The Role of the Broadbed Maker Plough in Ethiopian Farming Systems: an Ex Post Impact Assessment Study
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
The role of the broadbed maker plough in Ethiopian farming systems: An ex post impact assessment study ILRI Impact Assessment Series 7 A.S. Rutherford, A.N. Odero and R.L. Kruska International Livestock Research Institute P.O. Box 30709, Nairobi, Kenya Authors’ affiliations A.S. Rutherford, Livestock Consultant A.N. Odero, Systems Analysis and Impact Assessment Programme, ILRI R.L. Kruska, Systems Analysis and Impact Assessment Programme, ILRI © 2001 ILRI (International Livestock Research Institute) All rights reserved. Parts of this document may be reproduced without express permission for non-commercial use but with acknowledgement to ILRI. Cover drawing by Wessene Abay. ISBN 92–9146–095–8 Correct citation: Rutherford A.S., Odero A.N. and Kruska R.L. 2001. The role of the broadbed maker plough in Ethiopian farming systems: An ex post impact assessment study. ILRI Impact Assessment Series 7. ILRI (International Livestock Research Institute), Nairobi, Kenya. 156 pp. Table of Contents List of Tables ..........................................................iv List of Figures .........................................................viii Acknowledgements......................................................ix Executive summary ......................................................1 1 Introduction.........................................................4 1.1 Background ......................................................4 1.2 Crop production: Tradition and technology .............................5 1.3 Broad context of the study..........................................10 2 Methodology .......................................................13 2.1 Geographic information systems analysis ..............................13 2.2 Survey methodology...............................................14 2.3 Gross margins ...................................................15 2.4 Economic surplus modelling methodology .............................15 3 Results and discussion ................................................18 3.1 GIS results ......................................................18 3.1.1 Ethiopia ...................................................18 3.1.2 Kenya .....................................................19 3.1.3 Global analysis ..............................................19 3.2 Survey results ....................................................22 3.2.1 Zonal- and wereda-level survey comparison .........................22 3.2.2 Farmer survey results and discussion .............................32 3.3 Gross margin results ..............................................41 3.4 Economic surplus modelling results ..................................42 4 Implications and conclusions...........................................45 4.1 Implications .....................................................45 4.1.1 Lesson #1—Risk..............................................45 4.1.2 Lesson #2—Extension .........................................46 4.1.3 Lesson #3—Inputs: Household labour, BBM and draft power ..........47 4.1.4 Lesson #4—Weight and design of the BBM ........................47 4.1.5 Lesson #5—Plot distribution ....................................48 4.2 Conclusions .....................................................48 References ............................................................49 Appendix 1. Summary of previous studies ...................................52 Appendix 2. Survey forms and tables .......................................61 Appendix 3. Data conversion assumptions...................................67 Appendix 4. Gross margins, economic surplus model and assumptions ............68 Appendix 5. Farm-level survey tables .......................................86 Appendix 6. Wereda survey tables .........................................129 Appendix 7. Zonal survey tables ..........................................140 iii List of Tables Text tables Table 1. Geographic information systems (GIS) parameter descriptions........13 Table 2. Increased scope of geographic information systems (GIS) identification of possible technology recommendation domains..................22 Table 3. Survey coverage ............................................25 Table 4. Average BBM technology input costs (EB/kg), 1998/99.............32 Table 5. Number of years the BBM was used by each farmer, 1994–1998 ......37 Table 6. Frequency of BBM technology use by year and total number of farmers ...................................................37 Table 7. Summary of 1998/99 average yield and price information from farm surveys ...............................................38 Table 8. Summary of gross margin estimates by scenario, 1998 ..............42 Table 9. Economic surplus modelling results ............................43 Table 10. Ex post economic surplus modelling results: Sensitivity analysis on the research and extension (R&E) costs to 1998 ......................43 Tables in appendices Table A1. Distribution of land area, production and household by type of production system in 1983 ...................................52 Table A2. Cereal yields for the main crop season in 1987 (kg/ha) by land arrangement ..............................................53 Table A3. Ethiopia highland Vertisol crops—Grain and straw yields ...........53 Table A4. Yield and farm size results from selected previous studies ............54 Table A5. Survey results by location and organisation ......................55 Table A6. Survey sites and production system .............................55 Table A7. Sites and phases of technology package research ...................56 Table A8. Number of farmers by year in the on-farm technology verification and transfer studies, 1986–92 .....................................56 Table A9. Summary of results from rapid adoption study of the BBM, 1997 .....59 Table A10. Major problems in the adoption of BBM technology package ........60 Appendix 4. Ethiopia gross margin estimates (1998) (US$/ha) ..................68 Grain returns assumptions....................................69 Residue returns assumptions ..................................70 Local wheat—average cost of variable inputs—ILRI .................70 Improved wheat—average cost of variable inputs per hectare—survey . 70 iv Teff—average cost of variable inputs—ILRI........................71 Chickpea/rough pea—average cost of variable inputs (ILRI) ..........71 Maize—average cost of variable inputs (ILRI) ......................71 BBM-use costs—survey .......................................71 Interest ...................................................71 Improved wheat versus local wheat—Grain .......................72 Economic surplus model assumptions...........................76 Improved wheat versus local wheat—Straw .......................77 Improved wheat versus teff—Grain..............................80 Improved wheat versus teff—Straw ..............................83 Table F1. Total farmers surveyed .......................................86 Table F2. Peasant associations (PAs) surveyed by frequency ..................86 Table F3. Land distribution by type and region............................87 Table F4. Land distribution by type and zone .............................88 Table F5. Land distribution by type and wereda............................90 Table F6. Arrangements for BBM use ......................................93 Table F7. Arrangements for use of BBM .................................93 Table F8. Source of borrowed BBM .............................................94 Table F9. Number of farmers the BBM is leased out to .....................94 Table F10. Number of farmers sharing the BBM............................95 Table F11. Number of cattle owned......................................95 Table F12. Number of cattle shared......................................95 Table F13. Cattle owned ..................................................96 Table F14. Cattle shared ..............................................96 Table F15. BBM usage by farmers .......................................97 Table F16. Total area of BBM usage .....................................98 Table F17. Improved wheat areas (ha/farmer)..............................99 Table F18. Improved wheat yields (kg/ha)................................100 Table F19. Improved wheat residue yields (kg/ha) ...........................101 Table F20. Improved wheat prices (EB/kg)..................................103 Table F21. Improved wheat residue prices (EB/kg) .........................104 Table F22. Crops replaced by BBM-related crops.............................105 Table F23a. Crops replaced by BBM-related crops by farmer numbers and location......................................................106 v Table F23b. Land preparation practices for the BBM replaced crops in 1998 ......107 Table F24. Mean yield of local wheat (kg/ha)................................108 Table F25. Mean yield of local wheat residue (kg/ha) .......................109 Table F26. Price of local wheat (EB/kg)..................................110 Table F27. Price of local wheat residue (EB/kg) ...........................111 Table F28. Mean yield of teff (kg/ha)....................................112 Table F29. Mean yield of teff residue (kg/ha)..............................113 Table F30. Price of teff (EB/kg) ........................................114 Table F31. Price of teff residue (EB/kg)..................................115 Table F32. Mean yield of chickpea (kg/ha) ...............................115 Table F33. Mean yield of chickpea