Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Determinants of Common Bean Productivity and Efficiency: A Case of Smallholder Farmers in Eastern Uganda

Contents:

Author Info

  • Sibiko, Kenneth Waluse
Registered author(s):

    Abstract

    Agriculture sustains the livelihoods of about 70.8% of Ugandans, while common bean has emerged to be an important cash crop as well as a staple food for the majority of farmers and consumers. Although Uganda’s bean output has more than doubled, average bean yields in the country have been between 0.6 and 0.8 Mt Ha-1, even though yields higher than 1.5 Mt Ha-1 can be realized with improved varieties. Thusthe objective of this study was to determine the factors influencing common beanproductivityand efficiency among smallholder farmers in Eastern Uganda.The study was conducted in Busia, Mbale, Budaka and Tororo districts in Eastern Uganda based on a sample of 280 householdsselected using a multi-stage sampling technique. For the data collection, a personally administered structured questionnaire was used to conduct interviews, with a focus on household heads. In the analyses, descriptive statistics, a stochastic frontier modeland a two-limit Tobit regression model were employed. It was established that bean productivity was positively influenced by plot size, ordinary seeds, certified seeds and planting fertilizers. The mean technical efficiency among bean farms was 48.2%, mean economic efficiency was 59.94% and mean allocative efficiency was 29.37%. Finally, Tobit model estimation revealed that technical efficiency was positively influenced by value of assets at 1% level and extension service and group membership at 5% level; while age and distance to the factor market negatively influenced technical efficiency at 10% and 5% levels respectively. Economic efficiency was positively influenced by value of assets at 1% level and off-farm income and credit at 5% level. However, farmers’ primary occupation negativelyinfluenced economic efficiency at 5% level. Allocative efficiency was positively influenced by value of assets at 1% level and farm size and off-farm income at 10% level; while distance to the factor market negatively influenced allocative efficiency at 5% level.Hence the study recommended on the need for increased provision of extension service and training on correct input application and improved farming technologies to increase bean productivity. It also suggested on the need for policy to discourage land fragmentation, develop road and market infrastructure in rural areas and provide affordable and easily available credit facilities to improve production efficiency of bean farms.

    Download Info

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
    File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/134500
    Download Restriction: no

    Bibliographic Info

    Paper provided by Collaborative Masters Program in Agricultural and Applied Economics in its series Research Theses with number 134500.

    as in new window
    Length:
    Date of creation: Mar 2012
    Date of revision:
    Handle: RePEc:ags:cmpart:134500

    Contact details of provider:
    Web page: http://www.agriculturaleconomics.net

    Related research

    Keywords: Crop Production/Industries; Farm Management;

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    References

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
    as in new window
    1. Daniel Solís & Boris E. Bravo-Ureta & Ricardo E. Quiroga, 2007. "Soil conservation and technical efficiency among hillside farmers in Central America: a switching regression model ," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 51(4), pages 491-510, December.
    2. Battese, George E., 1992. "Frontier production functions and technical efficiency: a survey of empirical applications in agricultural economics," Agricultural Economics: The Journal of the International Association of Agricultural Economists, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 7(3-4), October.
    3. Joachim Binam & Kalilou Sylla & Ibrahim Diarra & Gwendoline Nyambi, 2003. "Factors Affecting Technical Efficiency among Coffee Farmers in Côte d’Ivoire: Evidence from the Centre West Region," African Development Review, African Development Bank, vol. 15(1), pages 66-76.
    4. Soniia David & Louise Sperling, 1999. "Improving technology delivery mechanisms: Lessons from bean seed systems research in eastern and central Africa," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer, vol. 16(4), pages 381-388, December.
    5. Shujie Yao & Zinan Liu, 1998. "Determinants of Grain Production and Technical Efficiency in China," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(2), pages 171-184.
    6. Battese, George E., 1992. "Frontier production functions and technical efficiency: a survey of empirical applications in agricultural economics," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 7(3-4), pages 185-208, October.
    7. André Croppenstedt, 2005. "Measuring Technical Efficiency of Wheat Farmers in Egypt," Working Papers 05-06, Agricultural and Development Economics Division of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO - ESA).
    8. Taylor, Timothy G. & Scott Shonkwiler, J., 1986. "Alternative stochastic specifications of the frontier production function in the analysis of agricultural credit programs and technical efficiency," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 149-160, April.
    9. Solis, Daniel & Bravo-Ureta, Boris E. & Quiroga, Ricardo E., 2007. "Soil conservation and technical efficiency among hillside farmers in Central America: a switching regression model," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 51(4), December.
    10. Charnes, A. & Cooper, W. W. & Rhodes, E., 1978. "Measuring the efficiency of decision making units," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 2(6), pages 429-444, November.
    11. Jonna P. ESTUDILLO & Keijiro OTSUKA, 2006. "Lessons From Three Decades Of Green Revolution In The Philippines," The Developing Economies, Institute of Developing Economies, vol. 44(2), pages 123-148.
    12. Nyagaka, Daniel & Obare, Gideon A. & Nguyo, Wilson, 2009. "Economic Efficiency of Smallholder Irish Potato Producers in Kenya: A Case of Nyandarua North District," 2009 Conference, August 16-22, 2009, Beijing, China 49917, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    13. Ross, Kara L. & Dalton, Timothy J. & Featherstone, Allen M., 2009. "A Nonparametric Efficiency Analysis of Bean Producers from North and South Kivu," 2009 Annual Meeting, January 31-February 3, 2009, Atlanta, Georgia 46575, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    14. Tijani, A.A., 2006. "Analysis of the technical efficiency of rice farms in Ijesha Land of Osun State, Nigeria," Agrekon, Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA), vol. 45(2), June.
    15. Adesina, Akinwumi A. & Djato, Kouakou K., 1997. "Relative efficiency of women as farm managers: Profit function analysis in Cote d'Ivoire," Agricultural Economics: The Journal of the International Association of Agricultural Economists, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 16(1), March.
    16. Quisumbing, Agnes R., 1996. "Male-female differences in agricultural productivity: Methodological issues and empirical evidence," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 24(10), pages 1579-1595, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Lists

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:cmpart:134500. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search).

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.