• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Extension, fertilizer use, and agricultural productivity in Agricultural Growth Program (AGP) woredas
 

Extension, fertilizer use, and agricultural productivity in Agricultural Growth Program (AGP) woredas

on

  • 317 views

International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) and Ethiopian Development Research Institute (EDRI). Conference on "Towards what works in Rural Development in Ethiopia: Evidence on the Impact of ...

International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) and Ethiopian Development Research Institute (EDRI). Conference on "Towards what works in Rural Development in Ethiopia: Evidence on the Impact of Investments and Policies". December 13, 2013. Hilton Hotel, Addis Ababa.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
317
Views on SlideShare
317
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
5
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Extension, fertilizer use, and agricultural productivity in Agricultural Growth Program (AGP) woredas Extension, fertilizer use, and agricultural productivity in Agricultural Growth Program (AGP) woredas Presentation Transcript

    • ETHIOPIAN DEVELOPMENT RESEARCH INSTITUTE Extension, fertilizer use, and agricultural productivity in Agricultural Growth Program (AGP) woredas
    • Introduction Extension Fertilizer Use Productivity Conclusions Extension - Introduction • Ethiopia one of few African countries that heavily invested in agriculture in recent years • Some of these investments have focused on the provision of advisory and training services • Over the last two decades, Ethiopia’s extension system has gone through a number of experimentations
    • Introduction Extension Fertilizer Use Productivity Conclusions Introduction • Public extension structure: from federal ministry to regions to kebeles through frontline extension agents (Development Agents) • Each woreda required to identify priority market oriented commodity production and detailed projection of input requirements • Delivery-wise, changed from largely top-down to significant ownership by the regions and woredas.
    • Introduction Extension Fertilizer Use Productivity Conclusions Introduction • Launch of ambitious plan: assure extension service in each of the 15,000 kebeles in the country • The plan envisaged: 1/ the establishment of Farmer Training Center (FTCs) in each kebele and 2/ the deployment of three Development Agents (DAs) in each kebele • Purpose of our analysis is to better understand functioning of this system based on recent collected data
    • Introduction Extension Fertilizer Use Productivity Conclusions Data on extension agents • Data collected by Ethiopian Economics Association (EEA) and the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) in 2009. • The surveys were conducted in eight selected woredas in seven regions: Afar, Amhara, BeneshangulGumuz, Gambella, Oromia, SNNP, and Tigray • Kebele-level surveys: Done in all kebeles of each selected woredas; a total of 156 kebeles; the DAs interviewed in all these kebeles
    • Introduction Extension Fertilizer Use Productivity Results • DAs’ profile and capacity Variables Values Age 28.4 Experience 2.4 Female % 17.4 Technical/vocational training (10+3) 64.2 Any need for additional training (%) 99.1 Conclusions
    • Introduction Extension Fertilizer Use Productivity Conclusions Results • What are responsibilities of DAs’? – DAs have a large number of tasks (on top of agricultural extension): 1/ Advice farmers; 2/ Distribute inputs (fertilizer, improved seeds, etc.); 3/ Mobilize farmers for public works; 4/ Take care of community resources; 5/ Give training; 6/ Receive training; 7/ Attend meetings; 8/ Prepare reports; 9/ Supervise road construction, 10/ Collect data, etc. – A DA serves 554 households on average [a very good ratio compared to other countries]
    • Introduction Extension Fertilizer Use Productivity Conclusions Results • DAs spend most of their time on activities in the field Activities Field Office Training not on field Receiving training Others % 64 18 14 3 1
    • Introduction Extension Fertilizer Use Productivity Conclusions Results • Resources at the disposal of DAs: – Limited transport means: 98% of them mentioned that they go by foot to visit farmers; Only 2 % of them have access to a bicycle or motorbike – Other resources: often only reporting material, leaflets, and package booklets; however, these resources are reported to not be available for around half (50%) of the DAs. • One caveat of these results: Survey was done almost five years ago and situation might have changed in the meanwhile
    • Introduction Extension Fertilizer Use Productivity Conclusions Extension effects as assessed by farmers • Data: AGP household surveys • Conducted in 4 high potential highland regions of Ethiopia in 2010 and 2012 • The survey covers 93 woredas; 61 AGP and 32 high potential non-AGP woredas • Both household and community level questionnaires were administered • A total of 7,930 households were interviewed; a slightly lower number in 2012
    • Introduction Extension Fertilizer Use Productivity Conclusions
    • Introduction Extension Fertilizer Use Productivity Conclusions Results (2010 and 2012) 2010 2012 Gov’t extension or DA office exist in the kebele 83% 89% If office outside the PA, what is the distance to the closest office from the PA center 12km 9km Improved 76% Stayed equal 15% Deteriorated 9% Average number of DAs in the kebele 2.8 77% 17% 6% 2.8 In the past 2 years, how did access to extension services change:
    • Introduction Extension Fertilizer Use Productivity Conclusions Results (2010 and 2012) Extension agents’ visits 2010 2012 Household was visited at least once in the year 36% 47% New inputs 35% 39% New methods 34% 18% New crops 6% 7% Fertilizer 13% 20% Improved seed 7% 10% Credit 1% 2% Others 5% 5% 29% 27% If visited, what kind of advice was given: If not visited, most important reason? Not enough extension agents
    • Introduction Extension Fertilizer Use Productivity Conclusions Fertilizer use - Introduction • Urea and DAP are the common type of fertilizers being distributed • The distribution almost exclusively goes through cooperative unions and primary cooperatives • The distribution system has faced several challenges ranging from logistics to pricing of fertilizer; we compare assessment of farmers in AGP woredas in 2010 and 2012
    • Introduction Extension Fertilizer Use Productivity Conclusions Results • A slight improvement in chemical fertilizer use in the last five years is seen Number of years that chemical fertilizers were used in the last five years 0 1 2 3 4 5 2010 37.2 7.3 4.8 4.6 4.8 41.3 2012 36.9 5.9 4.4 4.3 2.5 45.9
    • Introduction Extension Fertilizer Use Productivity Conclusions Fertilizer use; Results • Access to fertilizer Variables Fertilizer was available in the PA on time Problems with fertilizer supply system 1. Shortage of supply 2. Late arrival 3. High price 4. Lack of credit 5. No problem 6. Others 2010 76% 2012 87% 20.61 12.05 35.9 14.81 12.47 4.17 12.07 5.3 43.71 17.47 17.77 3.69 • A HH is considered as having access if; • Fertilizer was available in the PA on time and the HH mentions that either DAP or UREA were available on time or choose (code 3 or 5 above) from list of problems or the HH gets fertilizer from out side the village
    • Introduction Extension Fertilizer Use Productivity Conclusions Results • In 2010 meher season, 74% of the farmers had access to fertilizer; 55 % [56% in 2012]used fertilizer; Fertilizer users cover 72% of their cultivated area • 37% of the total cultivated AGP area fertilized • Complementarity of fertilizer use with improved seed and water – Almost all (95%) of improved seed users (21%) have used fertilizer – Only 4% of the farmers using irrigation; rain the main source; close to 85% of fertilizer users have got enough water either through rain or irrigation
    • Introduction Extension Fertilizer Use Productivity Conclusions Results • Estimate the effect of different explanatory variables on fertilizer demand (double-hurdle regression; conditional on access) • Profitability of fertilizer is one of the most important variables affecting fertilizer demand • Other variables of importance: Rainfall expectation; Experience with using fertilizer; Extension advice; Access to media/information (ownership of radio and TV); Ownership of transport animals
    • Introduction Extension Fertilizer Use Productivity Conclusions Productivity - results • Plots with fertilizer have larger output per hectare. • The figures below are results of simple t-test of yield between plots with fertilizer and without by crop Plots with fertilizer produce more Crop % Teff 31 Barely 58 Wheat 51 Maize 70 • Farmers who were visited by extension agents at least once in last year are 16% more productive than those who were not visited (through simple t-test; more detailed analysis planned)
    • Introduction Extension Fertilizer Use Productivity Conclusions Conclusions • Significant changes in high-potential agricultural (AGP) areas • Supply system of agricultural inputs and service delivery improving over time: More access to extension agents and an improved fertilizer supply chain • However, demand issues still an issue: farmers complain about profitability of fertilizer use (“high price”) and lack of credit for purchase of modern inputs • This apparently explains only small improvement of uptake of modern inputs over time
    • ETHIOPIAN DEVELOPMENT RESEARCH INSTITUTE Thank you