Impact Of Agricultural Market Reforms On Smallholder Farmers In ...
Impact Of Agricultural Market Reforms On Smallholder Farmers In ... Impact Of Agricultural Market Reforms On Smallholder Farmers In ...
The weights are used to calculate averages, percentages, and sums throughout the report. They compensate for the fact that some regions or household types are over-represented in the sample relative to the population, while others are under-represented. Questionnaire The survey used a 27-page pre-coded questionnaire, designed by IFPRI, the Agricultural Policy Research Unit (APRU) at Bunda College of Agriculture, and its collaborators. It was revised following three field tests. The questionnaire was composed of 16 sections: household member characteristics, household characteristics, land use and cropping patterns, crop production, source of labor and labor use, input use and purchases (fertilizers, manure, seeds, pesticides), changes in labor and inputs, credit use and source, crop sales and marketing, storage, sources of information, consumption (food and non-food), time allocation, inventory of assets (household and agricultural), sources of income, and farmers’ perceptions. Data collection The IFPRI/APRU Smallholder Farmer Survey employed a team of seven enumerators and two supervisors. The enumerators were selected from a group of bachelor level students who had some experience conducting household-level surveys. The survey team was directed and supervised by Mr. Richard Kachule from APRU. The enumerators were trained for two weeks in which every section of the questionnaire was reviewed and explained. The training also included three field trips to pre-test the questionnaire, practice using it, and identify potential problems. A manual was prepared to guide the enumerators in completing the questionnaire, defining key terms, and deciding difficult cases. The supervisors were also trained on how to randomly select the villages and households to include in the sample. Data collection took place from August to early November 1998. 5.1.2 Farm household characteristics and income sources This section describes the basic socio-economic characteristics of the smallholder farm household members and their sources of income. The statistical results are disaggregated either by region, total annual household expenditures per capita (which include food and non-food 233
expenditures as well as the rental value of the residence), farm size per household, or gender of the household head. The regional breakdown includes the North, the Center, and the South. Total household expenditures are grouped into five quintiles. Each quintile groups 20 percent of the households (or 160 households) in a separate expenditure category. For example, the lowest quintile represents the 160 poorest households (those that have the smallest value of annual expenditures per capita) while the upper quintile is made up of the 160 richest households. The average value of total per capita expenditures of each expenditure quintile is presented at the top of Table 5.2. It ranges from MK 1,079for the lowest expenditure quintile to MK 6,550 for the wealthiest group. 29 Average total per capita expenditures for all households are MK 3,083. Similar to the expenditures quintiles described earlier, farm households are grouped into five categories according to farm size, with the first quintile representing the households with the smallest farms (0.5 ha on average) and the fifth quintile representing those with the largest farms (3.0 ha on average.) Socio-economic characteristics Analysis of the smallholder farmer data indicates that average household size is about 5 with an average number of 2 to 3 children per household (see Table 5.2). Household size decreases with per capita expenditures as the poorest households have an average of 6 members while the richest have an average of 4. Table 5.2 also shows the breakdown of the household heads of each family by ethnic group and religious affiliation. Results show that ethnic group composition in Malawi is fairly diverse although ethnic groups have a distinct geographical distribution. The Chewa, which are the largest ethnic group representing a little more than onethird of the farm household heads in Malawi, are mainly found in the Center. The Tumbuka are largely present in the North, while the Yawo and Lomwe are concentrated in the South. More than three-quarter of farm household heads are Christians whereas less than one-fifth are Moslem. Moslems are more concentrated in the Southern region of Malawi while the North has the highest concentration of Christians. The distribution of ethnic groups and religious background by expenditure category does not show any definite trend in terms of one group being richer than the other. 29 It is difficult to convert these numbers into US dollar because the Malawian Kwacha was devalued several times during the period 1997/98, increasing from 15 MK/US$ in 1997 to 42 MK/US$ at the end of 1998. 234
- Page 190 and 191: Table 4.1.140-Summary of food expen
- Page 192 and 193: Table 4.1.142-Percent of households
- Page 194 and 195: Table 4.1.144-Food consumption by e
- Page 196 and 197: Table 4.1.149-Results of regression
- Page 198 and 199: Table 4.1.152-Value of household as
- Page 200 and 201: Table 4.1.156-Value of household as
- Page 202 and 203: Table 4.1.160-Housing characteristi
- Page 204 and 205: Table 4.1.162-Housing characteristi
- Page 206 and 207: Table 4.1.165-Main source of water
- Page 208 and 209: Table 4.1.170-Source of information
- Page 210 and 211: Table 4.1.176-Source of information
- Page 212 and 213: Table 4.1.181-Regression for percei
- Page 214 and 215: Table 4.2.5-Change in number of veh
- Page 216 and 217: Table 4.2.12-Availability and sourc
- Page 218 and 219: Table 4.2.21-Number of GFs per vill
- Page 220 and 221: Table 4.2.30-Percentage of villages
- Page 222 and 223: Table 4.2.34-Distribution of villag
- Page 224 and 225: Table 4.3.1-Distribution of GVs by
- Page 226 and 227: Table 4.3.9-Number of each type of
- Page 228 and 229: Table 4.3.12-Percentage of secretar
- Page 230 and 231: Table 4.3.19-Distribution of GVs by
- Page 232 and 233: Table 4.3.24-Percentage of inputs s
- Page 234 and 235: Table 4.3.32-Average value of curre
- Page 236 and 237: Table 4.3.40-Percentage of GVs in w
- Page 238 and 239: CHAPTER 5 - RESULTS FROM THE MALAWI
- Page 242 and 243: On average, around 20 percent of th
- Page 244 and 245: agricultural work. Other less commo
- Page 246 and 247: 5.1.4 Time allocation In Malawi, as
- Page 248 and 249: attributed it to the fact that fert
- Page 250 and 251: insignificant. The coefficient on t
- Page 252 and 253: As in the results from the previous
- Page 254 and 255: most important sources of input on
- Page 256 and 257: applied for credit compared to 20 p
- Page 258 and 259: less than 1 mt per ha which are fai
- Page 260 and 261: 5.1.9 Agricultural marketing Market
- Page 262 and 263: Households that belong to a club al
- Page 264 and 265: most important contractors are the
- Page 266 and 267: indicates that the extent of povert
- Page 268 and 269: wheat, and fruits and nuts, a highe
- Page 270 and 271: Surprisingly, the education of the
- Page 272 and 273: Housing characteristics The overwhe
- Page 274 and 275: It was also important to find out w
- Page 276 and 277: Surprisingly, tobacco growers are m
- Page 278 and 279: Over three-quarter of the EPAs repo
- Page 280 and 281: The changes in the number and types
- Page 282 and 283: 5.2.11 Storage Facilities On averag
- Page 284 and 285: Table 5.2 - Household characteristi
- Page 286 and 287: Table 5.7 - Percentage of household
- Page 288 and 289: Table 5.12 - Farm labor use and all
The weights are used to calculate averages, percentages, and sums throughout the report. They<br />
compensate for the fact that some regions or household types are over-represented in the sample<br />
relative to the population, while others are under-represented.<br />
Questionnaire<br />
The survey used a 27-page pre-coded questionnaire, designed by IFPRI, the <strong>Agricultural</strong><br />
Policy Research Unit (APRU) at Bunda College of Agriculture, and its collaborators. It was<br />
revised following three field tests. The questionnaire was composed of 16 sections: household<br />
member characteristics, household characteristics, land use and cropping patterns, crop<br />
production, source of labor and labor use, input use and purchases (fertilizers, manure, seeds,<br />
pesticides), changes in labor and inputs, credit use and source, crop sales and marketing, storage,<br />
sources of information, consumption (food and non-food), time allocation, inventory of assets<br />
(household and agricultural), sources of income, and farmers’ perceptions.<br />
Data collection<br />
The IFPRI/APRU <strong>Smallholder</strong> Farmer Survey employed a team of seven enumerators<br />
and two supervisors. The enumerators were selected from a group of bachelor level students who<br />
had some experience conducting household-level surveys. The survey team was directed and<br />
supervised by Mr. Richard Kachule from APRU. The enumerators were trained for two weeks in<br />
which every section of the questionnaire was reviewed and explained. The training also included<br />
three field trips to pre-test the questionnaire, practice using it, and identify potential problems. A<br />
manual was prepared to guide the enumerators in completing the questionnaire, defining key<br />
terms, and deciding difficult cases. The supervisors were also trained on how to randomly select<br />
the villages and households to include in the sample. Data collection took place from August to<br />
early November 1998.<br />
5.1.2 Farm household characteristics and income sources<br />
This section describes the basic socio-economic characteristics of the smallholder farm<br />
household members and their sources of income. The statistical results are disaggregated either<br />
by region, total annual household expenditures per capita (which include food and non-food<br />
233