COLLEGE OF BUSINESS AND ECONOMICS

DETERMINANTS OF MAIZE PRODUCTION IN CASE H/G/W/ ZONE IN

CASE OF JIMMA GENETI DISTRICT.

A RESEARCH PAPER SUBMITTED TO DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS

FOR PARTIAL FULL FILAMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF BACHELOR
OF ART (BA) DEGREE IN ECONOMICS.

March, 2024
Shambu, Ethiopia
 Table of Contents

Contents Page Number

Table of Contents.......................................................................................................................i
ABSTRACT...............................................................................................................................ii
1. INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................4
1.1 Back Ground of the study....................................................................................4
1.2 The statement of the problem.............................................................................5
1.3 Objectives of the study.........................................................................................6
1.4 Research Questions..............................................................................................7
1.5 Significance of the study......................................................................................7
1.6 Scope and Limitation of the study......................................................................7
2. LITERATURE REVIEW.................................................................................................8
2.1 Theoretical Literature Review............................................................................8
2.1.1. Extension service in relation to smallholder maize production.......................9
2.1.2. Demographic characteristics of smallholder farmers and maize production
11
2.1.3. Access to credit facilities by smallholder farmers in relation to maize
production 12
2.2. Targeting in micro finance................................................................................12
3. METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY...........................................................................15
3.1 Description of the study area.............................................................................15
3.2 Types and Source of Data..................................................................................15
3.4 Method of Data analysis....................................................................................17
3.5 Data Analysis Techniques and Procedures......................................................17
4. DATA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION.......................................................................18
4.1 Introduction........................................................................................................................18
4.2. PERSONAL INFORMATION OF RESPONDENTS....................................18
4.2.1. Respondents by gender.........................................................................................18
4.2.2. Age respondents...................................................................................................18
4.2.3. Highest level of education attained by the respondents19
4.2.4. Arable land for maize production.........................................................................20
4.3. DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS AND MAIZE PRODUCTION.................21
4.3.1. The age group that easily adopts new technology................................................21

i
 4.3.2. Level of education that easily adopts new technology.........................................21
4.3.3. Gender and maize production...............................................................................23
4.3.4. Male headed household and access to credit facilities.........................................23
4.4. Main costs involved in maize production.........................................................26
4.5. AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION AND MAIZE PRODUCTION................28
4.5.1. The last field day attended............................................................................28
Table 10: The last field day attended....................................................................................28
4.6..............................................CREDIT ACCESSIBILITY AND MAIZE PRODUCTION
28
5. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS..........................................................30
5.1. Conclusions.........................................................................................................30
5.2. Recommendations..............................................................................................30
References................................................................................................................................33

ii
ABSTRACT
Maize is a staple crop in Ethiopia, hence it bears important implications for poverty alleviation
and food security. The thesis aims to assess the factors affecting maize production of smallholder
farmers in Jimma Geneti district. The study used descriptive research design to investigate the
factors affecting maize productivity in Jimma Geneti. The questionnaire was randomly
distributed to smallholder farmers in Jimma Geneti, and the researcher targeted the farmers
group in Jimma Geneti which regularly meets on. The data was analysed using descriptive
method only. Research data was presented using the following; frequency tables and
percentages, bar graphs and pie charts. The findings indicated that young farmers adopts
technology fast and easy as compared to old farmers. The farmers group leader should report to
the local government that they are receiving subsidies late to see if it can be adjusted to
effectively use government subsidies. Individual farmers should also be encouraged to use the
subsidies effective. Farmers should also seek financial information from different financial
institution to and choose the credit facility that is affordable and meet the farmer’s needs.

Key words: Maize, maize production, smallholder farmers, Jimma Geneti

iii
 1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Back Ground of the study

Ethiopia is one of the nations among developing countries in the world and characterize by the low
income and lower technology. The country was mainly depending on agricultural activities and
provided with good climatic conditions and fertile soil for crop production. The farmers in developing
countries are depending upon a farm income and they are characterizing by the low income and
scarcity in the supply of food. This is because of technological backwardness, speedy population
growth and turn down in productivity of crops and livestock endeavor (Agatamudi and Hirko, 2016).

Maize production is a vital component of food security and livelihoods among smallholder farming
societies in Ethiopia. Being the staple food of the overriding mass of people in the country, maize is
the mainly important products in terms of food security. The majority of smallholder farmers grow
maize principally for survival purposes (FAO, 2018). Maize crop was the third most significant cereal
crop in the world after wheat and rice and the most extensively grown crop from lowland to highland
agro-ecologies in Ethiopia (Gebre et al., 2019). Among cereal crops, maize accounts for the largest
donated in the country's crop production and is grown more than any other crop by farmers. Between
2006 and 2017, the national average yield was 2.6 tons/ha (CSA 2015a, 2017), which is higher than
the sub-Saharan African average of 1.98 tons/ha (FAOSTAT, 2018). In sub-Saharan Africa, global
statistics show that more and more land is being used for small-scale maize production to congregate
future food demands (Romy, 2020). From 2007 to 2017, the area on which maize is grown in sub-
Saharan Africa has increased by almost 60% (FAOSTAT, 2019). Ethiopia is the only country in Sub-
Saharan Africa that has shown substantial advancement in maize productivity and input use (EEA,
2017).

Ethiopian Economic Association reported that after a period of limited growth, yield more than
doubled from around 1.5 ton/ha in 2000 to over 3 tons/ha in 2013. Despite the recent progress in
productivity, yield levels in Ethiopia are still very low relative to what could be produced (EEA,
2017). According to Food and Agricultural Organization Statistics (FAOSTAT), national maize
production in Ethiopia is on average 6.7 million tons for the period 2013-2015 present production. The
analysis shows that relieving economic constraints should have the greatest contribution to maize
production, although improving efficiency of input use, more efficient markets and adoption of
advanced technologies also result in higher national production (FAO, 2015).

4
Maize is vital to the livelihoods of smallholder farmers in Ethiopia since the crop with the major
smallholder exposure at 8 million holders compared to 5.8 million for teff and 4.2 million for wheat.
Moreover, maize plays a central role in Ethiopia’s food security. It is the lowest cost source of cereal
calories, providing 1½ times and two times the calories per dollar compared to wheat and teff
respectively. An efficient maize area could force Ethiopia’s food production to rapidly reduce the
national food shortage and keep rate with a growing population (Shahidur et al., 2010).

Maize is the most important staple in terms of calorie intake in rural Ethiopia. Maize becomes a more
low-priced crop relative to other staples such as wheat and teff to rural and urban consumers through
increased production forcing market prices down. It is now gradually more used both separately as
well as in mixed flour with other more expensive cereals in traditional Ethiopian diets (Tsedeke et al.,
2015). The 2004/2005 national survey of consumption expenditure indicated that maize accounted for
16.7% of the national calorie intake followed by sorghum (14.1 %) and wheat (12.6%) among the
major cereals (Berhane et al., 2011). The familiarity of maize in Ethiopia is to some extent because of
its high value as a food crop as well as the growing demand for the Stover as animal fodder and source
of fuel for rural families. Approximately 88 % of maize produced in Ethiopia is consumed as food,
both as green and dry grain. Maize for industrial use has also supported growing demand.

1.2 The statement of the problem

Very little maize is currently used as feed but this too is changing in order to support a rapidly
growing urbanization and poultry industry (Zerihun et al., 2017). In Ethiopia, maize is the second next
to teff in the production area and the first in its productivity. Of the total grain cereal crop area, 79.4%
(9,848,746 ha), maize took up 16.1% of cultivated areas and its national productivity reaches up to
3.24 ton per hectare. Oromia state accounts for about 54.3% of the total area of cultivation to the
nation and the productivity in this region is presently 3.31 tons per hectare (Zerihun et al., 2017).

However, Western parts of sub-humid regions are mostly producing maize harvest and accounts for
more than 60% of the total production of the region. Most of the Western parts of Oromia in their
locality of production percentage include Jima zone (13.8%), East Wollega (11.5%), West Shewa
(9.2%), Ilu Aba-bor (8.7%), West Wollega (6.5%), Kelam Wollega (5.2%) and Horro Guduru (4.6%)
zones. The production area increased from year to year and from location to locations (Derib et al.,
2017). Even though maize covers the second largest production areas and first in its productivity
5
compared to other cereal crops, there are still high yield gaps between the actual yield currently
producing and the potential yield that is documented by different research institutions.

For instance, long maturing hybrid maize varieties will produce up to 9.5-12 tons per hectare at the
research field and 6-8.5 tons per hectare at on farm fields if the production and management are done
in integrated approaches (Tittonell and Giller, 2013). Whereas, the national and regional current maize
productivity is below half of the dormant yield of most of the hybrid seeds, 3.2 tons per hectare. This
high yield gaps are most probably caused by many abiotic and biotic factors which permanent maize
based mono cropping and poor soil fertilities are the major problems limiting the productivity of the
crops (Harold, 2015). In the features of budding food consumption and altering food routine of the
people, the maize has prospective function to play as a food crop in Ethiopia. Maize occupies
significant site in the food chain after rice and wheat since people can consume maize by different
ways and in terms of human consumption. So, it is essential to develop the area under maize farming
for ensuring the food security and upholding sustainable development of agriculture (Uddin et al.,
2017).

Therefore, a comprehensive understanding of factors determining quantity of maize production is

important to improve the response instruments related to the production of maize crop development.
This study was focused on factors affecting maize production at the farm household level in eastern
Ethiopia at large and in the Meta district of the eastern Hararge zone in particular. The objective of the
study was, therefore, to identify the factors affecting maize production among smallholder farmers in
the Meta district, Oromia Ethiopia.
1.3 Objectives of the study

The general objective of the study will be to analyses the determinants of maize production in case
H/G/W/ zone in case of Jimma Geneti [Link]:-
 To investigate how demographic characteristics, influence maize production of smallholder
farmers in Jimma Geneti district
 To investigate how agricultural extension services influences maize production of smallholder
farmers.
 To investigate how access of credit facilities influences maize production in smallholder
farmers in Jimma Geneti district
 To come up with some policy recommendation for policy makers.
1.4 Research Questions
6
 1. What impact does Agricultural extension services have on maize production of smallholder
farmers in Jimma Geneti district?
2. How does demographic characteristics influence maize production of
3. smallholder farmers in Jimma Geneti district?
4. How does access to credit facilities influence maize production in smallholder farmers in
Jimma Geneti District?What are the contribution of MFI in poverty reduction?
1.5 Significance of the study.

The researcher expects that, the study can significant for the government to evaluate the link and gap
availability of agricultural input with output. The research is encouraging the government towards
developing concepts and methodology on the performance and efficiency distribution of maize
production and extension services. Finally the study will be significant to other researcher to give hint
use for the base line for further research in this area.
1.6 Scope and Limitation of the study

The study is limited on the factor affecting Bean productivity of small holder farmers in Jimma Geneti
Woreda, Horo Guduru Wollega Zone, 2024. The study will focus on assessing the determinants of
maize production and factors that determined it. The study will be limited in shortage time to properly
conduct the study as intended and as well as lack of adequate finance also limits to cover a wide
coverage of the sample population.

7
 2. LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Theoretical Literature Review

Majority of smallholder farmers in Africa engage in farming practices to produce food for domestic
use and sell the surplus to the market. Smallholder farming is the backbone of rural economy as it
provides food, income, employment and rural development to people in rural area. Most of
smallholder farmers in Southern-Africa grows maize as it is the most consumed crop in the region
(staple food). Smallholder farmers contribute significant percentage to national maize output, however
small attention is channelled to them as if they are not important. This is supported by the findings of
Stephen, (2013), which mentioned that smallholder farmers add a larger percentage of food production
in African countries but they give too little attention to them as if they are not valuable in the nation.
Because of little attention given to smallholder farmers, they face different challenges that later affects
their production, and leading to low production, low incomes and food shortages.

According to Cornelis and Meer, (2006), market failures relatively bear heavily upon small-scale
producers and this put them in a disadvantageous position for participating in coordinated supply
chains. In addition, in their research he also mentioned that incomplete and inefficient information and
technologies are provided to the smallholder farmers by the market hence smallholder farmers are
highly disadvantaged, (Cornelis and Meer, 2006). Below the researcher explained the empirical
literature of the study and he grouped it in different sub-headings.
2.1.1. Extension service in relation to smallholder maize production

Extension service plays an important role in agricultural and rural development. It allows
dissemination of knowledge and skills from the agricultural expertise to the farmers. Dissemination of
information can be through; training the farmers, 9 conducting demonstration, developing and testing
new technologies, conducting onfarm experiments, workshops, seminars, field day. Extension service
also brings new technologies that can be adopted to improve production, incomes and standards of
living. Agricultural extension services equip farmers with knowledge on the ways to meet new
challenges such as adopting environmentally sustainable production techniques, accessing export
markets, and other health challenges that affect agriculture (Birner et al., 2006). The extension systems
provide a framework through which farmers are organized into functional groups to enable farmers to
gain access to production resources such as credit, inputs, marketing services and information on
government development programmes (Alonge, 2006). In Zimbabwe, Emory D. Alvord, introduced

8
agricultural extension services in 1927, and he started with nine agricultural demonstration workers
(Hanyani-Mlambo, 2002).

According to FAO 2010, Agricultural extension service is defined as a system that should facilitate the
accessibility of information, knowledge and technologies, to farmers, their organisation and other
market actors, and also facilitate in their 10 interaction with partners in research, education,
agribusiness, and other relevant institutions; and assist them to develop their own technical,
organizational and management skills and practices. This definition considers agricultural extension
service as a primary tool for agriculture, its related activities as well as other economic activities, more
effective and efficient to meet the needs of the people. Agricultural extension service helps in
achieving sustainable agricultural development, rural development and solve food insecurity problem
in the country. Agricultural extension service primarily aimed at improving the knowledge of the
farmers in rural areas so as to increase food production and enhance rural development. It is a critical
role of agricultural extension providers to transfer technology skills and knowledge to the farmers
(Anandajayasekeram, 2008).

Ability of agricultural extension providers to disseminate information and then the farmers adopts the
information and new technology are a sign of effective agricultural extension service. The empirical
studies by; among others, indicated that improved technology adoption for agricultural transformation
and poverty reduction is critical in modern day agriculture (Moser and Barrett, 2003; Minten and
Barrett, 2008). According to, Nin et al., (2003), due to technical change in the form of adoption of
improved agricultural technologies through the help of extension service providers, there has been a
positive impact on agricultural productivity in developing countries. Research studies should be done
to identify the problems of the farmers in the area in order to promote technical changes and
dissemination information plays a critical role in resolving the identified problem hence lead to
improvement of agricultural development. Availability of advanced agricultural production technology
to the farmers is another critical role that facilitates adoption and utilisation of the improved
technologies to smallholder farmers. Therefore, extension service providers have to ensure that they
make relevant improved technologies to the farmers to ensure adoption and utilisation.

Furthermore, to ensure rapid adoption of new technology in developing countries, agricultural

extension officer need to identify the factors that are influencing farmers’ decisions to adopt or not to
adopt modern agricultural production technologies and find ways to resolve them. Adoption of

9
modern agricultural production technology can be effective when farmers have access to extension
services to counter the negative effect of lack of years of formal education in the overall decision to
adopt some technologies. When the farmers access extension service this create a platform for
acquisition of the relevant information that promotes technology adoption. Reduction Through access
of extension services by farmers, this result in reduction of uncertainties about the technology’s
performance, and it changes the individual assessment from subjective to objective over time thereby
facilitating adoption.

Extension service provider has to find effective method to use to disseminate information to large
group of farmers to ensure accessibility of their service to large population. Train and visit, field days,
tours agricultural shows, seminars, workshops are some of cost effective methods of disseminating
new maize technology to large farmers’ population, (Mignouna, et al, 2010). In addition to above,
extension service provider should ensure that the extension worker delivering the message is well
equipped with relevant information about the subject matter. This can be ensuring through regular
training of the extension workers, monitoring and evaluating the work done by the agents by checking
the level of adoption to taught technologies. This is useful in measuring the level of adoption of new
technology by the farmers. Extension workers can also assist smallholder farmers by linking them to
various institution that may have interest in helping them. This may help smallholder farmers to know
input suppliers, credit schemes, out grower schemes, and many different government aids.
Extension workers can also assist the smallholder farmers to obtain fair market prices for their maize,
to calculate their inputs, identify places where to buy inputs at affordable prices, help farmers to obtain
necessary inputs, to calculate organize group transport, obtain credit and saving the surplus cash at
harvest time to purchase inputs for the following season. (Mignouna, et al., 2010).
.
2.1.2. Demographic characteristics of smallholder farmers and maize production

According to Murphy and Knudsen, (2002), demographical characteristics was defined as a socio-
economic characteristics of a population expressed statistically such as; age, sex, occupation,
education level, income level, marital status, average size of a family. The most common
socioeconomic characteristics of smallholder that in technological adoption includes; age, education,
household size, landholding size, occupation, income level, (Ngeywo, et al., 2015). There is a
relationship between age of the farmer and technological adoption. Younger farmers tend to adopt new
technology faster than the older farmers do (Kinyangi, 2014). Younger farmers concentrate more on

10
searching new technology to adopt to facilitates increase in yields whilst older farmers on increasing
yields using available technology.
2.1.3. Access to credit facilities by smallholder farmers in relation to maize production

One of the most successful way of improving production in smallholder farmers is to improve their
access to credit facilities (Manganhele, (2010); Brück & Van den Broeck, 2006). This is because
smallholder farmers play an essential role in ensuring food security, economic growth and
employment creation. Therefore, financing smallholder maize farmers becomes an important
undertaking for poverty reduction in developing countries, especially those in Sub-Saharan Africa
(Parker, 2008).

Access to credit facilities by smallholder farmers’ increases farms profitability by allowing by

allowing the farmers to use the money to purchase inputs for maize production. Studies of smallholder
farmers in Tunisia and Tanzania have shown that access of credit facilities has a direct positive impact
on profitability of farms bound by liquidity constraints, (Foltz, 2004; Guirkinger and Boucher, 2008).
Low levels of accessibility of credit facilities hinders agricultural investment and limit expansion of
farm operations (Anang et al., 2015). Due to uniqueness of agriculture, for instance its uncertainties,
low returns, high rental rates and limited scope of employment, farmers find it impossible to raise the
needed finance without resorting to borrowing. One of the most important lessons of the universal
agrarian history is that the 13 agriculturalist must borrow because most of their capital will be tied-up
in their lands or stock. Therefore, agricultural production requires adequate and timely credit to ensure
good production (Selase, et al, (2017).

Access to credit facilities is a further aggravated problem that affects smallholder farmers in maize
production. Financial institutions may not lend to the smallholder farmers because of lack of financial
records to track progress of the farmer and the ability to repay back the loan. Lack of tangible
collateral security, such as tittle deeds of the land, can limit financial institution to lend money to
smallholder framers because financial institution will it impossible to lend money to someone without
title deeds, in case they did not pay their loan, it will be difficult to reclaim their money (Korir, 2015).
Most smallholder farms communally owned and the farmer may not necessarily have the tittle deed to
prove ownership of the land, thus, due to this reason financial institutions may not lend smallholder
money. Lack of variable asset may also cause financial institution not to lend money to smallholder
famers. (Manganhele, 2010).
2.2. Targeting in micro finance
11
In this section, the researcher looked across the theories supporting maize production in smallholder
farming and the theory, which the research will use, is allocative efficiency. Allocative efficiency
measures how an enterprise uses production inputs optimally using the right combination to maximize
profits (Inoni, 2007). Allocative efficiency is maximized when marginal benefit equals the marginal
cost of producing one extra unit. Thus, the allocative efficient level for production is achieved when
the farm operates at the least-cost combination of inputs. Most studies have been using gains obtained
by varying the input ratios based on assumptions about the future price structure of products say maize
output and factor markets. (Burke, 2012, Ibrahim 2012, Makate, 2014 and Bhasera, 2015). The
research will follow the reviewed assumption by Chukwuji, et al., (2006), to allocate resources for
profit maximization. The assumption included the following; farmers choose the best combination
(low costs) of inputs to produce profit maximizing output level; there is perfect competition in input
and output markets; producers are price takers and assumed to have perfect market information; all
inputs are of the same quality from all producers in the market. According to Inoni, (2007), he also
defined allocative efficiency as the ratio between total costs of producing a unit of output using actual
factor proportions in a technically efficient way, and total costs of producing a unit of output using
optimal factor proportions in a technically efficient way. Thus, for a farm to be allocative efficiency
and maximize profit in perfect market, Marginal Value Product (MVP)from the employment of an
extra unit of a resource should be equal to Marginal Cost (MC) or unit cost, (Chukwuji, et al, 2006).

12
 3. METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY
3.1 Description of the study area

Jimma Geneti is one of the woredas in Oromia region of Ethiopia. It is part of the Horo Gudru Welega
Zone and is bordered on the east by Choman Guduru, on the northeast by Abay Chomen, on the north
by Horo, on the west by East Welega Zone, on south by West Welega Zone and on the southeast by
Jimma Rare. The administrative center is Harato. It is located 27 km from Shambu, the main town of
the Zone and 273 km from the capital, Addis Ababa. According to Ethiopian agro-ecological zone
classification, 60 % of the district is classified as Subtropical (Woina-Dega) and 40 % as Highland
(Dega). The agro-ecological zone of the woreda is rain f all in traditional dega (hight land which occur
from 1 500_2600m a.s.l).The weather is co ld during the rainy season in subtropical (woinadega). The
major crop cultivated in the area are Bean, Potato, Wheat, Maize, Teff, Barley, Horse bean, and others
are most widely cultivated crops in the woreda and it produced for household’s consumption. Bean, W
heat and maize are the dominant food crops produced in the woreda (Firdisa, 201 4).
3.2 Types and Source of Data

Both primary and secondary data will employ to meet the prescribed objectives of the study.
The primary data will be collected from the selected bean growing farmers (household) in the study
area using structured questionnaire will be design in a way it provides statistical information on
farmers’ demographic composition, farm characteristics and other institutional characteristics, and
other factors affecting the production of bean and the p productivity level of those householder
farmers of the study area. The secondary data will collect from Jimma Geneti agriculture office,
reports, boo ks, and other relevant published and unpublished documentary sources.
3.3 Sample size and sample size Determination

Cochran 1963 adopted the following formula and was used to determine the

sampling size for the research at 10% level of significance. The 57 smallholder

farmers are as a sample representing the whole population.

n= is the sample size N = is the population size e = Level of significance Therefore:

N = 135 e = 10% and n = 135 / 1+ 135(0.1) ^2 = 57
3.4 Method of Data analysis

In this study descriptive statistics method of data analysis will be employed. In the descriptive study,
frequency, standard deviation, minimum, maximum, percentage, mean and table method of

13
presentation will be used to assess the productivity of bean and try to identify relative importance of
key factors that influence the factor affect bean Productivity in study area. It provides a summary
description related to the household farmer socio-demographic, economic and farm characteristics in
the study area.
3.5 Data Analysis Techniques and Procedures

Descriptive statistical method of interpretation will used for data collected from respondent’s survey.
Percentages, means, tables and etc., to analyze the collected data. All of these were computed using
Microsoft Office word and Excel (to summarize the data because it minimizes space and time).

14
4. DATA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
4.1 Introduction

This chapter presents, interpret, analyze and discuss the findings of the research study on assessing
factors affecting the production of maize for smallholder farmers in Jimma Geneti district.
4.2. PERSONAL INFORMATION OF RESPONDENTS
4.2.1. Respondents by gender

The question asked the respond to indicate their gender and the following are the

results obtained.

Figure 1: The respondents of the

questionnaire by gender

Male, 24,
(42.1%)
male
Female, 33,
(57.9%) female

Figure 1 shows that 33 (57.9%) out of 57 respondents of the questionnaire were females and 24
(42.1%) were males. This indicates that many females in Jimma Geneti are running farm operations as
compared to males. The reason why majority of my respondents were females was that most of the
smallholder farmers in Jimma Geneti are war veterans and majority of them are late, hence women
take over the ownership of the land and continues with farming system.

4.2.2. Age respondents

Table 2: Age of respondents

Frequency Percent
21-30 6 10.5
31-40 11 19.3

15
 41-50 20 35.1
51-60 18 31.6
61-70 2 3.5
Above 70 0 0
Total 57 100.0

Table 2 shows that 10.5% of the respondents were 21-30 years old, 22.8% were 31 – 40

years old, 35.1% were 41-50 years old, 28.1% were between 51-60 years old, and 3.5%

ranges from 61-70 years old. The study shows that the majority of the smallholder

farmers in Jimma Geneti were between the ages range of 31-60 years, but majority fall

under the age group 41-50 with 35%, followed by 51-60 age group with 31.6%.

[Link] level of education attained by the respondents

Figure 3: level of education attained by respondents

25

20
20 19

15
frequency

11
10
7

0
0
Primary Secondary College under-graduate post -graduate
educational level

Figure 3 shows that the highest level of educational attained by the respondents its

primary level with frequency of 20 respondents, followed by secondary level with 19

people, college level with 11 respondents, under-graduate with 7 respondents and 0

respondents for post graduate respondents. The findings showed that majority of

respondents attained primary level and the number decreased as the level of education

16
increased. This can be because most of smallholder farms in Jimma Geneti are owned

by war veterans, of which most of most of them were highly affected by war and did

not managed to attain higher educational levels. Thus, that is the reason why most of

the respondents indicated that primary were the highest educational level that they

attained. Some managed to proceed to secondary and college level, but the number

decreases as the level of education attained increases. However, the study shows that

most of the smallholder farmers in Jimma Geneti had acquired basic education and as

supported by Rogers, (2003), education influences decision making, good farm

management and adoption of agricultural improved technologies.

4.2.4. Arable land for maize production

Table 4: Arable land for maize production of smallholder farmers in Jimma

Geneti

Hectares Average yield produced in Number of

tonnes respondents

per hectare
1–2 2 22

3–4 3 35

Table 4 shows that majority of smallholder farmers in Jimma Geneti have field with

area of 3-4 hectares and others has field with area ranges from 1-2 hectares. According

to response, smallholder farmers with 3-4 hectare produces the average yield of 3 t/ha

whereas smallholder farmers with 1-2 hectares produces an average yield of 2 t/ha.

4.3. DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS AND MAIZE

PRODUCTION

4.3.1. The age group that easily adopts

17
 new technology

Table 5 The age group that easily adopts technology

Age Frequency Percent

20-30 40 70.2
31-40 14 24.6
41-50 2 3.5
51-60 1 1.8
Total 57 100.0

The smallholder farmers were asked to indicate the age group that easily adopts new

technology. According to Table 4.4.1, the age group that easily adopts technology ranges

from 20-30 which constitutes 40 (70.2%) of the sample size, followed by 31-40 age group

with 14 (24.6%), 41-50 age group with 2 (3.5%), 51-60 age group with 1 (1.8%). The

findings show that smallholder in Jimma Geneti are aware that younger farmers adopts new

technology easily and fast as compared by old people.

4.3.2. Level of education that easily adopts new technology

Table 6: Level of education that easily adopts technology

Frequency Percent
Primary Secondary 2 3.5
College 4 7.0
Under-graduate 11 19.3
Post-graduate Total 16 28.1
24 42.1
57 100.0
The respondents were asked to indicate the level of education that easily adopts technology and the

following are the outcomes obtained. Table 6 shows that post- graduate is the highest level of

education that easily adopts technology with 42.1%, followed by under-graduate with 28.1%, then

college with 19.3%, secondary with 7.0% and primary with 3.5%. The results show that the higher the

18
level of education attained, the higher the chance to adopt new technology easily and fast. This is

because education influences farmers’ decision-making and enhances the farmers’ ability to keep

records which is essential in analyse the farms’ progression.

4.3.1. Gender and maize production

Table 7: Male-headed household and maize production

Likert scale Frequency Percent

Strong agree 50 87.7
Agree 4 7.0
Uncertain 2 3.5
Disagree Strong
1 1.8
disagree
0 0

Total 57 100.0

Respondents were asked to indicate their level of agreeing with the statement that male-

headed household are more productive than female headed household, and the

following was the outcomes. Table 7 shows that 87.7% of the respondents strongly

agrees that male headed household produces more maize as compared to female headed

household and only a few disagrees (1.8%). Male-headed household are more mobile

and eager to seek information more as compared to women. Availability of current

information influences agricultural production, hence, leading to higher maize produce

by male-headed farmers as compared to female-headed household. The study by

Larson, et al, (2015), supported the above findings that female produces lower yields

whereas male produces higher yields. However according to Doss, (2015) and Cadzow,

(2016) studies mentioned that low production by women maybe as a result of lower

cultivation land as compared to men.

19
 4.3.2. Male headed household and access to credit facilities

Table 8: Male headed household and access to credit facilities

Frequency Percent

Strong agree 25 43.9

Agree 17 29.8
Uncertain 8 14.0
disagree 4 7.0
Strong disagree 3 5.3
Total 57 100.0
Respondents were asked whether they agree on the statement that male-headed

household has much access to credit facilities as compared female-headed household

and the following were the responses. Table 8 shows that 43.9% strongly agrees and

29.8% agrees the statement that male-headed household has higher access to credit

facilities as compared to female headed household. Seven percent disagree and 5.3%

strongly disagree on the statement. Women spent most of their time doing domestic

duties and looking after their children and finds limited time to attend extension

services. High absenteeism of extension makes most of women to lack information on

some relevant information of accessing credit facilities; hence, a few will access credit

facilities. Furthermore, some types of credit facilities may require proof of ownership of

land as a collateral security, of which most of the lands might be male owned. Females

then faces challenges in accessing credit facilities since they will not have collateral

security to back up their loan. According to Manganhele, (2010), women have very low

power in decision making hence the same characteristics of lower decisional capacity

exist in the same manner when women try to access credit facilities. Mohamed, (2003),

also supported this finding saying, although some of microcredit programmes target

women, they do not benefit women more as expected as most of women have low

20
access to information.

21
 [Link] costs involved in maize production

Table 9: Main costs involved in maize production

Frequency Percent
Land preparation 10 17.5
Planting 3 5.3
Fertilizer acquisition 25 43.9
Seed acquisition 16 28.1
Weeding 1 1.8
Irrigation 2 3.5
Total 57 100.0

Respondents were asked to indicate the main cost incurred during maize production and

the following are the results. The highest costs that are incurred by smallholder farmers

in Jimma Geneti is fertiliser acquisition with 43.9%, followed by land preparation with

28.1%, seed acquisition with 17.5%, planting with 5.3%, weeding with 3.5%, and

irrigation with 1.8%. This result showed that fertiliser constitutes a larger portion on

maize cost of production and most smallholder farmers in Jimma Geneti find it difficult

to buy fertiliser, as shown in the above table, that it is too expensive. Due to limited

access to credit facilities, smallholder farmers will be having insufficient funds to buy

fertiliser. Therefore, higher prices of fertiliser will cause them not to purchase enough

fertiliser for their maize production or to purchase nothing at all. This will then have a

negative effect to the quality and quantity of yields of maize. The findings of the study

are supported by Wanyama, et al, (2010) who said that fertilizer prices could influence

negatively or positively maize yields. If the price of fertiliser decreases farmers

purchase more meaning they will apply more leading to higher yields but if it the price

of fertiliser increases less will be purchased, therefore apply less and therefore get less

yields.
22
 [Link] EXTENSION AND MAIZE PRODUCTION
4.5.1. The last field day attended

Table 10: The last field day attended

Frequency Percent
Valid Within the last half year 14 24.6
Within the last one year 6 10.5

Within the last two years 2 3.5

22 38.6
Total

Table 10 show the last field day attended by the respondents; 24.6% of the respondents

attended the field day last half year, 10.5% of the respondents attended field day last

one year, and 3.5% of the respondents attended the field day last two years. This shows

that the attendance of field day increased over past two years and smallholder farmers

are slowly realizing the importance of extension. According to Mignouna, et al., (2010)

study they mentioned that extension services are one of the major movers of the

agricultural sector and have been considered as a means of technology dissemination to

farmers.

4.6. CREDIT ACCESSIBILITY AND MAIZE PRODUCTION

4.6.1. Respondents who have received a loan from a financial institution/bank

Figure 4.7.1: RESPONDENTS WHO

RECEIVED LOAN

YES, 20
(35.1%)
NO, 37
(64.9%)

Yes23 No
Respondents were asked to indicate whether they have received loan from any financial

institution and the following were the response. Figure 4.7.1 shows that 64.9% of the

respondents have never received loan from the any financial institution and only 35.1%

received loan. This finding shows that smallholder farmers in Jimma Geneti do not

access credit facilities to finance the farms’ needs. Of which studies according to

Collymore, (2005); Brück & Van den Broeck, (2006); says that the most successful way

of improving production in farming is to improve on access to credit facilities to

finance farms requirements and operation. Low access to credit facilities might be

caused by lack of information on availability of credit facilities with low interest rates

and with favourable terms and condition. In addition, ignorant or resistance to access

credit facilities maybe another reason why smallholder farmers do not access credit

facilities because of fear to suffer from unlimited liabilities in case they do not repay

their Owings in time. Another factor that limit access to credit

24
[Link] AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1. Conclusions

As shown in the objectives, the researcher sought to investigate how demographic

characteristics influences maize production of smallholder farmers in Jimma Geneti.

The study showed that smallholder farmers in Jimma Geneti are aware that younger

farmers adopt new technology easily and fast as compared to old people. On the level

of education that adopts new technology easily and fast, the findings show that

smallholder farmers in Jimma Geneti are aware that the farmers who attained highest

level of education (post-graduates) adopts new technology easily and fast as compared

to farmers who managed to attain low level education (primary level). Concerning the

question asking whether male-headed household are more productive than female-

headed household, the findings show that 87.7% strongly agree with the statement and

only a few disagree. This could be possible because male have access to most of

resources as compared to women for example current information, financial resources

and extension services. On the issue of accessibility to credit facilities by gender, the

findings show that majority of respondents indicated that male-headed household

access credit facilities more than female-headed household. This may be due to the fact

that male-headed household seeks to find information about different credit facilities

offered in the market as compared to women. As a result, more males access credit

facilities as compared to women.

5.2. Recommendations

Engage young people in maize production since they adopt technology fast and easy as

compared to old farmers. This can be made possible by employing attaches from

colleges and universities, and learn from them as they practice maize production.

Female-headed house hold should be encouraged to seek information on different

25
farming aspects so as to improve their production rates.

Smallholder in Jimma Geneti should make use of machine power in land preparation to

ensure the land is well prepared. This can be done through cooperative hiring of the

machines as a group so as to share costs or to buy the machinery as a group of

smallholder farmers so as to share costs. The farmers should be confident enough to use

modern farming methods so as to reduce costs of production for example minimum

tillage. Representative of smallholder farmers in Jimma Geneti should make consult

local government and report that they are receiving subsidies late, so that action may be

taken to correct late distribution of subsidies. Smallholder farmers in Jimma Geneti

should use the subsidies efficiently so as to save money for other inputs that are not

provided by the government.

Farmers should be encouraged to seek, consult and participate in agricultural extension

services like field days. Agricultural extension officers should hold field days regularly

to ensure repetition of demonstration or education of complex activities. Extension

service should be well advertised to ensure that the message reaches large number of

people in the area. Agricultural extension agents should help smallholder farmers in

Jimma Geneti; to access credit facilities, identify the cheap supplier of farm inputs,

organise transport to transport their products to the market and identify market for their

products.

Farmers should seek financial information on the credit facilities available from

different financial institutions and choose one that is affordable and matches with your

needs. Banks should send their representative to visit smallholder farmers and

disseminate information on the credit facilities they offer, and terms and conditions s

applied.

26
 References
Adugna E, Wagayehu B. 2012. Causes of household food insecurity in Wolayta: Southern
Ethiopia. Journal of Stored Products and Postharvest Research, 3(3): 35-48, DOI:
10.5897/JSPPR11.069
Agatamudi L, Hirko K. 2016. Statistical analysis of factors affecting wheat production. A
case study at Walmara Woreda. International Journal of Engineering and
Management Research,6(5):[Link] from:
[Link]
WheatProductionACaseStudyAtWalmaraWoreda(43- 53).pdf (Accessed: September
October 2016).
Alexopoulos EC. 2010. Introduction to Multivariate Regression Analysis. Hippokratia, 14
(1): 23-28. Available from: [Link]
Berhane G, Paulos Z, Tafere K, Tamru S. 2011. Foodgrain consumption and calorie intake
patterns in Ethiopia. International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), ESSP II
Working Paper: 23, Addis Ababa, pp.18. Available from:
[Link]
ethiopia.
Derib K, Gemchu S, Abera D. 2017. Characterization and Ranking of Vermicompost
Obtained from Different Plant Materials and Animal Wastes in Terms of their Major
Nutrient Contents and Manurial Value. Proceedings of the International Conference
on “Creating & Enabling Future through Science, Technology & Innovation:
Dynamics & Challenges for Development Endeavors”. Available from:
[Link]
Ethiopian Economic Association (EEA). 2017. “Reducing the Maize Yield Gap in Ethiopia:
Analysis and Policy Simulation”, Number 02, November 2017. Available from:
[Link]
r_maize_yield_gap_2018.pdf.
FAO. 2015. Analysis of price incentives for Maize in Ethiopia.

Technical notes series, MAFAP, by Wakeyo M.B.,

Lanos B., Rome. Available from:

[Link]
27
 templates/mafap/documents/technical_notes/Ethiopia/2

005- 2013/pdf. Hair, J.F., Andersοn, R.E., Tatham,

R.L., Black, W.C., (2002). Data cοllectiοn methοds

with Readings, fοurth ed. Prentice-Hall, Lοndοn.

Hanyani-Mlambο, B. T. (2002). Strengthening the pluralistic agricultural extensiοn

system: A Zimbabwean case study. Fοοd and Agriculture

Οrganizatiοn οf the United Natiοns (FAΟ).

Harper, J. K., Rister, M. E., Mjelde, J. W., Drees, B. M. & Way, M. Ο.

(1990). Factοrs influencing the adοptiοn οf insect management technοlοgy.

American Jοurnal οf Agricultural Ecοnοmics, 72(4), 997-1005

Hοbbs, P. R. (2007). Cοnservatiοn agriculture: what is it and why is it impοrtant fοr

future sustainable fοοd prοductiοn? Jοurnal οf

Agricultural Science- Cambridge-, 145(2), 127.

Inοni, Ο. E. (2007). Allοcative efficiency in pοnd fish prοductiοn in Delta

State, Nigeria: A prοductiοn functiοn apprοach.

Agricultura trοpica et subtrοpica, 40(4), 127-134.

Kabeer, N. (2016) Gender equality, ecοnοmic grοwth, and wοmen’s agency:

the “Endless Variety” and “Mοnοtοnοus Similarity” οf

patriarchal cοnstraints. Feminist Ecοnοmics, 22(1), 295-321.

Mabundza, R., Dlamini, C. S., & Nkambule, B. (2014) Gender mainstreaming in

28
 smallhοlder agriculture develοpment: a glοbal and African

οverview with emerging issues frοm Swaziland. African

Jοurnal οf Agricultural Research, 9(42), 3164-3170.

Makate, C. (2014). Structure Cοnduct and Perfοrmance οf the infοrmal metal

manufacturing industry in Zimbabwe: Implicatiοns tο

stakehοlders in the agriculture sectοr: University οf

Zimbabwe.

Mοhamed, K. S., & Temu, A. E. (2008). Access tο credit and its

effect οn the adοptiοn οf agricultural technοlοgies: the

case οf Zanzibar. African Review οf Mοney Finance and

Banking, 45-89.

Njοbvu, I. (2011). Impacts οf Maize Pοlicy Changes οn Small Scale Farmers'

Vulnerability tο Explοitatiοn in Nyimba District, Zambia

(Master's thesis, Nοrges teknisk-naturvitenskapelige

universitet, Fakultet fοr samfunnsvitenskap οg

teknοlοgiledelse, Geοgrafisk institutt).

Nyοrο, J. K. (2002). Kenya's Cοmpetitiveness in Dοmestic Maize Prοductiοn:

Implicatiοns fοr Fοοd Security. A paper presented in a seminar at the African.

In Study Center, University οf Leiden.

Tiruneh, A., Tesfaye, T., Mwangi, W., & Verkuijl, H. (2001). Gender

differentials in agricultural prοductiοn and decisiοn-making

amοng smallhοlders in Ada, Lume, and Gimbichu Wοredas οf

the Central Highlands οf Ethiοpia. Cimmyt.

29
 farming system: A case study in Οmοn district, Can Thο prοvince, Mekοng

Delta. Οmοn rice, 10, 94 100.

Yarοn, D., Vοet, H., & Dinar, A. (1992). Innοvatiοns οn family farms: The Nazareth

regiοn in Israel. American Jοurnal οf Agricultural Ecοnοmics,

74(2), 361- 370.

30