Organization and Performance of Cotton Sectors in Africa ... - infoDev

According to the focus group informants, average labor input per hectare ofcotton production is 40 percent higher in ESA than in WCA. 72 The main reasonis the greater penetration of animal traction technology within WCA, where itis used by nearly all farmers for land preparation and by many for weeding.Efforts are also being made to promote the use of labor-saving herbicides inWCA, whereas in ESA only the top two groups in Mozambique recorded anyuse of herbicides. 73 Thus, weeding is the single largest contributor to this laborusedifferential between the two regions.If one compares higher and lower producing groups, total labor input fallswith production level. Smaller producers require less labor for harvesting, tendto weed fewer times, and require less labor (if any at all) for fertilizer applicationand spraying. However, smaller producers (group 3 in Mozambique, Tanzania,and Zambia; all group 4s) often do not have access to animal traction,even for land preparation, so they may have to use hand hoes, which is muchmore labor intensive. Alternatively, they have to hire plowing services, whichraises their expenditure on hired services above that of larger producers (seeBurkina Faso group 3, for instance).Focus group discussions in Mali and Burkina Faso did not distinguishbetween family and hired labor input, so in table 10.1 all labor input in the WCAcountries is considered to be family labor. Although this conclusion may not beentirely true, average family sizes are much larger in WCA than in ESA, and it isunderstood that most labor tasks on WCA cotton farms are performed by familymembers. By contrast, the top producer groups in ESA rely heavily on hiredlabor, which accounts for more than 70 percent of total labor input for group 1in Mozambique, Tanzania, Zambia, and Zimbabwe (and also in Zambia group2). Smaller producers in ESA countries are more reliant on family labor.As discussed in chapter 6, given the high input costs associated with cottonproduction and the difficulties that African smallholder households have inaffording such inputs, one of the main strengths of coordinated cotton systemsis their ability to provide producers with access to input on credit. Participantsin focus group discussions in Burkina Faso and Mali insisted that all groupsuse the same quantity of fertilizers per hectare (ha). This response may havebeen influenced by the presence of the local extension officer at the discussions.Yet all cotton farmers are entitled to receive a similar quantity of fertilizers (perha of cotton cultivated) on credit, so fairly uniform usage is credible. By contrast,fertilizer use is highly skewed in Uganda and Zimbabwe, the only twocountries in ESA where any inorganic fertilizer is used on cotton. Despite a 50percent subsidy in Uganda, only group 1 farmers reported using fertilizers.According to participants in the focus group discussions, fertilizer use by thetop group in Zimbabwe is higher than in any other country, including WCA.However, in part as a result of nationwide fertilizer shortages in Zimbabwe in2005/06, fertilizer use by group 2 is much less than by group 1, while group 3is not considered creditworthy enough to receive credit for fertilizer—evenunder normal circumstances.YIELDS AND RETURNS TO FARMERS 127