crop production in ethiopia: a spatial–structural analysis

Crop Production in Ethiopia:A Spatial–Structural Analysis

Jordan Chamberlin and Alemayehu Seyoum Taffesse

International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI)

ESSP-II/EDRI Seminar16 March 2009

Addis Ababa,

Introduction

Motivation

• Enhancing food security a policy priority;

• Increasing productivity a key ingredient towards food security;

Vital to assess where agricultural production is.

Objectives

• Current: To summarise the structure and dynamics of food crop production inEthiopia over the last decade;

• Ongoing: To understand the determinants of the agricultural productivity and itsgrowth.

Outline

Approaches and Data

Current State - the state of crop production, circa 2008

• What is produced; Where is it produced; How is it produced

• Dynamics - pattern and sources of growth

• Some closing observations

Approaches and Data

Approach – Decomposition

• What are the relative contributions of acreage expansion and yield increase?• Do changes in crop prices matter a great deal?• Does crop diversification/specialisation contribute much to output growth?

Output decomposition

Revenue decomposition

i i i i idQ Ady ydA

1 1 1 1

n n n n

i i i i i i i i i i i ii i i i

dR a y p dA A a ydp A a pdy A y pda

Approaches and Data

Geographic disaggregation• Heterogeneity of production and marketing contexts

Domains

• Capture initial conditions

• Capture potential for growth

+

+ =

Low-access High-access

Low-pop-

density

growth led by

area-expansion(mixed growth)

High-pop-

density(little growth)

growth led by

yield-increases

Zonal level analysis

Simplified domain framework

Approaches and Data

Data

Dataset compiled from cereal production and price data at the zonallevel collected by the Central Statistics Agency (CSA)’s AgriculturalSample Surveys - 1996/97-2007/08 (1989-2000 E.C.).

Caveats

• Cereals – acreage, output, food expenditure, calorie intake;

• Forty zones of the four regions – Amhara, Oromiya, SNNP, and Tigray.(dominant in the production of temporary crops);

• Meher season.

Current State

Crop

Average (2004/2005 – 2007/08 )

Number of holders

Area Cultivated in hectares Production in quintals

Level

Share in total area cultivated Level

Share in total production

(%) (%)

Grain 11,519,148 10,382,365 92.7 140,902,733 79.8

Cereals 11,156,837 8,230,211 73.4 120,629,724 68.3

Teff 5,462,782 2,337,850 20.9 24,079,480 13.6

Barley 3,842,462 1,024,390 9.1 13,264,217 7.5

Wheat 4,118,164 1,439,098 12.8 22,933,077 13

Maize 7,287,931 1,595,238 14.2 33,142,865 18.8

Sorghum 4,253,534 1,429,886 12.8 22,161,808 12.5

Pulses 6,377,027 1,384,499 12.4 14,955,466 8.5

Oilseeds 3,127,131 767,655 6.9 5,317,543 3

Vegetables 4,936,741 106,585 1 4,248,252 2.4

Root crops 4,757,733 174,826 1.6 14,732,919 8.3

Fruit crops 2,658,415 51,078 0.5 4,034,590 2.3

Others (Chat, Coffee) 2,068,262 471,278 4.2 3,634,091 2.0

Current State

Note: Cereal yield is calculated as acreage-share weighted average of the yieldsof the five major cereals listed in the table – they account for more than 95 percentof cereal acreage and cereal output.

Average Annual growth rate - 2004/05-2007/08 (1997-2000 E.C.) (%) Yield (quintals

per hectare) Crop

Production (quintals)

Area Cultivated (hectares)

Yield (quintals per hectare)

Grain 11.8 3.9

Cereals 12.2 4.8 6.2 14.0

Teff 15.9 6.7 7.7 10.2

Barley 0.7 -3.4 4.5 13.0

Wheat 2.1 0.6 1.5 15.9

Maize 18.9 9 7.8 20.6

Sorghum 18.3 7.4 8.9 15.4

Cereal production 2007/08

BARLEY MAIZE

TEFF WHEAT

SORGHUM

1000 - 100, 000100, 000 - 250, 000250, 000 - 500, 000500, 000 - 1, 000, 000> 1, 000, 000

Quintals

Cereal area 2007/08

BARLEY MAIZE

TEFF WHEAT

SORGHUM

100 - 50005000 - 1000010000 - 5000050000 - 100000100000 - 500000

Hectares

Cereal yields 2007/08

BARLEY MAIZE

TEFF WHEAT

SORGHUM

0 - 55 - 1010 - 1515 - 2020 - 30

Quintals/hectare

Current State

How?

Crop

Fertiliser Applied

areaFertiliser application Share of crop area (%)

(share in total area

cultivated -%)

(total quintals/

total hectares)

(quintals per hectare of fertilizer

applied area)

Improved seed

applied crop area

Pesticide applied

crop area

Irrigated crop area

Extension package covered

crop area

2007/08 2007/08 2007/08 2007/08 2007/08 2007/08 2007/08

Cereals 39.0 0.45 1.16 4.7 20.8 1.1 14.5

Teff 54.3 0.52 0.95 0.7 30.5 0.7 13.8

Barley 30.5 0.30 0.99 0.6 20.7 1.2 11.0

Wheat 62.1 0.85 1.36 2.9 43.6 0.5 21.9

Maize 32.8 0.54 1.63 19.5 2.9 2.2 21.3

Sorghum 3.1 0.03 1.05 0.1 5.4 1.2 1.4

Current State

How – cont’d

Average age of holder (years)

Proportion of male holders

(%)

Median education level of holder

(years of schooling)

Mean household size (number of members)

41.5 80.9 1.1 5.2

Fertilizer use: 2006/07

BARLEY MAIZEBARLEY MAIZE

TEFF WHEAT

SORGHUM

PERCENTAGE OF HOLDERS USING FERTILIZER

0 - 20%20 - 40%40 - 60%60 - 80%80 - 100%

Growth in cereal production

Summary – substantial growth over the last decade, the bulk of it in the second half

Year Crop

Production Area Cultivated Yield

Level (quintals)Growth rate (%)

(1997/98-2007/08)

Level (hectares)

Growth rate (%)

Level (quintals/hectare)

Growth rate (%)

(1997/98-2007/08)

19

97

-19

98

Barley 7,863,950 681,950 11.5

Maize 19,288,510 1,100,610 17.5

Sorghum 10,697,400 954,740 11.2Teff 13,073,480 1,747,190 7.5Wheat 11,067,850 787,720 14.1

Sum 61,991,190 5,272,210

20

07

-20

08

Barley 13,548,071 72.3 984,943 44.4 13.8 19.3

Maize 37,497,491 94.4 1,767,389 60.6 21.2 21.1

Sorghum 26,591,292 148.6 1,533,537 60.6 17.3 54.8

Teff 29,929,235 128.9 2,565,155 46.8 11.7 55.9Wheat 23,144,885 109.1 1,424,719 80.9 16.2 15.6Sum 130,710,974 110.9 8,275,743 57.0

Growth in cereal production

1. Output, acreage, and yield levels and growth rates varied widelywithin and across years – a large part of the latter almost certainly areflection of rain-fall variability.

Capture variations across space (zones), time (years)

Acreage Production Yield

CV Levels (%)

CV Growth

(%)

CV Levels (%)

CV Growth

(%)

CV Levels (%)

CV Growth

(%)

Barley 128.0 2073.2 151.9 4146.2 34.0 2198.6

Maize 104.5 1208.4 121.4 2586.9 34.4 2799.0

Sorghum 111.2 1453.6 119.2 5384.0 47.3 821.3

Teff 105.2 1247.2 120.4 7343.4 34.9 626.6

Wheat 137.8 1002.5 159.4 3661.4 46.2 982.7

Changes in production: 1996/7 – 2006/7

BARLEY MAIZE

TEFF WHEAT

SORGHUM

Changes in area: 1996/7 – 2006/7

BARLEY MAIZE

TEFF WHEAT

SORGHUM

Changes in yield: 1996/7 – 2006/7

BARLEY MAIZE

TEFF WHEAT

SORGHUM

Growth in cereal production

2. Acreage expansion originates the bulk of the growth in total outputduring the period,

• Out of the sixty crop-domain-period specific pairs of yield and acreagecontribution shares, in only twelve did the share of yield was higher.

• Uncorrelated crop zonal-level acreage share of a crop and the significanceof contribution of yield changes to zonal-level growth in that crop’s output.

3. The relative contributions of acreage and yield changes to output growthwere not statistically significantly different across development domains, cropbelts, as well as time periods - only exceptions, the output growthcontribution of changes in sorghum yield and acreage were different acrossdomains.

• Teff the exception - comparable contribution come from acreage and yieldincreases

Growth in cereal production

4. the contribution of yield growth rises measurably towards the end of theperiod.

Acreage expansion also dominates as a source of growth at the crop level. Astriking exception is teff – rising yield contributes more than increasedacreage.

Year

Median Contributions of change in crop yield to Changes in Quantity of Cereal Output (%)

Barley Maize Sorghum Teff

1998/99 49.2 36.8 53.2 48.6

1999/2000 8.1 25.7 19.2 39.2

2000/01 48.0 40.0 25.6 59.5

2001/02 37.1 31.1 26.9 25.3

2003/04 -0.3 29.6 36.7 38.8

2004/05 49.2 75.0 55.1 79.4

2005/06 57.1 67.4 48.9 60.7

2006/07 19.2 21.4 26.6 16.8

2007/08 41.5 30.3 41.9 69.7

Changes in input use (2001/2 – 2006/7)

Some Final Observations

Acreage expansion continued throughout the period covered.

• sources of acreage expansion;

• and its potential impact, including on other uses of land and consequences thereof(environmental, say)

Need to systematically investigate

Significant growth in yields was recorded over time. However:

• Cereal yields are still low – less than a fifth of the level in Egypt, less than a third of that inChina and Viet Nam;

• High dependence on rainfall with negligible irrigation coverage of staple crops production;

• Highly undercapitalised with physical capital per land-holder of US$138 – 3000 tractors in usein Ethiopia during 2006 versus 163,000 in Viet Nam;

• Meagre human capital stock (measured in terms of education alone), with 64 percent of land-holders not literate and only 6 percent of them having higher than six years of formalschooling.

• Only about 40 percent of cereal acreage benefit from chemical fertilizers with intensity offertilizer use relatively low in comparison with countries like Egypt, Bangladesh, India, andVietnam.

Pertinent to explore why yields remain and how could they be raised significantly andrapidly.