IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/cmpart/117798.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Factors Influencing Hulling Of Coffee Among Farmers In Masaka District, Uganda

Author

Listed:
  • Mathias, Wakulira

Abstract

For many years, coffee has been a major source of income to many Ugandans. Traditionally, Uganda coffee farmers have sold their coffee in unhulled form as dried cherries (Kiboko) through governmental parastatals. Structural changes in the agricultural sector arising from policy reforms that Uganda embraced since 1990 (notably liberalisation, privatisation and decentralization) removed the monopoly of governmental parastatals in agricultural marketing and pricing which was a disincentive to improvement of quality and quantity of output. Because of liberalisation, coffee quality and exports declined as the traders were more concerned about quantity rather than quality, which led to low prices and consequently low farm incomes. In response to this, value addition through hulling prior to marketing by farmers was suggested as one of the remedies. However, the rate of adoption of this strategy remains disappointingly low. The purpose of this study is to determine the factors underlying the adoption of coffee hulling by farmers, and to estimate the price elasticities for hulled and unhulled coffee sold. 300 farmers were randomly selected and interviewed using a structured questionnaire. Descriptive statistics were used to characterize and highlight differences between farmers who sell hulled and unhulled coffee. The censored Tobit model was used to analyse the factors that influence the sale of hulled coffee. Two OLS models for the marketed supply of unhulled and hulled coffee were estimated and their corresponding elasticities determined. The results indicate that higher market prices of hulled coffee positively and significantly (p<0.01) enhance the proportion of hulled coffee sold, while distance from the farmer’s home to the coffee processing factory and drought conditions during the season significantly (p<0.05) reduce the proportion of hulled coffee sold. Membership in farmer associations has a positive and significant influence on the amount of hulled coffee sold because it enables farmers to transport and sell together thereby reducing the transaction costs borne by each farmer. The sale of hulled coffee was found to be more price responsive than the sale of unhulled coffee both in the short and long run. Based on these findings the study recommends supporting the development of farmer institutions as a way of promoting the uptake of coffee hulling and value addition to improve farmers’ incomes. In addition, the bulking of coffee among farmers should be encouraged and accompanied by provision of market information to farmers for both hulled and unhulled coffee to help them to make informed decisions on where and what form of coffee to sell. There is also a need to invest in improving farmers’ access to processing facilities, since long distance to such facilities is shown to have a negative effect on the sale of hulled coffee.

Suggested Citation

  • Mathias, Wakulira, 2009. "Factors Influencing Hulling Of Coffee Among Farmers In Masaka District, Uganda," Research Theses 117798, Collaborative Masters Program in Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:cmpart:117798
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.117798
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/117798/files/Mathias%20Walulira%20Thesis.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.117798?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kidane, A., 1999. "Real Exchange Rate Price and Agricultural Supply Response in Ethiopia: The Case of Perennial Crops," Papers 99, African Economic Research Consortium.
    2. Evers, Barbara & Walters, Bernard, 2000. "Extra-Household Factors and Women Farmers' Supply Response in Sub-Saharan Africa," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 28(7), pages 1341-1345, July.
    3. Asmerom Kidane, 1999. "Real exchange rate price and agricultural supply response in Ethiopia: The case of perennial crops," Working Papers 99, African Economic Research Consortium, Research Department.
    4. Rao, J. Mohan, 1989. "Agricultural supply response: A survey," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 3(1), pages 1-22, March.
    5. Minot, Nicholas, 1999. "Effects of transaction costs on supply response and marketed surplus," MTID discussion papers 36, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    6. Adesina, Akinwumi A. & Baidu-Forson, Jojo, 1995. "Farmers' perceptions and adoption of new agricultural technology: evidence from analysis in Burkina Faso and Guinea, West Africa," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 13(1), pages 1-9, October.
    7. Abrar Suleiman, 2004. "Smallholder Supply Response and Gender in Ethiopia: A Profit Function Analysis," Working Papers 2004007, The University of Sheffield, Department of Economics, revised Aug 2004.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Salah M. Elawad & Elrashied E. Elkhiedir & Mahmoud A. Amassaib & Ahmed M. El Naim, 2017. "Government Policies and Food Security in Sudan (1970-2007): Incentives, Efficiencies and Comparative Advantage for Sorghum Producing in Mechanised Rain-fed Subsector," Academic Journal of Life Sciences, Academic Research Publishing Group, vol. 3(3), pages 12-17, 03-2017.
    2. nnamdi, Kelechi & ifionu, Ebele, 2013. "Exchange rate volatility and exchange rate uncertainty in Nigeria: a financial econometric analysis (1970- 2012)," MPRA Paper 48316, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2013.
    3. Firdu Gemech & John Struthers, 2007. "Coffee price volatility in Ethiopia: effects of market reform programmes," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(8), pages 1131-1142.
    4. Abule Mehare & Abdi K. Edriss, 2013. "Evaluation of the Effect of Exchange Rate Variability on the Export of Ethiopia’s Agricultural Product: A Case of Coffee," Margin: The Journal of Applied Economic Research, National Council of Applied Economic Research, vol. 7(2), pages 171-183, May.
    5. Rao, Nitya, 2017. "Assets, Agency and Legitimacy: Towards a Relational Understanding of Gender Equality Policy and Practice," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 43-54.
    6. Evan J. Miller-Tait & Sandeep Mohapatra & M. K. (Marty) Luckert & Brent M. Swallow, 2019. "Processing technologies for undervalued grains in rural India: on target to help the poor?," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 11(1), pages 151-166, February.
    7. Ghadir Asadi & Mohammad H. Mostafavi-Dehzooei, 2022. "The Role of Learning in Adaptation to Technology: The Case of Groundwater Extraction," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-37, June.
    8. Ridier, Aude & Roussy, Caroline & Chaib, Karim, 2021. "Adoption of crop diversification by specialized grain farmers in south-western France: evidence from a choice-modelling experiment," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), vol. 102(1), April.
    9. Nehring, Richard F., 1991. "Output and Input Subsidy Policy Options in Bangladesh," Journal of Agricultural Economics Research, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, vol. 43(2), pages 1-13.
    10. Nicholas Minot & Lisa Daniels, 2005. "Impact of global cotton markets on rural poverty in Benin," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 33(s3), pages 453-466, November.
    11. Avila-Santamaria, Jorge J. & Useche, Maria P., 2016. "Urea Subsidies and the Decision to Allocate Land to a New Fertilizing Technology: Ex-ante Analysis in Ecuador," 2016 Annual Meeting, February 6-9, 2016, San Antonio, Texas 229851, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    12. Marina Della-Giusta & Christine Phillips, 2006. "Women entrepreneurs in the Gambia: challenges and opportunities," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(8), pages 1051-1064.
    13. Martey, Edward & Wiredu, Alexander Nimo & Etwire, Prince M. & Fosu, Mathias & Buah, S. S. J. & Bidzakin, John & Ahiabor, Benjamin D. K. & Kusi, Francis, 2014. "Fertilizer Adoption and Use Intensity Among Smallholder Farmers in Northern Ghana: A Case Study of the AGRA Soil Health Project," Sustainable Agriculture Research, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 3(1).
    14. Caroline Roussy & Aude Ridier & Karim Chaïb, 2014. "Adoption d’innovations par les agriculteurs : rôle des perceptions et des préférences," Post-Print hal-01123427, HAL.
    15. Bizimana, C & Nieuwoudt, WL & Ferrer, SRD, 2002. "Factors Influencing Adoption Of Recommended Farm Practices By Coffee Farmers In Butare, Southern Rwanda," Agrekon, Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA), vol. 41(3).
    16. Vavra, Pavel & Colman, David, 2003. "The analysis of UK crop allocation at the farm level: implications for supply response analysis," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 76(2), pages 697-713, May.
    17. Christophe Gouel, 2013. "Rules versus Discretion in Food Storage Policies," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 95(4), pages 1029-1044.
    18. Shaosheng Jin & Bashiru Mansaray & Xin Jin & Haoyang Li, 2020. "Farmers’ preferences for attributes of rice varieties in Sierra Leone," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 12(5), pages 1185-1197, October.
    19. Lay, Jann & Golan, Jennifer, 2009. "The Impact of Agricultural Market Liberalisation from a Gender Perspective: Evidence from Uganda," Open Access Publications from Kiel Institute for the World Economy 39944, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    20. Liang, Yan & Miller, J. Corey & Harri, Ardian & Coble, Keith H., 2011. "Crop Supply Response under Risk: Impacts of Emerging Issues on Southeastern U.S. Agriculture," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 43(2), pages 1-14, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Crop Production/Industries;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:cmpart:117798. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.agriculturaleconomics.net .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.