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 economic reforms have boosted per capita production of almost all the major crops. The 1994 devaluation improved the incentives for production of cotton and other export crops, as well as increasing the real price of maize and rice. Over the 1990s, cotton production grew at almost 10 percent per year and rice at 13 percent per year. Other important food crops including maize, manioc, yams, and groundnuts grew at 4.5 – 8 percent per year over the decade. Per capita production of sorghum/millet was stable, while that of beans declined slightly. Most farmers in Benin say that their household’s standard of living has improved since 1992. Slightly more than half report improvement while 28 percent complain of deterioration. Improved economic conditions are cited as the main reason for improvement, while those perceiving a deterioration usually cited non-policy factors such as family health and weather. Reforms have probably reduced poverty and regional imbalances. Although urban households may have been adversely affected by privatization, higher import prices, and contraction of the state, the survey suggests that rural household feel their lives have improved since 1992. Even within rural areas, the perceived gains are greatest in the poorest department (Atacora) and least in the richest one (Atlantique). Indeed, comparing our results with those of a rural household survey carried out in 1994-95 suggests that the rural poverty rate has fallen markedly. The cotton boom has almost certainly also reduced the income gap between the North and the South. Agricultural marketing is characterized by increasing volume and greater competition. Village leaders report larger volumes of trade at nearby agricultural markets, increased numbers of traders, and improved market facilities (number of shops and storage facilities). The GV survey confirms national trends on the growth of fertilizer use and cotton production. And farmers report that they sell more than they used to and that the number of crop buyers has increased. Furthermore, these improvements are reported by all income groups. The SONAPRA/GV system has been successful in providing input on credit to an estimated 165 thousand small-scale cotton farmers. This system has facilitated the impressive growth of Benin’s cotton sector. Improvements in the quality, quantity, and timing of delivery may be attributable to the partial privatization of input delivery. One key to the success of the system is the SONAPRA monopoly on cotton marketing which facilitates the recovery of input credit at harvest. 333
Furthermore, the system facilitates input use on other crops. As a result of being able to obtain inputs on credit, cotton farmers are much more likely to apply fertilizer to their maize and to use pesticides on their cowpeas. The survey suggests that 25 percent of the fertilizer passing through the SONAPRA/GV channel is used on crops other than cotton. Nonetheless, GV managers report a few key problems in the cotton system. Although many aspects of input delivery and cotton marketing were rated good and improving, three areas were cited frequently as problems: low quality or ineffectiveness of pesticides, late payment for cotton, and arbitrary or corrupt practices in weighing and grading cotton. The first two problems are getting worse, according to GV managers, and the last is improving but remains an issue. Extension services have deteriorated markedly in recent years. Only one farmer in five had any contact with an agent in the previous year. This may explain why farmers say that their main source of information on production methods is friends and family. Both GV managers and village leaders complain that the quality of extension services has declined. This does not appear to be the result of the Programme de Restructuration du Secteur Agricole (PRSA), but rather due to attrition, related to poor incentives for extension agents. There is a widespread impression that rural roads have deteriorated. Among both village leader and farmers, more respondents felt that roads in their area had deteriorated than said they had improved. Problems with road infrastructure will limit the supply response of farmers to improved incentives for agricultural production. Female-headed household do not seem disadvantaged. Female-headed households do have smaller farms, fewer household assets, and less frequent contact with extension agents. On the other hand, the survey indicates that they have the same poverty rate as male-headed households, they are more market-oriented, and they have similar access to modern inputs and credit. On the other hand, femaleheaded farmers were more likely to report a decline in welfare since 1992. The results should be treated with some caution, however, because of the relatively small number of female-headed households in the sample (5 percent or 39 households). The reforms have not discriminated against small, remote, or non-commercial farmers. Small farmers show the same level of satisfaction with changes in economic conditions as large farmers. The farmers with the highest approval of economic changes are those in Atacora, the most remote 334
- Page 290 and 291: Table 5.15 - Determinants of the de
- Page 292 and 293: Table 5.17 - Sources of fertilizer
- Page 294 and 295: Table 5.22 - Access and use of cred
- Page 296 and 297: Table 5.25 - Percent of households
- Page 298 and 299: Table 5.29 - Percent of households
- Page 300 and 301: Table 5.34 - Crop disposal by type
- Page 302 and 303: Table 5.38 - Determinants of Market
- Page 304 and 305: Table 5.42 - Summary of expenditure
- Page 306 and 307: Table 5.45 - Food consumption by so
- Page 308 and 309: Table 5.47 - Percent of households
- Page 310 and 311: Table 5.49 - Percent of households
- Page 312 and 313: Table 5.51 - Food consumption by ex
- Page 314 and 315: Table 5.56 - Determinants of per ca
- Page 316 and 317: Table 5.59 Percent of households ow
- Page 318 and 319: Table 5.62 - Characteristics of the
- Page 320 and 321: Table 5.68 - Determinants of percei
- Page 322 and 323: Table 5.71 - Average yields per cro
- Page 324 and 325: Table 5.77 - Changes in the availab
- Page 326 and 327: Figure 5.1 Distribution of househol
- Page 328 and 329: Figure 5.7 - Percentage of Househol
- Page 330 and 331: CHAPTER 6 - SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AN
- Page 332 and 333: Fertilizer Half of the far
- Page 334 and 335: Regression analysis indicates that
- Page 336 and 337: Among those seeing improvement, the
- Page 338 and 339: Agricultural markets Three quart
- Page 342 and 343: department. The farms with very lit
- Page 344 and 345: Strengthen the extension service by
- Page 346 and 347: The most time-consuming agricultura
- Page 348 and 349: Most common means of transport to t
- Page 350 and 351: Small farmers in Malawi are mainly
- Page 352 and 353: households have less assets and les
- Page 354 and 355: Place more serious efforts to impro
- Page 356 and 357: REFERENCES Ahoyo Adjovi, N.R. and F
Furthermore, the system facilitates input use on other crops. As a result of being able to<br />
obtain inputs on credit, cotton farmers are much more likely to apply fertilizer to their maize and to use<br />
pesticides on their cowpeas. The survey suggests that 25 percent of the fertilizer passing through the<br />
SONAPRA/GV channel is used on crops other than cotton.<br />
Nonetheless, GV managers report a few key problems in the cotton system. Although many<br />
aspects of input delivery and cotton marketing were rated good and improving, three areas were cited<br />
frequently as problems: low quality or ineffectiveness of pesticides, late payment for cotton, and arbitrary<br />
or corrupt practices in weighing and grading cotton. The first two problems are getting worse, according<br />
to GV managers, and the last is improving but remains an issue.<br />
Extension services have deteriorated markedly in recent years. <strong>On</strong>ly one farmer in five had<br />
any contact with an agent in the previous year. This may explain why farmers say that their main source<br />
of information on production methods is friends and family. Both GV managers and village leaders<br />
complain that the quality of extension services has declined. This does not appear to be the result of the<br />
Programme de Restructuration du Secteur Agricole (PRSA), but rather due to attrition, related to poor<br />
incentives for extension agents.<br />
There is a widespread impression that rural roads have deteriorated. Among both village<br />
leader and farmers, more respondents felt that roads in their area had deteriorated than said they had<br />
improved. Problems with road infrastructure will limit the supply response of farmers to improved<br />
incentives for agricultural production.<br />
Female-headed household do not seem disadvantaged. Female-headed households do have<br />
smaller farms, fewer household assets, and less frequent contact with extension agents. <strong>On</strong> the other<br />
hand, the survey indicates that they have the same poverty rate as male-headed households, they are more<br />
market-oriented, and they have similar access to modern inputs and credit. <strong>On</strong> the other hand, femaleheaded<br />
farmers were more likely to report a decline in welfare since 1992. The results should be treated<br />
with some caution, however, because of the relatively small number of female-headed households in the<br />
sample (5 percent or 39 households).<br />
The reforms have not discriminated against small, remote, or non-commercial farmers.<br />
Small farmers show the same level of satisfaction with changes in economic conditions as large farmers.<br />
The farmers with the highest approval of economic changes are those in Atacora, the most remote<br />
334
Change language