Harnessing Opportunities for Productivity Enhancement for Sorghum & Millets (HOPE): Baseline Survey, Tanzania, Socioeconomics Discussion Paper Series Number 7

Schipmann, C and Orr, A and Muange, E and Mafuru, J (2013) Harnessing Opportunities for Productivity Enhancement for Sorghum & Millets (HOPE): Baseline Survey, Tanzania, Socioeconomics Discussion Paper Series Number 7. [Socioeconomics Discussion Paper Series]

PDF - Updated Version
Download (1MB) | Preview


The baseline survey was made in Singida Rural and Kondoa districts of Central Tanzania. A random sample of 360 farm households was sampled, divided into treatment, diffusion, and control groups. The survey was conducted in late 2010 and the results refer to the 2009-2010 agricultural year. A table with key quantitative findings is provided at the end of this summary. Socio-economic profile: The majorities of household heads were male, and most had upper primary education. On average they farmed 2.9 ha, leaving 2.1 ha uncultivated. The primary occupation was agriculture but almost half the sample households had income from non-farm sources. Households owned farm assets valued at Tsh 237,000 and livestock assets valued at 592, 000. Almost half the households owned mobile phones. Less than one-fifth of households surveyed had access to formal credit. Average per capita income was $247 per year, equivalent to $0.7 per day, or well below the $1 per day poverty line. Access to agricultural information: Only 15 % of sample households reported participation in any form of technology transfer, such as farmer field days or demonstrations. Government extension officers are the most important source of information about new technology but contact is infrequent and neighbors remain an important source of information. Crop production: About three-quarters of the sample households planted sorghum and finger millet. Significantly fewer households planted finger millet in Kondoa, and significantly fewer households planted maize in Singida. About four in ten plots were planted using seed saved from the previous harvest. Yields of sorghum averaged 0.46 tons ha-1. No significant difference was found between the yield of local and improved sorghum varieties. Yields of finger millet and pearl millet averaged 0.68 and 0.45 tons ha-1 respectively. Only 1 % of growers applied inorganic fertilizer to sorghum or millets, and about one-fifth broadcast seed rather than row-planting. About one-third of growers used in situ water harvesting, but none used integrated Striga management. Profitability: Finger millet had the highest gross margin (203,193 Tsh ha-1), followed by maize (145,542 Tsh ha-1), and sorghum (108,330 Tsh ha-1). These figures are based on cash costs and exclude the costs of family labor. Adoption: Over half the sample households knew at least one improved variety of sorghum, but only one-third grew an improved variety. The major reasons for non-adoption were unavailability of seed and susceptibility to pests and diseases. The main traits farmers required for sorghum and finger millets were high yield, early maturity, and drought resistance. At the time of the survey, however, improved varieties of finger millet had not yet been released. Utilization: Sorghum was primarily a food crop with only 14 % of the harvest being sold whereas millets were primarily a cash crop with 81 % being sold. Nine-tenths of finger millet sold was sold at the farmgate. Low market prices were reported as a major constraint on sales of both crops. However, only 4 % of farmers were members of a Producer Marketing Group

Item Type: Socioeconomics Discussion Paper Series
Series Name: Socioeconomics Discussion Paper Series 7
Subjects: Mandate crops > Millets
Mandate crops > Sorghum
Depositing User: Mr Sanat Kumar Behera
Date Deposited: 28 Oct 2013 09:40
Last Modified: 23 Apr 2015 05:06
URI: http://oar.icrisat.org/id/eprint/7214
Acknowledgement: This paper is part of ICRISAT Economics Discussion paper series. This series disseminates the findings of work in progress to encourage the exchange of ideas about a wide array of issues in the area of agriculture for development. An objective of the series is to get the findings out quickly, even if the presentations are less than fully polished. The papers carry the names of the authors and should be cited accordingly. Any comments and suggestions are more than welcome and should be addressed to the author who’s contact details can be found at the bottom of the cover page. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this paper are entirely those of the authors. They do not necessarily represent the views of the International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics and its affiliated organizations
View Statistics

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item