Browsing by Author "Sinyolo, Sikhulumile."

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3

An assessment of the maize structure, channel choice and market participation by the smallholder maize farmers in Zimbabwe: a case of Mazowe district=Ukuhlolwa kwesakhiwo semakethe yommbila, ukukhethwa komgudu kanye nokubamba iqhaza emakethe ngabalimi abancane bommbila eZimbabwe: ucwaningo ngesifunda saseMazowe.
(2023) Munyati, Vincent Tinashe.; Mudhara, Maxwell.; Sinyolo, Sikhulumile.
Marketing plays a crucial role in alleviating poverty, as well as in achieving food security and sustainable development goals, especially among smallholder maize farmers. Maize marketing has the potential to improve the resilience of households against food insecurity, which is caused by multiple factors which may be natural factors, socio-economic and institutional factors. Smallholder maize farmers find it difficult to participate in the maize market because of a range of limitations, such as poor transport facilities, information asymmetry and the lack of a market infrastructure, which reduces their motivation to partake and which may be echoed in concealed expenses that make it challenging to enter the markets and productive resources. This study ascertained the factors that determine the likelihood and intensity of smallholder maize farmers participating in the maize markets, and it also assessed the market choices made by the smallholder farmers in the Mazowe District of Zimbabwe and analysed the maize marketing structure and its effects on the maize marketing performance. Questionnaires were used to collect data from 382 smallholder farmers and 27 agro-dealers in the Mazowe District. The study adopted a mixture of tools for data collection, including a questionnaire, observations and discussions. The Heckman Selection Model was used as the main analytical tool to estimate market participation and the intensity of this participation, while the Multinomial Logit Model was used to assess the market choices of the farmers and the Herfindalf-Hirschman Index and Gini coefficients were used to measure the concentration of maize traders in the Mazowe District. Due to the narrow index of the maize marketing options in the country, only three distinct alternatives were isolated, namely, the farm gate, the local market and the Grain Marketing Board (GMB), a government parastatal. The results indicated the significant factors that were associated with the likelihood and intensity of the farmers’ market participation, namely, the age of household head, the number of maize buyers at the district level, their extension contacts, membership of a marketing association and the distance to the output market. Contrary to the apriori expectations, the distance to the market had a positive and significant impact on their intensity to participate in the maize market. Other factors that significantly influenced the market choice selection of the smallholder farmers were the age of household head, the extension contacts, market information, the distance to the market and the price offered to maize producers at the market. The number of visits by extension workers significantly increased the likelihood that a maize producer would sell his produce at the local market, rather than at the farm gate. The distance to the market significantly influenced the probability of choosing the local market over the farm gate. As the distance to the local market increases, the smallholder farmers in the Mazowe District preferred the farm gate for selling their produce. In this study, the popular marketing channel for the smallholder farmers was the farm gate; although the prices offered here were often not competitive, the farmers opted for it because of the low transaction costs. The results also indicated that the number of buyers in the maize grain market is too small to make it competitive. The few traders exhibited collusive behaviour with regard to price-setting. The local market channel and G.M.B had a lower Shepherd Marketing Efficiency Index. While both indices were low, when they were compared to the standard in literature, the GMB channel was the least efficient. Most farmers indicated that selling their grain to the GMB involved bureaucracy and late payments, which have negatively affected the marketing efficiency. These late payments have short-circuited the ability of small-scale farmers to generate a cash-flow with which to fund their agriculture activities. The study recommends that there should be mechanisms for developing the capacity of farmers to access marketing information, in order for them to make an informed decision regarding which marketing channel to choose. Governments need to think about how to help smallholder maize farmers to engage better with the existing profitable market channels. Being a member of an association increases the probability of a farmer selling to more lucrative markets. Farmer groups have the advantage of bulking and hence increasing the economies of scale. There is need for farmers to invest more in collective action. It is also easier and cheaper for traders to enforce quality and grade requirements by reaching farmers groups, rather than individual farmers. Iqoqa Abalimi bommbila abancane bakuthola kunzima ukubamba iqhaza emakethe yommbila ngenxa yohlu lwemikhawulo, njengezindawo zokuthutha ezingezinhle, ulwazi olungaxhumani, kanye nokuntuleka kwengqalasizinda yemakethe, okunciphisa ugqozi lwabo lokuhlanganyela futhi okungase kuzwakaliswe ngezindleko ezifihliwe ezenza kube yinselela ukungena ezimakethe kanye nezinsiza ezikhiqizayo. Lolu cwaningo lwaqinisekisa izinto ezinquma amathuba nokujula kwabalimi bommbila abancane ababambe iqhaza ezimakethe zommbila, lwaphinde lwahlola ukhetho lwemakethe olwenziwe ngabalimi abancane eZimbabwe. IHeckman Selection Model yasetshenziswa njengethuluzi eliyinhloko lokuhlaziya ukulinganisa iqhaza lemakethe kanye nokujula kwalokhu kubamba iqhaza, kanti iMultinomial Logit Model yasetshenziselwa ukuhlola ukukhetha kwemakethe futhi iHerfindalf- Hirschman Index yasetshenziselwa ukulinganisa ukuhlanganiswa kommbila. Ngenxa yenkomba encane yezinketho zokumaketha ummbila, kwatholakala izindlela ezintathu kuphela ezihlukile, okungukuthi, isango lepulazi, imakethe yendawo kanye neBhodi Lokumaketha Okusanhlamvu. Imiphumela ikhombise izinto ezibalulekile ezihambisana namathuba nokujula kokubamba iqhaza kwemakethe yabalimi, okungukuthi, iminyaka yenhloko yasekhaya, inani labathengi bommbila ezingeni lesifunda, abaxhumana nabo ukwandisa, ubulungu benhlangano yokumaketha kanye nebanga eliya emakethe yokudayisa. Imiphumela ikhombise ukuthi inani labathengi emakethe yommbila lincane kakhulu ukuthi lingayenza ibe nokuncintisana. Ucwaningo luncoma ukuthi kufanele kube nezindlela zokuthuthukisa amandla abalimi okuthola ulwazi lokumaketha, ukuze benze isinqumo esinolwazi mayelana nokuthi yimuphi umgudu wokumaketha okufanele bawukhethe. Ukuba yilungu lenhlangano kwandisa amathuba okuthi umlimi athengisele izimakethe ezinenzuzo. Kunesidingo sokuthi abalimi batshale imali eningi esenzweni esihlangene. Kulula futhi kushibhile kubathengisi ukuphoqelela izidingo zekhwalithi nebanga ngokufinyelela emaqenjini abalimi, kunabalimi ngabanye.
The impact of smallholder irrigation and water security on household welfare : the case of Tugela Ferry irrigation scheme in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa.
(2013) Sinyolo, Sikhulumile.; Mudhara, Maxwell.; Wale, Edilegnaw Zegeye.
Smallholder irrigation has been promoted across the developing world as a means of poverty reduction and rural development. The potential of smallholder irrigated agriculture in alleviating rural poverty has led the South African government to prioritise and invest in irrigation establishment, rehabilitation and revitalisation. However, the extent to which smallholder irrigation has been able to reduce poverty in the rural areas of South Africa is not well understood. This study, therefore, aimed to contribute to smallholder irrigation literature in two ways. The first objective of this study was to conduct an in-depth impact evaluation of the Tugela Ferry smallholder irrigation scheme on household welfare using the treatment effect and propensity score matching (PSM) methods. Secondly, the study sought to investigate the determinants of household water security, and how the level of water security subsequently affects the farmers’ household welfare. A stratified random sampling technique was used to obtain a sample of 186 irrigators and 70 non-irrigators in the Tugela Ferry area. Descriptive analysis highlighted that although the demographic characteristics of the farmers were not significantly different, the irrigators were characterized by better welfare indicators compared to non-irrigators. The Foster Greer Thorbecke (FGT) poverty indices also indicated that poverty incidence was more pronounced among non-irrigators than among irrigators. The results from the econometric models indicated that irrigation access plays an important role in the welfare of rural households, with irrigators consuming about R2,000 per adult equivalent per year more than the non-irrigators. While irrigation access is important, this study concluded that the poverty reduction effectiveness of smallholder irrigation can further be enhanced by ensuring that the irrigators are water secure. Factors such as age, off-farm income, duration of scheme membership, occurrence of conflicts, method of pumping water, location in the scheme and access to agricultural training influenced household water security. The study recommends that investments in smallholder irrigation should continue for poverty reduction, and that priority should be in ensuring water security not just irrigation participation. The study also recommends the introduction of small motorised pumps among the gravity-reliant irrigators and farmer training on water conservation techniques to improve the farmers’ water security in the smallholder irrigation schemes. Although the study highlighted how perceptions of irrigators could be used to generate the water security index, the water security concept needs further investigation.
The impact of social grants on rural households' incentives to farm, market participation and farm entrepreneurship: evidence from KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa.
(2016) Sinyolo, Sikhulumile.; Mudhara, Maxwell.; Zegeye, Edilegnaw Wale.
While there is general consensus on the need to reduce poverty and food insecurity in Africa, considerable debate exists on the effectiveness of transfers, such as social grants, in attaining these goals. The concern is that transfers may affect people’s social and economic behaviour negatively and entrench a culture of dependency and entitlement. This concern is echoed by policy-makers and academics in South Africa, where more than 16 million poor people were social grants beneficiaries in 2014. Even though a wide range of literature has explored many dimensions of the impact of social grants, limited in-depth research has explored the potential linkages between social grants and smallholder farming in South Africa. This is despite the importance of these two interventions, especially in the rural areas where poverty and household food insecurity are concentrated. The objective of the study was to investigate the impact of social grants on: incentives to farm, chemical fertiliser adoption, market participation and farm entrepreneurship in the rural areas of the KwaZulu-Natal (KZN) province. Using a sample of 984 households randomly selected across four districts of the province, different econometric techniques (such as the logit transformation technique, Papke and Wooldridge model, propensity score matching, generalised propensity score method, double-hurdle model and the Bartlett factor score regression) were utilised to analyse the data. The social grants variable was captured in two ways: as a dummy showing whether a household has access to social grants and as a continuous variable indicating the level of household dependency on social grants. The study results indicated that social grants have a wide coverage, benefiting most of the rural households that were interviewed. The study indicated high levels of unemployment among the household members in the rural areas in KZN, implying shortage of economic opportunities in these areas. While this underscores the importance of smallholder farming as a livelihood option, the results indicated low areas of land under cultivation, reduced participation by unemployed household members in smallholder farming activities and low levels of farm entrepreneurship. The question answered in this study pertains to whether these outcomes are a result of the households’ access to, or dependency on, social grants. The study results revealed that the disincentive effects of social grants are not just about access, but about the level of dependency on them. This implies that there is value in introducing the dummy and the continuous variable, as the influence of the two variables varied for some of vi the different outcomes studied. The findings of the study were largely consistent with the disincentive hypothesis, indicating that access to social grants and the level of dependency on them generally had negative effects on individuals’ incentives to take part in smallholder farming activities. However, this result did not apply on all the outcome variables. The econometric results indicated that access to, and level of dependency on, social grants did not influence, either positively or negatively, the proportion of land under cultivation. This result, which was robust across several econometric techniques, suggests that the declining land under cultivation among rural households is not due to social grants. Instead the study identified several other constraints that policy-makers should focus on to improve the proportion of cultivated land area in the rural areas. In terms of the impact of social grants on household members’ participation in farming activities, the results were in line with the disincentive hypothesis. The results indicated that both access to, and increasing levels of dependency on, social grants led to a significant reduction in the number of the household members that participate in smallholder farming activities. The implication of this result is that, although social grants are targeted to the vulnerable household members, they also reach the unintended household members, creating disincentive effects. The increase in household income due to access to social grants increases the reservation wage of the household members and lowers their motivation to participate in farming activities. The increase in the reservation wage means that household members would require smallholder farming to be more remunerative than currently for them to participate in it. The study identified other variables that affect participation in smallholder farming by household members, highlighting the importance of expectations of farming success as a key motivator. Access to, and level of dependency on, social grants were found to have mixed impacts on chemical fertiliser adoption. While the results indicated that access to social grants was associated with higher levels of chemical fertiliser use, increasing levels of dependency on social grants was associated with decreasing intensity of chemical fertiliser use. This implies that, although social grants may relax the financial constraints facing rural farmers amidst imperfect credit markets, high levels of dependency on social grants results in disincentives to invest in farms. In order to promote self-sufficiency and independence among the rural poor, the study highlights the need to find strategies such as introducing subsidies and focussed training, to encourage rural households to invest part of their social grants in smallholder farming activities. In terms of commercialisation incentives, the results found that higher social grant-dependency was associated with decreased probability of market participation. This suggests that the households who depend more on social grants are more likely to be subsistence-oriented as they rely on social grants for income. After the decision to enter the market is made, households with access to social grants sold lower maize volumes compared to those with no access to social grants. The study concluded that social grants had negative effects on the incentives of rural households to commercialise their farming activities. This has negative implications on the government’s drive to increase commercialisation levels of smallholder farmers by helping them graduate from subsistence farming. The results identified a number of factors that significantly influenced household market participation, highlighting the importance of institutional support (e.g., extension, training and information) in reducing transaction costs and increasing market participation. The study results imply that policies aimed at reducing both fixed and variable transaction costs (such as improved road infrastructure and institutional support such as extension, training and organising farmers into groups) should be prioritised to increase both rates and levels of smallholder participation in the maize markets. The study results indicated that the high levels of dependency on social grants inhibit farm entrepreneurship development. This implies that social grants, especially in households where they are more important, have created disincentives that have hindered the entrepreneurial attitudes of rural households. Given that the entrepreneurial competencies can be learned and changed, the study identified the policy variables to enhance farm entrepreneurship. The study recommends that government should prioritise the provision of support services such as training, extension and credit support, in order to establish entrepreneurial rural households. A greater emphasis should be on identifying the gaps in the farmers’ entrepreneurship skills set and then training the farmers according to their needs. To sum up, the study found that rural households who depended more on social grants had fewer of their members participating in smallholder farming; used less chemical fertiliser; were less entrepreneurial and less likely to be market-oriented. Although access to social grants had a positive effect on the level of chemical fertiliser use, it had negative effects on the proportion of household members that engage in smallholder farming activities and market participation levels. The findings imply that social grants are spilling over to unintended household viii members, creating a dependency syndrome among recipient households. Since social grants are important in addressing extreme poverty, the study recommends that their provision should continue, but policy-makers should be particularly cognisant of their possible unintended and adverse consequences on smallholder farming. The study recommends that policy-makers should synchronise the objectives of social grants and smallholder farming so that the disincentive effects are reduced. The study presents policy options to address both the social grants side as well as the smallholder farming side, arguing that dealing with the social grants alone is not enough to ensure the viability and success of smallholder farming. Policy options include increasing smallholders’ assets in order to grow their risk-bearing capacity, addressing imperfections in the rural credit markets, improving the expected profitability of smallholder farming as well as introducing focussed training to motivate rural households to invest part of their social grants in smallholder farming activities.