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.

Evolution of agricultural mechanization in Kenya from 1992– 2012

141 views

Published on

Evolution of agricultural mechanization in Kenya from 1992– 2012

Published in: Government & Nonprofit
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Evolution of agricultural mechanization in Kenya from 1992– 2012

  1. 1. Evolution of agricultural mechanization in Kenya from 1992– 2012 Hugo De Groote, Charles Marangu, Zachary Gitonga Addis Ababa, October 31, 2017
  2. 2. Introduction • Despite recent economic growth in Africa, – poverty levels remain alarmingly high – most people still live in rural areas, – food production cannot keep pace with the rapidly growing population – agricultural intensification is therefore urgently needed. • Africa has made progress in: – Adoption of improved crop varieties: good – Adoption of fertilizer and irrigation (land-saving technologies): medium • But: – Adoption of mechanization and farm implements (land saving technologies): remains low. – Why? – We have few recent studies on the topic in Africa • In this study: – an analysis of the evaluation of agricultural mechanization in Kenya over the last 20 years.
  3. 3. Background • Drivers of agricultural intensification – increasing population, – need for increased food production on a fixed land area (Boserup, 1965) – Technology development towards the scarcest resources (Ruttan and Hayami, 1984). • Mechanization: replacement of human labor by machinery, so: – where labor is scarce: ex. Increasing urbanization – where land is abundant: settler communities of North America, but also in East and Southern Africa (ESA) • Recent evolution in ESA: – population grows rapidly, – land becomes scarce and labor abundant. – structural transformation is taking place: from rural to urban, driven by economic development and job opportunities in the cities. • Hypothesis: – when rural labor moves to the cities, and the economy is sufficiently strong to absorb them and pay increasing wages, labor will become scarce in rural areas.
  4. 4. Methodology • Data: four representative household surveys conducted by CIMMYT over the last 20 years • Analysis of farm implements by rural households in the last survey (2013), and their geographical distribution • Analysis of evolution of mechanization by tracing adoption of tractors, plows and oxenover the four studyies (1992, 2002, 2010, and 2013) • Logistic regression to analyze the factors that affect the adoption of these three factors (2013)
  5. 5. Survey sites • All studies: stratified 2-stage sampling • Strata: 6 maize AEZs • PSU: EA or sublocations • SSU: households
  6. 6. Sample size Agroecological zonePSUs HH/ PSU HH PSUs HH/ PSU HH PSUs HH/ PSU HH PSUs HH/ PSU HH Low tropics 5 20 100 20 15 300 15 6 90 15 6 90 Dry mid-altitudes 10 18 181 25 8 200 18 12 217 18 12 216 Dry transitional 4 20 80 20 5 100 17 12 203 17 12 204 Moist mid-altitudes 9 20 183 25 10 250 20 12 240 20 12 240 Moist transitional 23 18 412 55 10 550 30 12 354 30 12 354 High tropics 28 16 451 40 10 400 20 12 240 20 12 240 total 79 1407 185 1800 120 1344 120 1344 1992 2002 2010 2012
  7. 7. Farm Implements • Most implements: hand tools. • First mechanical device: bicycle (48%). • Modern farm implements: knapsack sprayer (46%) and wheelbarrow (45%). • Solar panels coming up (17%) • Mechanization, ox-plow (28%), few carts (8%), fewer tractors (2%)
  8. 8. Evolution of farm mechanisation from 1992 to 2012 • Oxen: introduced by European and South African settlers in 19th-20th century, who switched to the use of tractors. • After independence, large settler farms taken over by African farmers/elite. • Many subdivided • Animal traction was promoted from colonial times in the African settlements
  9. 9. Mechanization by zone • Relative importance of tractors and oxen over the zones remains over the years. • Tractors mostly in the highlands, likely from colonial history, on large commercial farms • Oxen and oxen plows mostly in the dry and moist mid-altitudes.
  10. 10. • Trajectories over time are similar in the different zones. • Proportion of farmers with tractors is decreasing • Proportion of farmers with oxen and plows is increasing Evolution by Zone
  11. 11. Factors affecting adoption (2013) Dependent variables Constant Constant -7.29 *** -4.55 *** -4.21 *** Head Age of household head (years) 0.04 * 0.00 0.02 *** Household head is Male -0.37 0.54 -0.25 Head education (years) 0.04 0.01 0.03 * Marital status Married but spouse away 0.59 0.88 *** 0.45 Divorced/separated 0.00 0.18 -1.00 Widow/widower 0.38 0.50 -0.34 Hopusehold Adult Equivalent 0.14 0.15 *** 0.15 *** Tropical Livestock units 0.00 0.16 *** 0.11 *** Total land (Acres) 0.03 ** -0.02 *** 0.00 Number of extention contacts 0.00 0.01 *** 0.01 *** Total income (1000.000KES) 0.81 ** -2.18 *** -1.41 *** % land owned 0.56 0.34 0.53 planting fertilizer (1=Yes; 0=No) 0.16 0.10 0.10 topdressing fertilizer (0=No; 1=Yes) 0.98 -0.70 *** -0.56 *** Marketing Distance to main market (km) 0.02 0.00 -0.01 Percent of own maize sold 1.03 1.64 *** 1.51 *** Agroecological Dry mid altitude -1.95 ** 1.58 *** 2.19 *** Dry transitional -2.25 ** 0.80 1.11 *** Moist transitional -2.51 *** 0.34 0.40 High tropics -1.07 -1.69 *** -1.75 *** Moist mid altitudes -2.54 ** 1.07 ** 0.90 ** Tractor Trained oxen Ox plough
  12. 12. Summary • Adoption levels of agricultural mechanization in Kenya remain low – In 2012, most farm households used only hand tools, about half use bicycles, knapsack sprayers or a wheelbarrows. – About a quarter had a plow (28%), few a tractor (2%). – None of the interviewed farmers owned two-wheel tractors. • From 1992 to 2012, – % farmers with trained oxen increased from 17% to 33%, – % with tractors decreased from 5% to 2%. • Tractors vs. Oxen – Tractors were most important in the highlands, – Animal traction was most popular in the dry areas, moist mid-altitudes – Relative differences between zones remained, all zones followed the same trend. • Factors that affect mechanization differ for tractors and animal traction. – Tractors: increased with household income, acreage and age of the hh head. – Animal traction: increases with income and age of the household head, but decreases with land area. Further, adoption of animal traction is higher in households where the husband is away, and increases with sales of maize, livestock, family size, and access to extension. Finally, adoption of animal traction is negatively correlated with the top dressing of fertilizer.
  13. 13. Discussion on Methods • Definitions: distinctions should be made – between ownership, access and use (through ownership or rental services) of the different farm implements and draught animals – between oxen plows and tractor plows, – between different types of carts (oxen, donkey, or hand cart). – between oxen and trained oxen, and donkeys should be included. • Other mechanization elements should be included: – weeding implements, to be used with draught animals, – shelling equipment – choppers • Other factors of intensification: mechanical milling, irrigation, electricity, ... should be included in studies
  14. 14. Conclusions • Agricultural mechanization is making progress in Kenya, but through oxen, not tractors. • On tractors: – The proportion of farmers owning tractors is decreasing. – Farming systems have not yet reach the intensification levels required. – Two-wheel tractors are substantially cheaper, but still high, require fuel and maintenance, so their profitability needs to be carefully assessed. • Animal traction – Has received little attention from rural development projects and extension agencies. – From our analysis, animal traction is not linked to farm size; it does not reduce labor but rather complements it; it helps reduce the use of chemical fertilizer, and helps to engage in commercial maize production. – There is still a large potential for expanding animal traction, in particular, in the highlands: large farm areas, for crops and pasture, low population density, high levels of commercialization. – Negative elements in the highlands: only one season, no grazing areas, no mixted purpose cattle (mostly dairy). – Adoption increases with extension, so continued trainingand research and dissemination is needed. – Animal traction is not indicated in areas with high population density, small farms and little pasture, in particular the moist transitional zone.
  15. 15. Thank you for your interest!

×