23.01.2014 Views

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 ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Finally, if we divided the farm households into those that grow cotton and those that do not, we see<br />

sharp differences in the purchasing patterns. Among cotton growers (35 percent of all Bénin<br />

farmers), 98 percent of the fertilizer is obtained from SONAPRA through a GV and 97 percent is<br />

purchased on credit. <strong>In</strong> contrast, among non-cotton growers, 80 percent is purchased on a cash<br />

basis and the suppliers of fertilizer are much more varied, including CARDER (44 percent), traders<br />

(22 percent), GV/SONAPRA (21 percent), and other farmers (12 percent). Similarly, among the 20<br />

percent of non-cotton growers that were able to buy fertilizer on credit, the sources of credit were<br />

varied, including the USPP/GVs, other formal financial institutions, and informal lenders (see<br />

Table 4.1.64). It may be surprising that non-cotton growers are buying fertilizer from GVs and<br />

even purchasing on credit. It should be recalled, however, that the percentage of households<br />

reporting GV membership (42 percent) is higher than the percentage growing cotton (35 percent).<br />

Changes in the availability of fertilizer Respondents were asked whether the availability<br />

of fertilizer was better or worse than it had been in 1992. Overall, the proportion of households<br />

reporting better availability (21 percent) was approximately equal to the proportion saying that<br />

fertilizer was less available (20 percent). The response was generally positive in Borgou, Atacora,<br />

Zou, and Mono and negative in Atlantique and Ouémé (see Table 4.1.65). This may reflect the<br />

difference between farmers in the cotton zone and those outside it. Fertilizer prices doubled<br />

following the 1994 devaluation of the CFA franc, but for cotton growers the higher price of cotton<br />

more than offset this increase. <strong>In</strong> addition, the reduction in fertilizer subsidies in Nigeria probably<br />

affected the availability of fertilizer in neighboring Ouémé.<br />

Although male-headed households were neutral on the change in fertilizer availability, femaleheaded<br />

households were more likely to report improvement (33 percent) than deterioration (7<br />

percent) (see Table 4.1.66). The reasons for this difference hard difficult to determine, but these<br />

results do not support the common belief that female-headed households are more adversely<br />

affected by reforms.<br />

Poor households are no more and no less likely to report improved availability of fertilizer than<br />

richer households. <strong>In</strong> other words, there is no link between the household’s expenditure category<br />

and its view of the changes in fertilizer availability since 1992 (see Table 4.1.67).<br />

Changes in fertilizer use Aggregate statistics indicate that national fertilizer use has<br />

increased dramatically over the past decade, but they do not tell us which households and which<br />

60

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!