DETERMINANTS OF MAIZE PRODUCTION IN ASSOSA

WOREDA
BY: -
FENTANESH ALEM

ADVISOR: KACHA.A(Dr)

A SENIOR ESSAY RESEARCH PAPER SUBMITTED TO DEPARTMENT OF

ECONOMICS

COLLEGE OF BUSINESS AND ECONOMICS

WACHEMO UNIVERSITY

IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE BACHELOR ART

(BA) DEGREE IN ECONOMICS

HOSSANA, ETHIOPIA
JUNE, 2019
Acknowledgment
Above all I am thankful to Almighty God for giving me this life. He is the power- inside to
realize all my dreams in life.
Secondly, my great appreciation is to my advisor Dr kacha for his remarkable advices and
support though this study. He has been with me throughout the work. And also my deepest
gratitude goes further for him for his commitment to teach me about basic concepts of Research
Development and the reality behind research work. and also my family and friend for their
endless appreciation I love you all! It is because of the cost all paid that! Am here today! The
last but not the least is my class mates who have shared me their affections and psychological
encouragement. Thank you all.

I
 ADVISORS’ APPROVAL SHEET

This is to certify that the research entitled Factors that determine the determinant of maize
production in case of Assosa woreda submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the
BA degree in economics carried out by Fentanesh Alem Id. No 7933 under my supervision.
Therefore, I recommend that the student has fulfilled the requirements and hence hereby can
submit the research to the department of economics.

_Dr.Kacha. A_____ ________________ ____________

Name of advisor Signature Date 19/10/2011E.C

II
EXAMINERS’ APPROVAL SHEET

We, the undersigned, members of board the examiners of the final open defense by
______________________ have read and evaluated his thesis entitled
“----------------------------------------------------”, and examined the candidate. This is, therefore, to
certify that the thesis has been accepted in partial fulfillment of requirements for the BA degree
in Economics.

______________________ ______________ ______________

Name of Chairperson Signature Date
______________________ ______________ ______________
Name Advisor Signature Date
_______________________ _______________ ______________
Examiners:

_________________________ _______________ ____________

_________________________ _______________ _____________

III
 Table of contents
Acknowledgment..............................................................................................................................I

List of table....................................................................................................................................IV

Acronyms........................................................................................................................................V

Abstract..........................................................................................................................................VI

CHAPTER ONE..............................................................................................................................1

1. INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................................1

1.1 Background of the study............................................................................................................1

1.2 statement of problem..............................................................................................................2

1.3 Research Question..................................................................................................................3

1.4 Objective of this study...........................................................................................................3

1.4.1. General objective............................................................................................................3

1.4.2 Specific objectives...........................................................................................................3

1.5 Significance of the study........................................................................................................4

1.6 scope of the study...................................................................................................................4

1.7 Limitation of the study...........................................................................................................4

CHAPTER TWO.............................................................................................................................5

2. Literature Review........................................................................................................................5

2.1 Theoretical literature Review....................................................................................................5

2.1.1. Introduction....................................................................................................................5

2.1.2 Globally Maize production.....................................................................................................6

2.1.3 Maize production in Africa.............................................................................................7

2.1.4 Maize production in Ethiopia..........................................................................................8

2.1.5Determinants of maize production...................................................................................8

IV
 2.1.6 Maize varieties and utilization........................................................................................9

2.1.7 Fertilizer utilization.........................................................................................................9

2.1.8 Maize water use –rain fall and irrigation.......................................................................10

2.1.9 Land utilization..............................................................................................................10

2.10 Policy environment.........................................................................................................11

2.2 Empirical Literature Review..............................................................................................11

CHAPTER THREE.......................................................................................................................13

3. Methodology..............................................................................................................................13

3.1. Description of the Study Area.............................................................................................13

3.3 Method of data collection....................................................................................................13

3.5 Sampling size.......................................................................................................................14

3.6 The Method of Data Analysis..............................................................................................15

3.7 Definition of variables.........................................................................................................15

3.8 Model specification..............................................................................................................17

CHAPTER FOUR.........................................................................................................................18

4. Data analysis and presentation...............................................................................................18

4.1. Descriptive analysis............................................................................................................18

4.1.5 Distribution of seed variety usage by percentage of households......................................21

4.2Major problems of the area...................................................................................................22

CHAPTER FIVE...........................................................................................................................30

5. Conclusion and Recommendation.........................................................................................30

5.1 Conclusion...........................................................................................................................30

5.2 Recommendations................................................................................................................30

References......................................................................................................................................32

APPENDIX....................................................................................................................................33

V
List of table

Table 1 Ethiopia’s maize supply during 2006/07-2007/08…………………………….8

Table 2 comparison of modern varieties of maize and fertilizer among different

Countries and region…………………………………………...………………………9

Table 3 age composition of respondents………………………………………………18

Table 4 farm size and farming experience distribution of the

respondents……………………………………………………………….……………19

Table 5 access to credit distribution through usage of frequency and

percentage……………………………………………………………………….…….20

Table 6 market place distribution…………………………………………...………...20

Table 7 distribution of seed type……………………………………………...............21

Table 8 major inputs used for maize production in the area and their

respective amount……………………………………………………………….……22

Table 9 major problems in the study area…………………………………………….23

VI
Acronyms
CSA ………... Central Statistical Agency
ECX ………………. Ethiopian Commodity Exchange Authority
USDA………………. United States Department of Agriculture
FAo………………... Food and Agriculture Organization
WFP ……………... World Food Program
FAOSTAT……………. Food and Agricultural Organization Statistical Database
MoARD ……………... Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development
IFPRI ……………………… International Food Policy Research Institute
FAP …………………… Dia -Ammonium phosphate
GDP………………… Gross Domestic Product
ADLI………….…… Agricultural Development Led Industrialization
SSA …………………. Sub-Saharan Africa
SNNP………………... South Nations Nationalities and Peoples
BG……………………. Benisangul gumuz

VII
Abstract
This study was conducted in Assosa woreda of Assosa zone. The study attempted to address key
problems that cause maize production. Socioeconomic factors influencing maize yield and the
level of input use in the area the major problems found in the area were poor connection of
road, erratic rainfall, inadequate access to credit, pests and diseases and late delivery of inputs.
The major inputs used in the area was fertilizer (DAP +UREA), improved maize variety (BH-
140, BH-540, BH-660) and pesticide (Endo sulfan +2-4D). To undertake this study both primary
and secondary data was used. The data collected from different sources would be analyzed
through descriptive way of analysis such as table, percentage and mean and regression analysis
to analyze the effect of independent variable on dependent variable. The study found that land
size, farm size, fertilizer, seed type, market place and access to credit has positive effect in maize
production. since seed type has largest effect government should distribute seed type in a fair
distributed way.

VIII
 CHAPTER ONE

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the study

Maize is originated from South America particularly Tehuacan valley of Mexico, it first
introduced to Ethiopia in 16th century and 17 th century (Abdisa et al 2001). It is one of the most
important food crops produced and consumed in Ethiopia. Among cereal crop, it stands first
both in production and productivity and second after Teff in area coverage. According to CSA
(2017- 2018 data). Maize is grown by slightly more than ten million farm households. Ethiopia is
among the major maize producers in sub –Saharan African countries, where small holder farmers
dominate the major share of production.

In Ethiopia maize is grown under diverse agro ecologies and socioeconomic conditions typically
under rain fed production. The maize agro ecologies in Ethiopia can be broadly divided in to six
(6) major categories (MOA 2005 )including moist and semi moist mid altitudes (1700- 2000)
meter above sea level {1000-1200mmrain fall] moist upper mid altitudes [ 2000-
2400m:>1200mm] Dry mid altitude [1000m-1600m 650-900mm]moist lower mid altitudes [900-
1200mm] moist low lands [<900m.900-1200mm] and dry low lands [<1000m,<700mm]the
moist and these are mostly located in south west and west Oromia and north west Amhara parts
of southern nations nationalities and people regions [SNNPR] and Benishangul Gumuz (BG).
Taken together, the semi moist and moist ecologies cover about 75% of the nation maize
production area where as the dry ecologies cover small holder’s famers use animals for more
than 95% of the total maize area and production in Ethiopia. The farmers use animals traction
for land preparation and cultivation; almost all production is rain irrigated areas Small holders
across all 70 administrative units of Ethiopian which includes 59 zones and 11 special woredas
grow maize. this is currently occupying about 2 million hectares with an average yield of
upwards of 7 Million quintals. National maize yield has doubled from about 3.25 million quintals
during the 2013 to 7.8 million quintals in 2018. Analysis of FAO data revealed that a highly
significant (p>0.0001) annual yield gain of 68 KG /hectare was recorded formalize in Ethiopia

1
for the period 1990s to 2013. Only south Africa exceeded this figure (119kg/hectare / year in sub
Saharan Africa where as some Countries such as Tanzania and Kenya registered negative
growth.

Ethiopians, figure is superior to Mexico 955kg /hectare /year) between 2000 and 2013. (IBID).
Despite the pockets of change across Africa, such as change at the national level is a
significant transformation in a region where a green revolution seemed largely unattainable
(Howard and Mungoma 1997; De Groote et at 2002; Smale et at2011; Smale and Olwande
2014 ) on average maize area and productivity increased per by 4.0 and 6.3% per annum
respectively, during the 10 years between 2004 and 2013 food security in Ethiopia, and
elsewhere in Africa ,is a major socio political issue . Its economic well-being is also dependent
on success of its agriculture. Ethiopia has long suffered from food shortages and economic
under development even though it is endowed with a wide range of crops and agro ecological
diversity, maize, teff, sorghum, Wheat and barley

This study was conducted to analyze the contribution of maize food security in Assosa. The
increment of production in 1990s indicates a green revolution for food self- sufficiency in
Ethiopia. However, the availability of quality seed with necessary inputs at right time and place
with a reasonable price is crucial. Unavailability of improved infrastructure and maize
production, Wise utilization and conversation of natural resources will also have a significant
impact on maize grain production (Nigussi 2012)

1.2 statement of problem

The constraints of maize production in Ethiopia include, both biotic (weeds, plant pathogens.
Insect pests of rodents, wild animals) and abiotic factors (during hailstorm flood nutrient
deficiency, soils type, topography features (Amare et al 2013) Weed infestation is supreme
impertinence among biotic factors that are responsible for low maize grain yield. Worldwide
maze production is hampered up to 40% by competition from group of this crop Generally weeds
reduce crop yields by competing for light. Nutrients, water and carbon dioxide as well as
interfering with harvesting and increasing the cost involved in crop production, Weeds impose
the highest loss potential (37%) which is higher than the loss potentials due to animal pest s

2
(18%) fungal and bacterial pathogens (16%) and virus (2%) kerbed reported. that most farmers
in Ethiopia commonly lose up to 40,30.35, 18 and 30% of yield in Maize, Sorghum, Wheat,
Barley and Teff, respectively due to weed infestations. TesfayA.Amin, MulugetaN (2014).

Major challenges facing most developing countries such as Ethiopia is improving rural
livelihood and as well as food security and underlying food system development. there is an ever
increasing concern that it is becoming more and more difficult to achieve the needed increase in
agricultural production based on intensification, because there are limited opportunities for area
expansion. Hence, the solution to food problem would depend on measures, which help to
increase yield through intensification. Declining trends on quantities of maize produced has been
evident at the global and regional level with a majority of the world producers, of maize
recording significant declines in the quantities of maize exported (pingali,2001). Agriculture in
Assosa zone is of mixed type of farming system. The main food crops grow in the area are
Maize, Sorghum and Mango. Maize as one food crop in Assosa zone, its yield is affected by
multiple factors (food supply prospects for second half ,2013). Therefore, this study is conducted
to fill this gap to identify the determinants of maize yield production in the study area.

1.3 Research Question

 What are the factors that affect maize yield in the study areas?
 What are the input used by farmers in maize production in the study areas?
 What are the challenges of farmers in maize production in the study areas?

1.4 Objective of this study

1.4.1. General objective

The general objective of this study is to assess determinants of maize yield production in Assosa
zone Assosa woreda

1.4.2 Specific objectives

 To identify the type of input used by farmers in the study area
 To examine the challenges farmers, face in study area
 To examine the determinants of maize production in the study area
3
1.5 Significance of the study
The Significance of study was to assess determinants of maize yield, to identify challenges in
the area and come up with a sort of remedy for the identified problem. it will have a great benefit
to a number of stakeholders which include farmers, maize collection and manufacturing plants,
donor communities and Ethiopia as a country. Particularly it will help farmers to know the
reason why they are not able to maximize their maize production. The study also of great benefit
to other researchers who conduct study on the same topic or it will use as reference (secondary
source)

1.6 scope of the study

Though the hypothesized problems are expected to be found throughout Ethiopia but the
research is mainly concerned on the problems at only Assosa in Assosa zone of BG region.
This is because to make the research tangible. In this study the researcher attempted to assess the
major determinants of maize yield. Because of it has great importance for the farmer’s economic
ability and it is major product in the study area.

1.7 Limitation of the study

The limitation of the study was time constraint to collect and analysis of data. Shortage of
finance to collect data, limited availability of previously conducted work on the topic and lack of
experience in the field of the study.
In collecting data, the study was concentrate in Assosa zone Assosa wereda only. The result
would be sounder if it would have covered the whole rural parts of the country that engaged in
agricultural activity. Hence, it was not being possible to infer about the whole smallholder
farmers of Ethiopia, as different rural areas have heterogeneous characteristics in their
population. Another limitation of the study emanates from the information collected through the
questionnaire, that the researcher was make only a single visit to the households. Accordingly,
the credibility of the information collected from the households will depend on their recall.

4
1.8 Organization of the paper
The study is organized as follows. Chapter one presents background of the study, Introduction,
and statement of the problem, objective of the study, significant of the study, scope of the study,
limitation of the study, and research questions. Chapter two presents review of literature that
includes the need for credit, the role of cooperatives, definitions of concepts overview of the
financial system in Ethiopia and empirical studies on loan repayment performance. Chapter three
presents the research methodologies employed in the study. chapter four presents interpretation
and analysis and finally in chapter five conclusion and recommendation present.

5
 CHAPTER TWO

2. Literature Review

2.1 Theoretical literature Review

2.1.1. Introduction

Many scholars have been defined crop production as the production of temporary and permanent
crop which involves under the main categories of cereals, crop seed, oil crops, and vegetable
crops. Temporary crops production is the production of seasonal crops, whereas permanent crop
production which have long life. Crop production can be divided in to two that are staple crop
and cash crop. Staple crops are a variety of cereals oil seed and coffee. Cash crops included
flower, chat sugarcanes and other. Those crops play a greatest role to foreign currency by export
promoting (Ethiopian economy, grade 12 text books, 2001).

The world book encyclopedia explain crop as a sub-sector which used for home consumption
and a means of earn income and used to get foreign currencies by export promotion and for
home market. The use of crops can be seeing in different directions especially in developing
countries. Although several other advantages people began to farm in the early age (Semison.g-
ord and Tadesse. off,2002).

6
For a country that proudly claims to have started settled agriculture thousands of years ago,
Ethiopia’s currently unable to feed its population and thus continue to dependency on foreign
donations of food to sustain a significant portion of its citizens, is a buffing predicament that
triggers a bread economic and sociological study. Clearly the problem of Ethiopian agriculture
cannot be principally explained by natural endowments. The is no lack of consensus, even
among competing political groups or academic circles that the country's overall development is
intrinsically linked to what happens to agricultural sector in general and the massive population
that resides in this sector in particular. The sheer size of the rural population and the high level of
poverty that exists necessitate according high priority to the sectors rapid development (EEA,
2002:49).

The prevailing Orthodoxy among the development practitioners is to see the problem of
agriculture in the developing countries such as Ethiopia strictly as a technical and resource
related problem. This view identifies the low level of agricultural productivity as the key
problem and the automatic solution that follows is to find ways to enhance productivity. The
three major food crop categories that are analyzed here are cereals, pulsars and oil seeds. These
three crop categories together account for over 90 percent of the total area covered by temporary
or permanent crops. So clearly the performance of this three crop sub-sector by and large defines
what happens to the agriculture sector (IBID, 2003:52).

Furthermore, productivity is essential regarded as a technological problem. Since the technology

required for enhancing productivity is internationally available, what remains to be done is too
widely to diffuse this technology to areas with low productivity. Since the technologies are not
available for free and not cheap, it requires some kind of resources transfer from the rich
countries to the poor one in the short and medium term to enable developing countries to acquire
both the technology and technical know-how that goes with it. It also requires poor countries to
reallocate their own resource from less productive endeavors to world activity that could help in
increasing productivity of agricultural sector (EEA, 2002:51).

Officials were quick to announce not in terms of the overall output for the year but also as an
introduction of the overall success of the program in reaching its target of food self-sufficiency
much earlier than forecast. At the time, the future problem of Ethiopian agriculture was

7
diagnosed as related to marketing partly owing to the sudden drop in the prices of food crops
following the bumper harvest of the year (IBID, 1999:50).

Statistical comparisons could be very much biased depending up on the base year used for
comparison. However, an advantage in using that particular year as the use of modern farm
inputs (particularly fertilizer) has increased since then.

2.1.2 Globally Maize production

Maize production in the global arena can be categorized in to white maize production and
yellow maize production (Mirer et at, 2006). White maize is biologically and genetically very
similar to yellow maize. Although there is a difference in appearances due to the absence of
carotene oil pigments in the kernel which otherwise cause the yellow color of the grain
production conditions and cultivation methods are largely identical (Martinez,2002). World
production of white maize is currently estimated at around 70 million tones. Respecting 12-13%
of the annual world output of the all maize Over 90% of the white maize is produced in
developing counties. where it accounts for around one quarter of total maize output just under
two –fifth of the total maize are in the developing world. A larger area is planted to white than
yellow maize in the tropical highland and subtropical /mid altitude environments and it occupies
about 40% of the lowland tropical maize (Loperz 2004). Maize is widely cultivated throughout
world and a greater weight of maize is produced each year than any other grain.

The United States produces 40% of the world harvest. Other top producing countries include
China, Brazil, Mexico, Indonesia, India, France and Argentina FAO (2010). FAOSTAT shows
that in 2008. North America recorded the largest production of maize with about 38% of the
global output. This is followed by Asia (28.5%), South America (11.1%) Africa (6.9), and
Central America (3.4%).

2.1.3 Maize production in Africa

Introduced in to Africa by the Portuguese in the 18th to 18 th century maize has become
Africans most staple food and feed system. In 2005, the top exporters of maize in sub-Saharan
Africa were south Africa, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia and Swaziland, with top importers of

8
maize Zimbabwe, Angola, Ghana, Kenya and Mozambique, facing a growing population.
Several studies (pingali,2001) (World bank .2007) not that it is critical for Ethiopia and other
African countries to increase maize production in order to feed their people. According to
FAO/WFP (2004/2005), crop and food supply assessment, the production of the country’s staple
food.
Maize was on a long term decline, dropping by70% over a period of five years in most areas.
This was due to non- cultivation of the arable lands, due to delayed rainfall and the high risk of
making loss from agriculture as well as shortage of seed for alternative crops among others. The
Africa rain fed agriculture is viewed by many observes to be the most vulnerable sector to
climatic variability and the potential impacts of change on agriculture are highly uncertain (the
Report by world Meteorological Organization). Most of the maize produced and consumed in
Africa comes from small holder rural farms, production takes place under different condition
characterized by poor soils, low yielding varieties, inadequate access to yield enhancing inputs
such as fertilizers and improved seeds, inadequate access to finance by producers, by producers,
suppliers and buyers and variable climatic and environment.

2.1.4 Maize production in Ethiopia

Maize production in Ethiopia is totally rain fed and bulk of the production (90%)is obtained in
the long rainy season and small quantity from rains. It grows from moisture stress areas to high
rainfall areas and from the lowland to the highlands (kebede et at, 1993). Almost all the maize is
produced for human consumption. Some quantity is used in the milling and feed processing
industries (Diribaetat.2001). Mosisa et at (2001) indicates, successive in the production and
productivity of maize and areas it covered between 1990 and 2000. They stressed that the
availability of improved maize technologies combined with new extension program played a
great role in the increment of maize production in the 1990’s. However, it was apparent from
their report that much of the increase in maize production during this year has come from
increasing maize average and not necessarily increased productively. The following table
summarizes Ethiopia’s maize supply during 2006/2007/2008 in quintal.

Table 1: Ethiopian’s maize supply during 2006/2007-2007/2008

Annual 2006/2007 2007/2008
Production 37,764,397.06 37,497,490

9
 Import 708 32,014.96
Export 0 0

Source: CSA, 2006/2007/2008

2.1.5Determinants of maize production

Agriculture production is characterized by variability of yield due to different factors including
size of area cultivated, amount and quality of improved seeds, chemical fertilizers and policy
environment. There are also different risk factors, which adversely affect maize yield. Weather
risk and maker risk are the major challenges for farmers. Various biophysical and socioeconomic
constraints such as weeds pest and diseases; eristic rain fall erosion. Low soil fertility, poor in
fracture and post –harvest crop losses adversely affect production.

2.1.6 Maize varieties and utilization

Maize seed varieties are broadly classified as traditional and improved seeds. The production
capacity of traditional seed varieties (open pollinating varieties) widely differs from place to
place in the country. Open pollinating varieties are developed by local farmers, which resulted
from centuries of planting, harvesting and selection. However, many researchers agreed on the
level as not more than 1500kg/ha. On the other hand, improved maize varieties like BH-660
resulted in high yield as much as 10,49kg/ha (Akaluet at, 2001). The highest record of
11,000kg/ha. On maize was harvested during 2000/2001 from farmers filed found in western
Ethiopia through the sasakawa Global 2000 extension system (waken et at .2001). the average
yield of these improved maize varieties was between 6000-8000kg/ha. The area covered by
improved maize varieties in Ethiopia increased from 5% of total area under maize cultivation in
1997 to 20% in 2006 (Dawit et at. 2008). This coverage is at minimum when we see that there is
high demand of improved seeds variety among farmers, instant, in 2005 agricultural season the
supply of improved maize varieties (82,458 quintals) fall by 47% of the155.215quintals demand
(MoARD 2006 as cited by IFPRI 2007).

2.1.7 Fertilizer utilization

Fertilizers are broadly classified as organic and inorganic fertilizers are farm generated resources
such as crop residues, farm yard manure and legumes. inorganic (modern) Fertilizers is a
peculiar input the use of which requires improved varieties of maize seeds. Di- Ammonium

10
phosphate (DAP) and Urea are the two most widely adopted inorganic fertilizers in Ethiopia
thought the adoption rate is still the lowest among the smallholder deferens researches establish
the fact that the increased use of modern fertilizers is one of the major detritions for the recent
grown in maize predation the following table camper’s modern varieties of maize fertilizers use
among difference courtesies and region
Table2: comparison of modern varieties of maize and fertilizers use among difference countries
and region (1997-1999)
Countries Area under modern variety Fertilizer usage(k.g/ha of
arable and permanent crop
land
Year 1997 1999 1997 1999
Ethiopia 5 15 13 16
South eastern Africa 46 72 13 13
South Asia 48 46 99 110
China 99 91 263 51

Source IFPRI, 2007

2.1.8 Maize water use –rain fall and irrigation

Like other maize production Ethiopia is highly dependent bon rainfall in most parts of the
country the production of the crop uses bimodal I.e. both belg and Maher rainy season .in
Ethiopian context flections in rain fall is the prime cause of output (production) volatility
According to World Bank (2007), a 10% reduction of rainfall in a particular year reduced
growth (GDP) 4-5 years later by one percentage point. Estimated irrigated land under tradition
and modern irrigation schemes is only 10% in Ethiopian. During 2005/2006 production season,
35,586 hectare of land was irrigated

2.1.9 Land utilization

Size of area cultivated and production are positively correlated. Maize is cultivated in a wide
range of altitudes, soil types and terrains, mainly by stallholder crop produced. It is one of the
major and often the leading in annual production among cereals. It is also the second largest in
areas coverage next to teff (Yosefetat ,2005). According to Elein (2001), out of the total 8.3
million tons of cereals production, the share of maize was 2.2 million tons.

11
2.10 Policy environment
The policy environment is a driving force behind programs of extension. Agriculture input
utilization, market integration and risk mitigation. During the period of 1991, ADL, agricultural
extension package was introduced the participatory Demonstration and extension Training
System (PADETS). It had components of using high yielding improved seeds, fertilizers and
chemicals, credit access and improved farm management practices like line sowing, timely
cultivation and timely weeding, Maize, wheat, teff, and sorghum were received greater attention
by the program.

2.2 Empirical Literature Review

In this section, we review the empirical literature mainly regarding the determinants of
agricultural output
Berhanu G.et al (2009) conducted a study on small holders, institution service and commercial
transformation in Ethiopia, based on Oils estimation method. the result shows that the use of
improved seeds, fertilizer, and house hold in the extension program. Literate household and
access to credit is positively related with crop productivity. Distant plots from homestead are
negatively related with crop production.

Meyer et. al, (2006) examined maize production in the global arena can be categorized into white
maize production and yellow maize production. (Martinez,2004) White maize is biologically and
genetically very similar to yellow maize, although there is a difference in appearance due to the
absence of carotid oil pigments in the kernel which otherwise cause the yellow color of the grain.
Production conditions and cultivation methods are largely identical

Lopez, (2006) conducted a study on World production of white maize is currently estimated at
around 65-70 million tons, representing 12-13 percent of the annual world output of all maize.
Over 90 percent of the white maize is produced in the developing countries, where it accounts
for around one quarter of total maize output and just under two-fifths of the total maize area. In
the developing world, a larger area is planted to white than to yellow maize in the tropical
highland and sub-tropical/mid-altitude environments, and it occupies about 40 percent of the
lowland tropical maize area.

12
 Martinez, (2000) examined Maize is widely cultivated throughout the world, and a greater
weight of maize is produced each year than any other grain. The United States produces 40% of
the world's harvest; other top producing countries include China, Brazil, Mexico, Indonesia,
India, France and Argentina. FAO. (2010) FAOSTAT shows that in 2008, North America
recorded the largest production of maize with about 38.8% of the global output. This is followed
by Asia (28.5%); South America (11.2%); Europe (11.1%); Africa (6.9%); Central America
(3.4%); and Oceania (0.07%). Argentina, Brazil and China account for over 60 percent of total
maize output in the developing world, China alone for 45 percent. When these countries are
excluded from consideration, white maize constitutes over 60 percent of the maize area in
developing countries, and just under 60 percent of total maize output in those countries. By
contrast, white maize is a product of much lower importance for the developed world. In the
United States, for example, by far the world's largest producer of maize, white maize cultivation
accounts for less than one percent of the total domestic maize output, produced to a large extent
under contract farming due to the relatively limited market.

Morris, (2004) identified Two other significant areas of white maize production are, firstly,
Central America excluding the Caribbean sub-region, where it represents about 90 percent of
total maize output of the region, and, secondly, the northern part of South America Colombia and
Venezuela. Among the main producers in Asia, China, Indonesia and the Philippines. Yellow
maize is considerably more important in their total cereal production than white maize. White
maize tends, however, to be a main staple food in certain areas of these countries.

13
 CHAPTER THREE

3. Methodology
3.1. Description of the Study Area
Assosa is one of the seventh woredas of Assosa zone administration. It is located in the western
part of Ethiopia 661 km from Addis Ababa. The largest woreda in this zone is Assosa with the
population size of 104,147 of whom 52,968 were men and 51,179 were women and its
population density of 15.25person per square kilometers (CSA 2007). This woreda has an
elevation of 1570 meters. According to AssosaWoreda Agricultural and Rural Development
Office, there are 72 farmers’ kebeles total numbers of 25,200 house hold heads. This Woreda is
bordered by kormuk and komesha in the north, by menge in the northeast, by odabuldigilu in the
east, by bambasi in the southeast by mao-komo special woreda in the south and by Sudan in the
west. The climate is tropical with the summers have a good deal of rain fall, while winters have
little. In a year the average temperature is 21.9 C and the average rain fall is1222mm.

3.2 Type and sources of data

In this study both primary and secondary data type and primary and secondary data source was
used to get adequate information about the determinants of maize yield in the study area. The
maize growing farmers would be used as primary sources. Secondary sources like important and
existing documents, reports, Internet and agricultural office of the woreda was used as secondary
sources.

3.3 Method of data collection

To collect primary data a questionnaire would be prepared and interview would be made
available for farm households and agricultural office of the woreda. Secondary data would be
collected directly from sources such as annual report of the woreda, Internet, books and other
source

14
3.4 Sampling technique

The population of the study area consist of small holder farmers who are living in 72 rural
kebeles of Assosa Woreda. The entire population can't be considered due to the presence of large
number of population, time and resource (budget) limitation. So sampling allows the whole
population. For this purpose, among 72 kebeles in the woreda 4 kebeles namely Selga25,
Mengili37, Amba17and Abrhamo kebles was selected by applying stratified random sampling
technique method. The strata division was based on their heterogeneous climate conditions
division kola and woinadega. Regarding to questionnaires the sampling was made with a sample
size 72 farmers was taken as a center of investigation from the total farmers 1240 in
4kebeles.The total target population of the woreda were (25200) Assosa Woreda agricultural and
rural development bureau (2017/2018).

3.5 Sampling size

To determine the sample size, the researcher would use the following (Cochran’s 1977) formula.

n=z^2 p (1-p)/e2

Where, n=sample population

P=designates the estimated proportion of farmers in selected kebeles among the 1240 population
(farmers) in the woreda (addition of 4kebeles farmers divided for total 25200 farmers in the
woreda)

e =significance level 5%

z = confidence interval 95%

From the above formula the sample size of the researcher sample size would be.

p=1240/25200=0.049206

e=0.05

z=1.96 or 95% confidence interval

n= (1.96)2 (0.049206)/0.0025

15
=3.8416 (0.049206)/0.0025

=0.18903 (0.955

=0.1797/0.0025

=71.89

So n=72

In order to select the sample size from each kebles the researcher used Proportional techniques to
population size such as, 17 for amba 17 kebele,20 for selga25,19 for mengele37 and 16 for
abrehamo kebele. And data was collected from each stratum by using random convenience
method.

Amba 17=300/1240(72) =17

Abrehamo=250/1240(72) =16

Selega 25=350/1240(72) =20

Mengel 37=340/1240(72) =19

3.6 The Method of Data Analysis

The study used both descriptive statics and econometric analysis. Percentage and frequency
would be used to analyze the socioeconomic characteristics of farmers and other determinants of
maize yield. Multiple regression model using Stata software was used to identify factors
influencing maize yield in the study area.

3.7 Definition of variables

The study identified the Dependent variable which can be affected by independent variables. The
Dependent variable was maize yield while independent variables are, age, education, family size,
experience, farm size, seed type, and access to credit, fertilizer, pesticide, off farm income and
market place.

Age; - is expected to affect maize yield positively. This is because as the age increase provide
that the concepts of return to scale. It is measured by year.

16
Education; - is expected to affect maize yield positively. Since it is assuming that the more the
farmers are literate the mere they adopt technology in maize production. It is treated as dummy.

Farming experience; - is expected to correlate positively with maize yield. Because the longer
the households are in maize production the more would be yield since they are assuming to have
awareness on production system. It is measured in year.

Family size; - is also expected to affect maize yield positively. Because the more family size the
household has, the more will be labor for the farmer which could increase maize yield provide
that, it holds true up to return to scale. It is measured in years.

Farm size; - is expected to affect maize positively since the more land holding size is, the more
would be the maize yield. It is measured in hectare.

Seed type; - is also expected to affect maize yield positively. This is because the more improved
seed is being used; the more would be maize yield. It is treated as dummy variable.

Access to credit; - is expected to affect maize yield positively, because the more access to credit,
it is assumed as the easier to afford input on time which contribute to higher maize yield. It is
treated as dummy variable.

Fertilizer; -the more KG of fertilizer applied the more soil fertility which directly contribute to
maize yield. This work up to the concept of returns to scale, it is measured in kilogram.

Pesticide; - is expected to correlate positively with maize yield. This is because the more
pesticide in due production of maize, the lesser pest or the higher pest and weed control which
contribute to higher maize yield. This is also works up to the concept of returns to scale. It is
measured in litters.

Off farm income; - is expected to affect maize yield positively. Because the more the farmers
engaged in off farm activity the easier to afford input on timely basis, which can increase maize
yield. It is treated as dummy variables.

Market place; - is expected to affect maize yield positively. This is because the more the
farmers sell their maize at kebele; the more would be the ease of access to information about
market price. It is treated as dummy.

17
3.8 Model specification
The method of data was used to measure the functional relationship between a quantities
Dependent variable and one or more independent variables were regression analysis. A linear
regression equation of the Dependent variable is Y and X and independent variables areX1, X2,
X3...Xi given by

Yi=Bo+BiXi+Ui

=Bo+BiXi+Ui

=Bo+B1X1+B2X2+B3X3+..............B15X15+Ui

Where

Yi= maize yield which is Dependent variable

Bo= intercept

Bi's=are the slopes (the change in Y for the unit change in explanatory variables).

Xi's= are independent variable which affect maize yield.

Ui= is the value of Y when all independent variables assume zero value (or value that affect
maize yield is ignored by the researchers at the study, in this case climate and weather
conditions).

The coefficient of linear regression model is estimated under the assumptions of the random term
assumes normal distribution with zero mean and constant variance. The values of random terms
are also assumed to be independent. The test about individual coefficient uses the p value and
tests whether each independent variable is drastically significant or not.

18
19
 CHAPTER FOUR

4. Data analysis and presentation

4.1. Descriptive analysis

This section is mainly concerned with descriptive analysis result of survey data and
interpretation of analytical findings.

Data was collected from four kebeles with sample size of 72. The research result showed that.

4.1.1 Age structure

Table 3 Age composition of respondents

Age interval Number of Percentage Mean

respondents
20-30 16 22.22%

31-40 23 31.94%

41-50 27 37.5%

50-57 6 8.33%

TOTAL 72 100% 35.84

Source:-own computed survey 2019

The average Age structure of sample households was 35.84. There is age variation among the
sample households. The minimum and maximum age was 20 and 57. The average result shows
that most of the household has good experience of farming activities which contributes to
increase in maize yield because this is the ranges where human beings are capable of performing
any activity.

4.1.2 Farm size

Table 4. farm size and farming experience distribution of the respondents

20
 Land frequency Percentage Farming Frequency Percentage Average
size experience
interval interval
0.25- 47 65.27% 1-10 23 31.94%
1.25
1.25- 21 29.17% 11-20 27 37.5%
2.25
Above 3 4.167% 21-30 19 26.38%
2.25
Above 30 3 4.167%
Total 72 100% 72 100% 8.28

Source: - own computed survey 2019

There was variation among sample household on land holding size. The minimum and maximum
land holding size of the sample household was 0.25 ha and 2.5ha respectively. The average land
holding was 0.58ha. This shows that land holding of land holding of sample households was
good as compared to Ethiopia farmers average land holding.

On average the far mining experience of the household was 8.28 years. This shows that, sample
households have a good farming experience; they are quite knowledgeable about the production
system that can enhance their maize production efficiency.

4.1.3 Distribution of Access to Credit

Table 5 Access to credit distribution through usage of frequency and percentage

Group Frequency Percentage

Access 40 55.44%
Non access 32 44.56%
Total 72 100%
Source: - own computed survey 2019

Most of the farmers (55.44%) have access to credit. This shows that farmers were able to afford
needed input at the right time. It was also inferred that about 55.44% of sample household were
engaged in off-farm activity. This shows that, farmers were able to tackle or solve their financial
problem even though credit access problem persist.

21
4.1.4 Distribution of Market place

Table 6: market place distribution

Market place Frequency Percentage

Kebele 38 52.78%
Woreda 34 47.22%

Total 72 100%

Source: - own computed survey 2019

Most of the farmers sell their product at kebele market about 52.78% of the house hold were
have a market center at kebele market. which is important to get market information easily.

4.1.5 Distribution of seed variety usage by percentage of households

The research result has shown as there was difference among households in maize seed variety
usage. About 45.21% of household used seed; 27.25% of household used BH-140:20.12% of
household used BH- 540; 7.42% of household were used BH- 660.

The application is also expanding but not optimal as small aspire to have increased volume of
maize production. In the area improved maize varieties such as BH- 540, and BH =660 were
commonly used. The improved maize in the area small improved maize in the area small
improvements was observed in maize seed production in recent years. (Own survey, 2019).

Table 7: distribution of seed type

Seed type Frequency Percentage

Local 32 44.44%
Improved 40 55.56%
Source: - Own computed survey 2019

In the area 55.56% of sample households were used modern maize seed varieties. This reveals
that adoption level of modern seed varieties of sample households was good.

4.1.6Agricultural inputs used by farmers of the area

4.1.7 Fertilizer

22
The major types of fertilizers used in the woreda were DAP and UREA which are relative large
number of farmers have access in the area. The total fertilizer used by farmers in the area is
96.56 kg.

4.1.8Pesticide

Today, chemical application is of the available pest control mechanism in the in the area. It needs
to control migratory pests like locusts, birds weed etc. at times when plants pest and weed
damage crop caused by pest and weeds, it was reported that. The application of pesticide is more
evident. The total pesticide applied in the area estimated to be (105L) in the year 2018/2019

Approximately 2.5liter pesticide is used for used for more than 2 hectares of land. The following
table summarize major inputs in the area their respective amount

Table8: Major inputs used for maize production in the area and their respective amount.

Type of input used Units of measurement Amount of input used

Fertilizer QT 96.59
DAP >> 47.59
Urea >> 49
Improved maize seed verity >> 906.125
Maize BH-660 >> 272
BH-540 >> 245
BH-140 >> 389.125
Pesticide and herbicide >> 105
2-4D >> 46
Endosuifan >> 59
Secondary data Source; - Assosa woreda agricultural and rural development bureau (2018/19)

4.2Major problems of the area

Transportation; - in the area, it was found that as their poor road connection. As a result,
farmers were enforced to use draft and pack animals to make produce available to the market
which consumer more time. Coupled with this was also high transportation cost.

Pests and diseases: - in the area, it was reported that as the infestation of pests and disease were
common. Particularly, maize stem bore, birds, and wild animals like ape were reported as key
challenges for the farmers in the area.

23
Financial problem: - the research result also showed that as farmers were faced financial
problem while accessing inputs, because they sell their maize at winter season when the price is
low. As a result, they faced financial problem in accessing necessary inputs for summer
production.

Delayed rainfall; - from the farmer’s response, there was also shortage of rainfall or erratic
rainfall. As respondents have said, most of the time rainfall occurs when they not benefit the
crop; during harvest time.

Late delivery of inputs; - in the area was late delivery of inputs. As respondents have said late
delivery inputs was attributed due to the absence of distributing agencies.

Table 9: major problems of the study area

Types of problem frequency Percentage

Transportation 12 16.67%
Pests and disease 20 27.77%
Financial problem 15 20.08%
Delayed rain fall 11 15.27%
Late delivery of input 14 19.44%
Total 72 100
Source; own computed survey 2019

4.3 Regression analysis values using multiple linear regression method

Y=B0+B1farsize+B2seedtype+B3acctocre+B4fert+B5offinc+B6markplace+Ui

Y=-5.77+(3.54) far size+(5.099) seed type+(3.75) acctocred+(1.83) off far inc+(0.85) fert+(1.30)
mktplace +Ui

Dummy variables in the model

Off farm (1) for yes (0) for NO

Market place (0) for kebele (1) otherwise

Access to credit (0) for yes (1) for no

24
Seed type 1 improved 0 other wise

Education 0 for illiterate 1 for literate

4.3.1 Disussion the result

To study the effect of socioeconomic factors on maize yield, statistical software window stata
12.0 was used. By using ordinary least regression analysis method, the data was analyzed. The
p–ration test indicated that there was a significant relation analysis and they showed high
goodness. of fit. The coefficient of determination (R-squared) was found to be (0.81) and the
adjusted (R-squared) was (0.77) this means, as age of farmers increase their production potential
decrease which resulted in decrease maize yield. The result was not in line with prior expectation
because as the age increase, maize yield has shown decreasing trend.

25
. import excel "C:\Users\Meron\Desktop\Copy FantaAlemmmm edi.xls", sheet("Sheet1") firstrow

. regress maizepro Age Edu Farexp Famsiz Farsiz seetyp Acccred Fer Pes offincom mktplac

Source SS df MS Number of obs = 72

F( 11, 60) = 23.65
Model 1903.57146 11 173.051951 Prob > F = 0.0000
Residual 439.039654 60 7.31732756 R-squared = 0.8126
Adj R-squared = 0.7782
Total 2342.61111 71 32.9945227 Root MSE = 2.7051

maizepro Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval]

Age .0403566 .0724072 0.56 0.579 -.1044794 .1851927

Edu 1.171095 .7277852 1.61 0.113 -.2846924 2.626882
Farexp -.0549024 .080363 -0.68 0.497 -.2156523 .1058475
Famsiz .2404011 .2466045 0.97 0.334 -.2528815 .7336836
Farsiz 3.546161 .8115274 4.37 0.000 1.922865 5.169458
seetyp 5.099675 1.243063 4.10 0.000 2.613179 7.586171
Acccred 3.751571 1.128216 3.33 0.002 1.494803 6.008339
Fer .0853544 .0463463 1.84 0.070 -.0073521 .1780608
Pes 1.682464 1.222749 1.38 0.174 -.7633989 4.128327
offincom 1.836772 .7752304 2.37 0.021 .2860799 3.387463
mktplac 1.306037 .6927676 1.89 0.064 -.079705 2.691778
_cons -5.717777 2.638655 -2.17 0.034 -10.99587 -.4396804

Source; Stata 12

From the above regressed model, the research found out is, six independent variables that of
farm size, seed type, access to credit, fertilizer, off farm income and market place are in
dependent variables that has positive impact on the dependent variable (output).

The explanatory variables that are significant affect output level, have positive relationship with
crop production.

Given the result of the model, to know whether the estimated partial regression coefficients are
statistically significant or not testing the significance of each explanatory variable is necessary.
The regression result shows that all the coefficient of variable is significant at 1%,5%and 10%
level of significance (using 90%,95%&99% confidence interval test).

26
Access to credit. the dummy variable, which is access, is significant at 5% level of significance
and their coefficient is positive. That is access to credit is positively affects the agricultural
output. The elasticity or responsiveness of output with respect to access (d output/d access) is
3.75. It tells keeping other things remain constant farmers which can access the credit can
increase their productivity by 3.75 quintal.

Market place A dummy variable market place at kebele or woreda is significant at 10% and its
coefficient is positive. The responsiveness of output with respect to market place is 1.30. This
show that, other thing remains constant, farmers in which their market place is at Keble causes
1.30 units of quintals change in the output of farmers in the same direction. This shows the role
of market place on agricultural productivity is more important.

Off farm income The dummy variable, which is participated or non-participated in the off farm
activity, it is significant at 10% and its coefficient is positive. That is off farm activity affects the
agricultural output. The elasticity of output with respect to off farm activity (d output/d farm) is
1.83%. It tells keeping other things remain constant farmers which engaged in the off farm
activity can increase their output by 1.83 quintal.

Seed type is significant at 1% level of significance and coefficients positive. The responsiveness
of the maize yield with respect to seed (d/maize yield/d seed type) is 5.099. This shows that other
things remain constant; farmers which use improved seed can increase 5.099 quintal in the
output of the farmers.

Seed variety influenced maize positively and significant (p< 0.01). This means, as the farmers
get adopted improved maize variety, the yield would also increase.

Farm size The regression result shows that land size is positively affect agricultural output. The
elasticity or responsiveness of output with respect to land size (d output/d land size) is 3.54 unit/
quintal increases in the output of farmers. This means that, the size of land increase or decrease
by one unit leads agricultural output to increase or decreases3.54 quintals, when Other things
being unchanged and also it is significant at 1%level.

Fertilizer The coefficient of fertilizer to output is positive from the above result. The elasticity
of output with respect to fertilizer is 0.085. It tells us a 1 unit (quintal) increase or decrease use of

27
fertilizer leads 0.085 unit (quintal) increase or decrease of output. Other things remain constant.
This shows that increase in the use of fertilizer by farmers increases the agricultural output. The
use of fertilizer enhances the fertility of the soil to replace the chemical elements taken from the
soil by the previous crop year. This increase farm production and productivity. And which is
significant at 10% level.

Regression analysis coefficient of fertilizer was corrected positively with maize yield and
significant (p< 0.1) showing that with increase in fertilizer maize yield was increased.

Generally, from the above analysis seed type has higher positive effect on agricultural output
compared to the other determinant that included in the model. On the other hand, fertilizer have
lower positive role for agricultural output compared to the rest variables.

4.4Test of the model

In this part, model adequacy and diagnostic test were employed.

Model Adequacy Test

To examine whether regression model is statistically significant or not /whether explanatory

variables jointly have explanatory power F-tests is crucial. Fitness is the measure of the overall
significance of the model and test of significance of R.

H0: Bi = 0 (all explanatory variables have not explanatory power or the model is overall in
significant)

HI: H0 is not true.

From the previous regression result F Calculated is 23.65 and p-value is 0.000. This show that
reject H0: Bi=0 and accept alternative hypothesis. That means the coefficient of all independent
variables affect the variation of output is statistically significant.

Goodness of fit of the model

28
As the above regression result table shows that R2=0.81. Which implies 81% of output variation
is explained by the selected (11) explanatory variables. In other words, 81% of variation of the
dependent variable is due to the variation of the independent variable which are included in the
model and the remaining variation 0.19(19%) is explained by the variable which are not included
in the model. If the value of adjusted R2 is higher, the greatest the goodness of fit of the
regression plans to be the sample observation. Therefore, the adjusted R 2=0.77 obtained in the
regression model reveals that their good fitness of values for a given result.

Diagnostic tests result

In this section, multi co linearity, heteroscedasticity was employed by the researcher.

Multi co linearity Test

Presence of multi co linearity affects the multiple linear estimators and makes them inefficient
and in consistence. There for the problem of multi co linearity must be tested. In this study
variance inflating factor (VIF) was employed to test multi co linearity of independent variables.
VIF shows how the variance of an estimator is influenced by presence of multi co linearity. The
result of the test as follows;

. vif

Variable VIF 1/VIF

Fer 6.46 0.154761

Pes 6.38 0.156744
Age 5.64 0.177365
Farexp 4.51 0.221816
seetyp 3.77 0.265388
Edu 3.64 0.274574
Acccred 3.31 0.301834
Farsiz 3.01 0.331917
Famsiz 2.93 0.341439
offincom 1.46 0.683378
mktplac 1.19 0.842738

Mean VIF 3.85

29
From the above result VIF is less than 10 for all independent variables that include in model.
From this, the conclusion is that there is no multi co linearity problem between explanatory
variables. It is possible to estimate individual effect of each variable on dependent variables. (see
the appendix).

Heteroscedasticity test

Hypothesis

Ho: constant variance

HI: not constant variance

The assumption of heteroscedasticity stated that the variance of each random term around its
zero mean is not constant and changes as the explanatory variable changes regardless of the
sample size. But it does not mean that it affects the unbiasedness and consistency properties of
multiple linear estimators rather it results the variation of coefficients of OLS to be incorrect and
inefficient. To detect this problem, the researcher utilizes Breusch–pagan (cook-weiberg) test for
heteroscedasticity. Out result shows that, the p-value of CH 12 obtained from its calculation is
sufficiently low, then we can reject Ho (constant variance/homoscedasticity). That is p-value of
ch2; prob>ch2=0.60 is greater than that the level of significance= 0.01,0.05&0.1 so that accept the
null hypothesis. Therefore, there is no variation in the size of the values of the explanatory
variable, which signifies that there is no problem of heteroscedasticity.

. hettest

Breusch-Pagan / Cook-Weisberg test for heteroskedasticity

Ho: Constant variance
Variables: fitted values of Adop

chi2(1) = 0.26
Prob > chi2 = 0.6068

30
 CHAPTER FIVE

5. Conclusion and Recommendation

5.1 Conclusion
Agriculture is the most important activity and carried through the world. it is the economic
activity, especially in developing countries. Starting from very beginning of the study, several
issues have been rose about the maize yield for sustain food security

The general objective of this study is to identify the major determinants that affect crop
productivity. In order to achieve the desired agricultural output, the availability of inputs is
mandatory. The empirical analysis was based on cross sectional data. The researcher employed
Multiple linear regression model to ensure the relationship between inputs and output.

From the regression result fertilizer, improved seed, farm size, credit service, off farm income
and market place are, positively related with crop production whereas, farming experience has
negative relationship with crop production. This shows that the increment of use of input
increase crop production, further leads to improve food security, avoid poverty and improve
economic growth and development in Ethiopia. use of fertilizer, off-farm income, improved
seed, market place, access to credit and land size has statistically significant impact on output.
However, age of heads of household, education level, farming experience, family size and
pesticide are statistically insignificant impact on crop production.

Generally, the researcher concluded that the availability of input such as: fertilizer, improved
seed and Land Size Etc. is important to expand crop production.

5.2 Recommendations
Following the findings and conclusions from the study, the crop productivities are highly
depending on inputs such as fertilize, improved seeds, off farm income market place and land
size, etc.

 Measure should be put across by the government to ensure that the farmers get farm
inputs in time and at a reasonable price in order to enable them produce more. This will

31
 assist in the building of economy and also address the cases of unemployment
experienced especially in the areas.
 The government should extend road infrastructure so as to ensure of transportation and
market integration.
 The government should improve promotion of market center at the kebele level so that
farmers get market information easily and it reduces transportation cost.
 The government should also improve provision of credit to solve short term financial
problem of the farmers.
 Governmental and non- governmental organizations may focus more on promoting the
use of modern inputs and should provide these inputs in appropriate manner.
 The regression results that using of pesticide is positively related with output but
statistically insignificant. What expected from the government is to conduct and teach
farmers about how to use of it. Besides this, farmers should use it properly.

References
 Abdisa Gemeda. Girma Aboma and Hugo verkuijil. 2001; Farmers Maize seed System in
Western Oromia, Ethiopia.
 Befikagu (1999/2000). Agricultural Sample Survey.

32
 Ethiopia Commodity Exchange Authority, January 2009. Understanding Maize, Addis
Ababa.
 FAO/ WFP (2005). World Hunge Kenya. Rome; World Food program of the United
States.
 Food supply prospects for 2nd half 2012, Disaster Risk Management & Food securiry
Sector August 2012, Addis Ababa,
 IFPRI. June 2007. Policy to promote General intensification in Ethiopia. Addis Ababa.
 World Bank (2007). World Development Report 2008; Agriculture for development
Washington. D.C
 Boreda Woreda agricultural and rural development bureau (2010).
 Berhanu Gebremedhin, moti J. Dirk H. (2009) Smallholder, institutional service and
commercial transformation in Ethiopia. International livelstonal livestock research
institute. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
 Samuel G/ selassie (2007) Commercialization of small holder agriculture in selected teff
growing areas of Ethiopia, paper presented at the fifth international conference on the
Ethiopia EEA. Addis Ababa.
 Menale k. Zikhalip p.zikhali, k- Gunnari (2011), Sustainable agricultural practice and
agricultural productivity in Ethiopia, Envronment for development
 Zenebe G/Gziabher, Arjeoskamand Tassew Woldehanna (2005), Technical efficiency of
peasant farmers in northern Ethiopia stochastic frontier approach. EEA, Ethiopia.

33
 APPENDIX
WACHEMO UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF BUSINESS AND ECONOMICS

DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS

Objective: - Hi my name is Fentanesh Alem am degree graduate student at wcu. Currently I am

conducting ‘’determinants of maize in major or growing zones of Ethiopia, the case of Assosa
woreda Assosa zone Benishangul region’’ in partial fulfillment of BA degree in ECONOMICS.
So the prime objective of these questioners is to gather information that can assist me to
accomplish my research project.

This questionnaire was prepared to household farmers of Assosa woreda.

Instruction: - Fill the blank with appropriate, short and precise and put mark (x) in the box
provided.

House hold demographics

Code ________-- kebele ____________

34
1.Age _________

2.Education level 0. Illiterate 1. Literate

3.Household size _______

4. Number of economically active (productive) family member’s __________

5. Number of dependent in household _____________

6. Number of dependent outside house hold

7.Land size

Plot number Crop grown Size (ha) Fertilizer applied Pesticide per
per hectare(ha) hectare(liter)
DAP UREA
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

1.Maize 2. sorghum 3. nut 4. Green paper 5. Teff

8. How long you used grow maize? ________________

9. What type of maize seed you grow? 0. Local seed 1. Improved seed

10. If improved what type of improved seed variety you use?

______________________________

11. Do you have access to credit? 0. Yes 1. No

12. If yes where do you access it? ________________________

35
13. Have you engaged in off-farm activity? 0. Yes 1. No

14. Where is the selling market for your product 0. wereda 1. kebele

15. How much quintal of maize you yield or produce in last are?

16. If the yield was low production what do you think the reasons are?

0. The land erode and not fertile 1. Shortage of rainfall

2. Due to pest and disease 3. Later delivery of input

Appendix 2

36
. import excel "C:\Users\Meron\Desktop\Copy FantaAlemmmm edi.xls", sheet("Sheet1") firstrow

. regress maizepro Age Edu Farexp Famsiz Farsiz seetyp Acccred Fer Pes offincom mktplac

Source SS df MS Number of obs = 72

F( 11, 60) = 23.65
Model 1903.57146 11 173.051951 Prob > F = 0.0000
Residual 439.039654 60 7.31732756 R-squared = 0.8126
Adj R-squared = 0.7782
Total 2342.61111 71 32.9945227 Root MSE = 2.7051

maizepro Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval]

Age .0403566 .0724072 0.56 0.579 -.1044794 .1851927

Edu 1.171095 .7277852 1.61 0.113 -.2846924 2.626882
Farexp -.0549024 .080363 -0.68 0.497 -.2156523 .1058475
Famsiz .2404011 .2466045 0.97 0.334 -.2528815 .7336836
Farsiz 3.546161 .8115274 4.37 0.000 1.922865 5.169458
seetyp 5.099675 1.243063 4.10 0.000 2.613179 7.586171
Acccred 3.751571 1.128216 3.33 0.002 1.494803 6.008339
Fer .0853544 .0463463 1.84 0.070 -.0073521 .1780608
Pes 1.682464 1.222749 1.38 0.174 -.7633989 4.128327
offincom 1.836772 .7752304 2.37 0.021 .2860799 3.387463
mktplac 1.306037 .6927676 1.89 0.064 -.079705 2.691778
_cons -5.717777 2.638655 -2.17 0.034 -10.99587 -.4396804

37
. vif

Variable VIF 1/VIF

Fer 6.46 0.154761

Pes 6.38 0.156744
Age 5.64 0.177365
Farexp 4.51 0.221816
seetyp 3.77 0.265388
Edu 3.64 0.274574
Acccred 3.31 0.301834
Farsiz 3.01 0.331917
Famsiz 2.93 0.341439
offincom 1.46 0.683378
mktplac 1.19 0.842738

Mean VIF 3.85

. hettest

Breusch-Pagan / Cook-Weisberg test for heteroskedasticity

Ho: Constant variance
Variables: fitted values of Adop

chi2(1) = 0.26
Prob > chi2 = 0.6068

38