IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/midiwp/270988.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Do Farmers Value Seeds of Different Quality Differently? Evidence from Willingness to Pay Experiments in Tanzania and Ghana

Author

Listed:
  • Maredia, Mywish K.
  • Shupp, Robert
  • Opoku, Edward
  • Mishili, Fulgence
  • Reyes, Bryon
  • Kusolwa, Paul
  • Kusi, Francis
  • Kudra, Abdul

Abstract

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Low effective demand is often cited as a major reason for the lack of private-sector involvement in the seed system for legume crops in developing countries. The viability of these seed systems depends on whether farmers perceive the seed product as a quality planting material, and whether they are willing to pay a premium for the seed relative to grain. To evaluate these issues, double blind field experiments and experimental auctions were conducted with more than 500 bean and cowpea farmers in northern Tanzania and northern Ghana. The experiments were designed to gauge the relative demand for three types of seed products: certified, quality declared (QDS), and recycled (i.e., grain saved from previous harvest). These three types of seeds differ in seed input (i.e., which generation of seed is used to produce them), the level of regulatory supervision they receive during production, and the technical conditions under which they are produced. Whether the production cost differential across these types of seeds makes them qualitatively different products as reflected in their perceived or actual performance of the plant, and whether that translates into sufficient price premiums paid by farmers for these better quality seeds are the research questions addressed by this study. Overall, the results of the field experiments indicate that, all else equal (i.e., the variety and management practices), plots planted with certified seed performed better on measures of objective indicators (i.e., yield, seed quality, and agronomic traits). However, the actual yield difference between the different bean plots in Tanzania was much smaller than the yield differential observed for the cowpea plots in Ghana. Irrespective of the magnitude of the yield differences (or yield deterioration observed over each generation of seed production), an important implication of this finding is that to increase productivity, it is not sufficient to promote only the adoption of improved varieties, but it is likely also necessary to promote the use of higher quality seed as an input. In both countries, plots planted with certified seeds were perceived, based on the observations of plots at the flowering and harvest stages, to be of the best quality by a majority of farmers. All else equal, farmers were willing to pay a premium for the higher quality seeds. The relative difference in farmers’ willingness-to-pay (WTP) for different seed types was highly correlated with the relative difference in their perceived quality. This willingness to pay a premium for quality legume seed by smallholder farmers is encouraging and indicative of the existence of an effective demand for self-pollinated crop seeds (as opposed to recycled grain) like beans and cowpeas. While a significant portion of farmers in the study (35-40%) were willing to pay a large enough premium to cover the higher production costs of certified seed, across both crop/country case studies, we found the rest of the legume growing farmers’ willingness to pay premium for quality seed was below the current local price of certified seed. Indeed, for a sub-set of these farmers in Tanzania (25%), the willingness to pay for quality seed was even lower than the local grain price. The implication of these findings is that there is no one-sizefits-all strategy to meet the seed needs of all the farmers. Current efforts to encourage the private sector to produce and supply certified seeds through agro-dealers can potentially meet the seed needs of at most 35-40% of farmers (if the quality of those seeds is substantially superior to recycled grain, and the seed is of a preferred variety). Clearly, more research and discussion is needed to assess the seed needs of the remaining (majority) farmers whose WTP for quality seed appears to be less than the current market price of certified seed. One avenue of research is to investigate mechanisms to lower the cost of producing quality seed, without reducing the incentives for seed producers, so that quality seed can be provided at prices closer to that of grain. While cost-reducing strategies through policy, programmatic and technological options should remain a high priority for governments and donor-supported programs such as the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA), this study also indicates the need for continued support for innovative and smart subsidy-based approaches to meet the needs of the 15-20% of farmers whose WTP for seed is so low that for-profit seed production/marketing models will not work. In drawing this implication, we have not taken in to consideration the varietal preferences of farmers and how their absolute WTP for quality seed might be influenced by the type of variety, which was held constant in the experiments. More research is needed to understand farmers’ varietal preferences and their demand for seed that embodies both their preferred traits and quality. Across the two countries, results indicate that seed quality matters, and that on average certified seeds consistently outperformed both the QDS and recycled seeds. In Ghana, on average the QDS outperformed the recycled seed, but in Tanzania the QDS and recycled seed performed similarly. Community based QDS production and sale is often promoted as a lowcost option for increasing farmers’ access to quality seed within a community. However, if the lower cost also comes with lower quality, then the sustainability of QDS seed systems is questionable since farmers may not be willing to pay the price premium required. That said, this study also illustrates that when the advantages of planting better quality seed in place of recycled seed can be demonstrated, a significant portion of farmers appear to be willing to pay more, indicating that private sector seed systems can be viable.

Suggested Citation

  • Maredia, Mywish K. & Shupp, Robert & Opoku, Edward & Mishili, Fulgence & Reyes, Bryon & Kusolwa, Paul & Kusi, Francis & Kudra, Abdul, 2018. "Do Farmers Value Seeds of Different Quality Differently? Evidence from Willingness to Pay Experiments in Tanzania and Ghana," Food Security International Development Working Papers 270988, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:midiwp:270988
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/270988/files/idwp158.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/270988/files/idwp158.pdf?subformat=pdfa
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Frode Alfnes, 2009. "Valuing product attributes in Vickrey auctions when market substitutes are available," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 36(2), pages 133-149, June.
    2. Shawn McGuire & Louise Sperling, 2016. "Seed systems smallholder farmers use," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 8(1), pages 179-195, February.
    3. Wiggins, Steve & Cromwell, Elizabeth, 1995. "NGOs and seed provision to smallholders in developing countries," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 413-422, March.
    4. Shawn McGuire & Louise Sperling, 2016. "Seed systems smallholder farmers use," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 8(1), pages 179-195, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Agricultural and Food Policy; Food Security and Poverty; International Development;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:midiwp:270988. 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). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/damsuus.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.