Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Assessing participation of IITA in cassava processing activities in Nigeria


Published on

how technologies and processes developed,characteristics of innovations generated and their outcomes,impact of cassava processing research interventions on households and other sector participants.

Published in: Technology, Business
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Assessing participation of IITA in cassava processing activities in Nigeria

  1. 1. Assessing participation of IITA incassava processing activities in Nigeria T. Abdoulaye, A. Abass, B. Maziya- Dixon, G. Tarawali, R. Okechukwu, J. Rusike, A. Arega and V. Manyong.
  2. 2. Outline• Background• Methods• Conceptual framework• Preliminary results• Observations from surveys• Future work
  3. 3. Background• Cassava impact well documented - productivity gains• Processing research undocumented• IITA promoted cassava processing - late 80’s• Processing increases demand and adoption
  4. 4. Background• Processing options for farmers on labor resourcemanagement• Research on cassava improvement and agriculturalengineering and processing and product development• PI 2002 opened frontier for marketing processed products
  5. 5. Objectives• Credible evidence of the impact of IITA cassavaprocessing research or lack of it in NigeriaSpecifically identify:(a) technologies and processes developed and promoted -how(b) Characteristics of innovations generated and theiroutcomes(c) Impact of cassava processing research interventions onhouseholds and others sector participants(d) Lessons to be learned from interventions
  6. 6. Hypotheses• Cassava processing research activities generated a new stream of outputs with potential to confer benefits to market participants• The innovations were adopted by fabricators and processors and resulted in the changes in their efficiencies• Improved varieties and Processing are complementary technologies
  7. 7. Data AnalysisData will be analyzed using:- Descriptive statistics- Budgeting methods- Econometric models. including micro-econometricevaluation methods.
  8. 8. Approach• Data from 14 states, 74 villages in 4regions of Nigeria• 36 villages with IITA intervention•38 villages with no-IITA intervention
  9. 9. Location of Surveyed communities
  10. 10. Data and Sampling Households Machine Processors fabricatorsSouth West 422 14 10South East 184 37 48South South 253 7 69North Central 93 0 16Total 952 58 143
  11. 11. Cassava processing R4D – Impact pathway (Adapted from Rusike et al, 2009) Inputs: Facilitation, Advocacy, labor, funds, plants, equipments etc.. OUTPUTS 3. Training 1. Modified/new 2. Products - Workshop on equipments - Odorless Fufu improving machines -Grater - HQCF - Capacity -Press - Better quality Gari building on -Fryers - Chips business skills -Sifters - Animal feed - Training on -Dryers process hygieneOutcomes: Farmers, Fabricators and Processors: Changes in knowledge and practices Increased business skills Cost savings More hygienic facilities New business, new products Increased incomes Impact: Households, village, LGA, State and Nation
  12. 12. Selected Cassava products in surveyed villages 100 90 80 70% of villages 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Garri Odourlessfufu Chips Bakery flour Products 2009 1999
  13. 13. Main Cassava Production constraints 80 70 60% of villages 50 40 30 20 10 0 bad road inadequate pest/disease low yield input market
  14. 14. Main cassava processing constraints 70.0% 60.0% 50.0%% of Villages 40.0% 30.0% 20.0% 10.0% .0% inadequate bad road inadequate far distance to water sources market processor
  15. 15. Date of creation of processingenterprises Before 2000After 2000
  16. 16. Ownership of enterprises CooperativeIncorporated company Sole proprietorship
  17. 17. Observations about Cassava processing sector in Nigeria• Gari is still the most popular product making the graters the most used equipment• Stakeholders recognize IITA as catalyst of changes• PI another important factor of change.• With change in 2007, millers stopped ordering cassava flour
  18. 18. Observations about Cassava processing sector in Nigeria• “Rent seekers” could not compete – true for both fabricators and processors• Others have adjusted and diversified• Few firms are reconsidering vertical integration
  19. 19. Households use of improved Cassava 70 60% of households 50 40 30 20 10 0 More than 10 years 5-10 years Current 2009
  20. 20. Household Cassava utilization 90 80 70 60% hoseholds 50 40 30 20 10 0 boiling garri fufu flour dry chips blendind mixed cassava cassava making making dry or flour leaves w et
  21. 21. Households awareness and use of Cassava processing Equipments 70 60% of households 50 40 30 20 10 0 peeling grating chipping pressing sifting frying Machines Aware(%) Use(%)
  22. 22. Future Work1. Component approach to analyze complementarities and sequencing between processing and adoption of new varieties. • Component approach will address if there are reasons to justify intervention2. System analysis using intervention and non- intervention site to measure impact of interventions as a whole – R4D approach • System approach will focus on whether interventions as a whole lead to impact
  23. 23. Future work- Use micro-econometrics approach to estimate impactbased on with and without R4D intervention by IITA andpartners.- Use econometrics to test complementarities - Johnson and Masters, 2004 could establish complementarities at village level but not at household - Now small graters more widely use and household level complementarities can be established- Conduct production cost and efficiency analysis - Manual vs. mechanical - Large vs. small enterprise- Compare to past estimations to test efficiency givencurrent prices
  24. 24. Thank