning System on Food and Agriculture WorldFood Programme. Special report on FAO/WFP crop and food supplyassessment in Ethiopia. Accessed on 02/03/2007fromftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/009/j9325e/j9325e00.pdf

Genesis T Yengoh, (2012). Agriculture & Food Security Determinants of yield differences in

small-scale food crop farming systemsGetinet kebede (2011). Linking small-scale irrigation and household food Security in drought

prone area of north east Ethiopia: a case study of Alawuha irrigation Schemein Gubalafto woreda, north wollo zone.

HH Komicha, B hlmer, (2006). the Ethiopian journal of economics Vol. 15 (1) effect ofcredit constraint on production efficiency of farm households in south-easternEthiopia

Jennifer E. Taylor (1998). an Exploratory Literature Review of Efforts to Help the Small-scale, Resource Poor Farmer in International Agricultural Development

J.F. Kirsten and J. Van Zyl1, (1998). defining small-scale farmers in the south Africancontext


23/24

17

Jonathan D. Carlson (2008). Intercropping with Maize in Sub-arid RegionsCommunity Planning & Analysis Technical Brief

Leigb Anderson and Mary Kay Guerty (2o10), yield gap and productivity potential inEthiopian agriculture.

Lori Bollinger et.al. (September 1999E.C) The Economic Impact of AIDS in Ethiopia, The

Futures Group International in collaboration with: Research Triangle Institute(RTI) the Centre for Development and Population Activities (CED). P,3

Ministry of Agriculture Department of Extension and Cooperatives, (September 1998),Ethiopian Agricultural Research Organization.

M.L. Parry, O.F. Canziani, J.P. Palutik of, Contribution of Working Group II to the FourthAssessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change P.J.vander Linden and C.E. Hanson, Eds. Cambridge University Press,Cambridge, UK, 976 pp

Mertz et al. 2009; Hassan, Scholes, and Ash (2005). Giller and Palm 2004). small scalefarming and shifting cultivation

Oyiga Benedict Chijioke et al., (2011) implication of climate change on crop yield and food

accessibility in sub Saharan Africa , interdisciplinary term paper, ZEF doctoralstudies program

Roling, N. and Pretty, J. N. (1997). Extensions role in sustainable agricultural development:Emerging challenges for sustainable agriculture. In Swanson, B.E.,Bentz,R.P., and Sofranko, A.J.(eds). Improving agricultural extension. A referencemanual. FAO, Rome, Italy.

Schmidhuber, J., and F.N. Tubiello, (2007). Global food security under climate change.Proc.Natl. Acad. Sci., 104, 19703-19708, doi:10.1073/pnas.0701976104

Shumet Asefa (June 2011). Mekelle University Online at http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/40461/ MPRA Paper No. 40461 posted 6. August 2012 13:41UTC

Sileshi Bekele Awlachew (2010). the international water management institute, Irrigationpotential in Ethiopia Constraints and opportunities for enhancing the system

State University Sasakawa Global (2000). Grain Marketing Research Project/MichiganSvein Ege, et al (2009). Proceedings of the 16th International Conference of Ethiopian

Studies Volume 1 Printed in Norway by NTNU-trykk, TrondheimT.Tadesse et al., (March 2013). Impact of rainwater management on growth and yield of rain-

fed lowland riceWale, E. and Yalew, A. 2007. Farmers Variety Attribute Preferences: Implication for

Breeding Priority Settings and Agricultural Extension Policy in Ethiopia.African Development Bank, 379-396

Yezihalem Tesfa Dagnaw, (2012). Critical Factors Hampering Agricultural Productivity inEthiopia: The Case of Northern Ethiopian Farmers
http://www.cambridge.org/features/earth_environmental/climatechange/wg2.htmhttp://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/40461/http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/40461/http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/40461/http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/40461/http://www.cambridge.org/features/earth_environmental/climatechange/wg2.htm


24/24

6. APPENDIX

Appendix 1 Expected production & distribution of improved seeds by ESE in 2010 (quintals)

Source: Ethiopian Seed Enterprise (ESE)

Appendix 2 Ethiopian Seed Enterprise (ESE) and its sales in the year 2006, 2007, and 2008

Crops 2006 2007 2008Wheat 115 888 75 602 121 749Maize (hybrid) 35 082 50 554 36 167Maize (composite) 11 568 4 194 5 767Maize total 46 650 54 748 41 934

Sorghum 139 279 787Barley 10 023 6 355 6 457Teff 3 527 5 816 6 541Field peas 796 1 388 1 003Faba bean 2 232 2 720 3 438Haricot bean 4 369 2 238 1 925Soya bean 812 1 705 469Chick peas 2 208 1 346 2 795Lentils 1 884 664 1 177Source: Ethiopian Seed Enterprise (ESE)

CropsAmhara Oromia SNNP Tigray Others Total

Wheat 98 293 137 610 98 293 39 317 19 658 393 172Maize (hybrid only) 19 029 12 115 21 963 56 6 395 59 558Sorghum 554 680 127 206 16 1 583Barley 3 927 11 227 2 717 1 482 - 19 365Teff 7 214 8 160 2 966 4 302 - 22 642Field peas 114 169 73 87 14 4Faba bean 1 501 1 592 637 773 46 4 549Haricot bean 147 720 736 25 8 1 636Soya bean 187 826 80 240 - 1 333

Chick peas 3 008 2 557 376 1 429 150 7 520Lentil 30 34 2 18 2 86

Agribusiness Organization and Management Seminar

Documents

Transcript of Agribusiness Organization and Management Seminar