Report 46 Horticulture PDF

Constraints and Opportunities of Horticulture Production and
Marketing in Eastern Ethiopia
By Bezabih Emana and Hadera Gebremedhin
February 2007
DCG Report No. 46

Constraints and Opportunities of Horticulture Production and
Marketing in Eastern Ethiopia
Bezabih Emana and Hadera Gebremedhin
DCG Report No. 46

February 2007
The Drylands Coordination Group (DCG) is an NGO-driven forum for exchange of practical
experiences and knowledge on food security and natural resource management in the drylands of Africa..
DCG facilitates this exchange of experiences between NGOs and research and policy-making
institutions. The DCG activities, which are carried out by DCG members in Ethiopia, Eritrea, Mali and
Sudan, aim to contribute to improved food security of vulnerable households and sustainable natural
resource management in the drylands of Africa.
The founding DCG members consist of ADRA Norway, CARE Norway, Norwegian Church Aid,
Norwegian People's Aid, The Strømme Foundation and The Development Fund. The secretariat of DCG
is located at the Environmental House (Miljøhuset G9) in Oslo and acts as a facilitating and
implementing body for the DCG. The DCG’s activities are funded by NORAD (the Norwegian Agency
for Development Cooperation).
This study was carried out by the CARE Ethiopia for the Drylands Coordination Group.
Extracts from this publication may only be reproduced after prior consultation with the DCG secretariat.
The findings, interpretations and conclusions expressed in this publication are entirely those of the
author(s) and cannot be attributed directly to the Drylands Coordination Group.
© Emana, B., and Gebremedhin, H., Drylands Coordination Group Report No. 46 (02, 2007)
Drylands Coordination Group c/o Miljøhuset G9
Grensen 9b
N-0159 Oslo
Norway
Tel.: +47 23 10 94 90
Fax: +47 23 10 94 94
Internet: http://www.drylands-group.org
ISSN: 1503-0601
Photo credits: T.A. Benjaminsen, Gry Synnevåg and Bezabih Emana
Cover design: Spekter Reklamebyrå as, Ås.

Printed at: Mail Boxes ETC.
Table of Contents
ACRONYMS ............................................................................................................................................................ VII

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS....................................................................................................................................VIII
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY........................................................................................................................................IX
1. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................................. 1
1.1 BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................................................. 1
1.2 OBJECTIVES ................................................................................................................................................. 2
1.3 ORGANIZATION OF THE REPORT .................................................................................................................. 2
1.4 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY ........................................................................................................................ 2
2. METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................................................. 4
2.1 DATA COLLECTION ...................................................................................................................................... 4
2.1.1 Producers’ survey .................................................................................................................................. 4
2.1.2 Consumers’ survey ................................................................................................................................. 5
2.1.3 Focus group discussion.......................................................................................................................... 6
2.1.4 Secondary data....................................................................................................................................... 6
2.2 DATA ANALYSIS .......................................................................................................................................... 6
3. SOME CHARACTERISTICS OF THE RESPONDENTS ............................................................................ 7
3.1 PRODUCERS ................................................................................................................................................. 7
3.1.1 Demographic features ............................................................................................................................ 7
3.1.2 Education ............................................................................................................................................... 8
3.1.3 Means of livelihood ................................................................................................................................ 8
3.2 CONSUMERS ................................................................................................................................................ 9
3.2.1 Demographic features ............................................................................................................................ 9
3.2.2 Means of livelihood of the consumers .................................................................................................. 10
4. HORTICULTURE PRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 12
4.1 FARMING SYSTEM IN THE AREA ................................................................................................................. 12
4.2 TYPES OF HORTICULTURE PRODUCED IN THE AREA .................................................................................. 15
4.2.1 Vegetables ............................................................................................................................................ 15
4.2.2 Fruits.................................................................................................................................................... 15
4.3 INPUT USE FOR HORTICULTURE PRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 16
4.3.1 Land allocated for horticulture production.......................................................................................... 16
4.3.2 Irrigation .............................................................................................................................................. 17
4.3.3 Labor.................................................................................................................................................... 19
4.3.4 Fertilizer and manure........................................................................................................................... 19
4.3.5 Seeds/seedlings..................................................................................................................................... 20
4.3.6 Pesticides ............................................................................................................................................. 21
4.4 VEGETABLE PRODUCTION, SUPPLY AND INCOME ....................................................................................... 22
4.5 PROFITABILITY OF HORTICULTURE PRODUCTION ...................................................................................... 25
4.5.1 Cost of production................................................................................................................................ 25
4.5.2 Production and marketing efficiency ................................................................................................... 26
5. INPUT SUPPLY SYSTEM.............................................................................................................................. 28
5.1 INSTITUTIONS AND POLICIES...................................................................................................................... 28
5.2 INPUT SUPPLY CHANNEL ........................................................................................................................... 28
5.2.1 Seeds/seedlings..................................................................................................................................... 31
5.2.2 Fertilizer............................................................................................................................................... 32
5.2.3 Pesticides ............................................................................................................................................. 32
5.2.4 Farm equipment ................................................................................................................................... 33
6. CONSTRAINTS AND PROSPECTS OF HORTICULTURE PRODUCTION ......................................... 35
6.1 CONSTRAINTS ............................................................................................................................................ 35
6.2 OPPORTUNITIES FOR HORTICULTURE PRODUCTION ................................................................................... 36
7. HORTICULTURE MARKETING IN EASTERN ETHIOPIA ................................................................... 38

7.1 MARKETS FOR HORTICULTURE PRODUCTS ................................................................................................ 38
iii
7.1.1 Finkile market ...................................................................................................................................... 39
7.1.2 Haramaya market................................................................................................................................. 40
7.1.3 Kombolcha market ............................................................................................................................... 41
7.1.4 Woter market........................................................................................................................................ 42
7.1.5 Harar market........................................................................................................................................ 42
7.1.6 Dire Dawa market................................................................................................................................ 43
7.1.7 Djibouti market .................................................................................................................................... 44
7.2 MARKETING CHANNEL AND THE MAJOR ACTORS ..................................................................................... 44
7.2.1 Producers ............................................................................................................................................. 45
7.2.2 Collectors ............................................................................................................................................. 45
7.2.3 Brokers ................................................................................................................................................. 46
7.2.4 Retailers ............................................................................................................................................... 46
7.2.5 Wholesalers .......................................................................................................................................... 46
7.2.6 Exporters .............................................................................................................................................. 47
7.2.7 Consumers............................................................................................................................................ 48
7.3 MARKET FACILITIES/INFRASTRUCTURE..................................................................................................... 52
7.3.1 Transportation...................................................................................................................................... 52
7.3.2 Storage ................................................................................................................................................. 54
7.3.3 Grading, standardization and packaging............................................................................................. 54
7.3.4 Financing ............................................................................................................................................. 55
7.3.5 Market information .............................................................................................................................. 56
7.4 CONSTRAINTS OF HORTICULTURE MARKETING ......................................................................................... 56
7.5 OPPORTUNITIES FOR INCREASED HORTICULTURE MARKETING ................................................................. 58
8. PRICE ANALYSIS .......................................................................................................................................... 60
8.1 PRICES OF HORTICULTURAL PRODUCTS IN THE DOMESTIC MARKET ......................................................... 60
8.2 MARKETING MARGINS .............................................................................................................................. 61
8.3 DJIBOUTI MARKET..................................................................................................................................... 62
9. GENDER ASPECT OF HORTICULTURE PRODUCTION AND MARKETING .................................. 64
9.1 PRODUCTION PARTICIPATION ..................................................................................................................... 64
9.2 MARKETING DECISION .............................................................................................................................. 64
10. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.................................................................................... 65
10.1 CONCLUSIONS............................................................................................................................................ 65
10.2 RECOMMENDATIONS.................................................................................................................................. 65
10.2.1 Improving the horticulture production ............................................................................................ 65
10.2.2 Improving marketing of horticultural products............................................................................... 66
11. REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................................... 68
ANNEXES .................................................................................................................................................................. 69
ANNEX 1: PRODUCERS' QUESTIONNAIRE (PRODUCTION AND MARKETING) ............................................................. 69
ANNEX 2: CONSUMERS' QUESTIONNAIRE (PRODUCTION AND MARKETING) ............................................................ 77
ANNEX 3: LIST OF KEY INFORMANTS AND EXPERTS FROM DIFFERENT INSTITUTIONS .............................................. 81
ANNEX 4: LIST OF KEY INFORMANTS AND FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION PARTICIPANTS FROM DEVELOPMENT
STATION, PEASANT ASSOCIATION & WOREDA LEVEL INSTITUTIONS ....................................................................... 83
iv
List of Tables
TABLE 1: DISTRIBUTION OF SAMPLE HORTICULTURE PRODUCERS INCLUDED IN THE SURVEY ......................................... 5
TABLE 2: NUMBER OF CONSUMERS INCLUDED IN THE SURVEY BY SEX ........................................................................... 6
TABLE 3: AVERAGE HOUSEHOLD SIZE AND DEPENDENCY RATIO .................................................................................... 7
TABLE 4: MARITAL STATUS OF THE HOUSEHOLD HEADS BY WOREDA.............................................................................. 8
TABLE 5: LEVEL OF EDUCATION OF THE HOUSEHOLD HEADS BY WOREDA ....................................................................... 8
TABLE 6: AVERAGE NO. OF CHILDREN IN SCHOOL PER SAMPLE HOUSEHOLD .................................................................. 8
TABLE 7: MAJOR MEANS OF INCOME GENERATION OF THE HORTICULTURE PRODUCERS ................................................. 9
TABLE 8: CONSUMERS' HOUSEHOLD SIZE AND FAMILY LABOR AVAILABILITY .............................................................. 10
TABLE 9: LEVEL OF EDUCATION OF THE HOUSEHOLD HEAD (CONSUMERS)................................................................... 10
TABLE 10: ANNUAL INCOME AND ITS PROPORTION ALLOCATED FOR THE PURCHASE OF HORTICULTURAL PRODUCTS .. 11
TABLE 11: AREA ALLOCATED TO VEGETABLES DURING THE DIFFERENT PRODUCTION CYCLES .................................... 13
TABLE 12: PROPORTION OF HOUSEHOLDS PRODUCING VEGETABLES (2005/06 PRODUCTION YEAR) ............................. 15
TABLE 13: NUMBER OF FRUIT TREES PER HOUSEHOLD .................................................................................................. 16
TABLE 14: AVERAGE CROPLAND HOLDING, IRRIGABLE LAND AND USE INTENSITY (HA) ............................................... 16
TABLE 15: TYPES OF CROPS PRODUCED BY USING IRRIGATION ..................................................................................... 17
TABLE 16: SOURCE OF WATER FOR IRRIGATION ............................................................................................................ 18
TABLE 17: PROPORTION OF HOUSEHOLDS WITH DIFFERENT METHODS OF IRRIGATION.................................................. 18
TABLE 18: SOURCES OF LABOR FOR HORTICULTURE PRODUCTION................................................................................ 19
TABLE 19: LABOR USE FOR SELECTED VEGETABLE CROP PRODUCTION......................................................................... 19
TABLE 20: NUMBER OF RESPONDENTS APPLYING ANIMAL MANURE TO VEGETABLES ................................................... 20
TABLE 21: USE OF CHEMICAL FERTILIZER FOR SELECTED VEGETABLE CROPS............................................................... 20
TABLE 22: SOURCE OF PESTICIDES PURCHASED BY FARMERS ....................................................................................... 21
TABLE 23: PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED IN USING PESTICIDE ........................................................................................... 22
TABLE 24: AREA ALLOCATED TO VEGETABLES AND NUMBER OF PRODUCERS IN DIFFERENT WOREDAS ......................... 22
TABLE 25: PRODUCTION AND UTILIZATION OF VEGETABLES ........................................................................................ 23
TABLE 26: REASONS WHY PRODUCTION/SUPPLY INCREASED DURING THE LAST 5 YEARS ............................................. 24
TABLE 27: COST OF PRODUCTION OF SELECTED VEGETABLES....................................................................................... 26
TABLE 28: PRODUCTION AND MARKETING EFFICIENCY AT PRIMARY AND TERMINAL MARKETS ................................... 27
TABLE 29: SOURCES OF IMPROVED SEEDS OF HORTICULTURAL CROPS IN THE STUDY AREA ......................................... 31
TABLE 30: FARMERS' RESPONSE ON SOURCES OF IMPROVED SEED ................................................................................ 32
TABLE 31: SOURCE OF FERTILIZER FOR HORTICULTURE PRODUCTION .......................................................................... 32
TABLE 32: INSTITUTIONS SUPPLYING PESTICIDES ......................................................................................................... 33
TABLE 33: INSTITUTIONS SUPPLYING SPRAYERS/WATER PUMPS ................................................................................... 34
TABLE 34: TOP THREE PRODUCTION PROBLEMS (% OF RESPONDENTS) ......................................................................... 35
TABLE 35: OPPORTUNITIES FOR EXPANSION OF HORTICULTURAL CROPS PRODUCTION ................................................. 37
TABLE 36: MAJOR HORTICULTURE TRADED AT FINKILE MARKET AND OUTFLOW ........................................................ 39
TABLE 37: VEGETABLE MARKETING IN HARAMAYA MARKET ...................................................................................... 40
TABLE 38: PROPORTION OF VEGETABLES TRANSPORTED TO DIRE DAWA ..................................................................... 40
TABLE 39: MAJOR SUPPLY OF POTATO TO KOMBOLCHA MARKET ................................................................................. 41
TABLE 40: SUPPLY OF ONION ........................................................................................................................................ 42
TABLE 41: SUPPLY OF POTATO...................................................................................................................................... 43
TABLE 42: SOURCES OF SUPPLY OF HORTICULTURAL PRODUCTS TO CONSUMERS (%) .................................................. 49
TABLE 43: THE QUANTITY PURCHASED PER MARKET DAY IN KG .................................................................................. 49
TABLE 44: PURCHASING FREQUENCY AND QUANTITIES PURCHASED BY THE CONSUMERS (EASTERN TOWNS) .............. 51
TABLE 45: PROPORTION OF CONSUMERS WHO RANKED THE CONSTRAINTS OF PURCHASING THE RESPECTIVE
PRODUCTS AS THE TOP THREE PROBLEMS (%) ..................................................................................................... 52
TABLE 46: WHAT SHOULD BE DONE TO IMPROVE CONSUMPTION OF HORTICULTURAL PRODUCTS? .............................. 52
TABLE 47: PROPORTION OF RESPONDENTS WHO RANKED THE MARKETING PROBLEMS AS ONE OF THE TOP THREE
PROBLEMS (%) .................................................................................................................................................... 57
TABLE 48: AVERAGE MONTHLY CONSUMER PRICE OF HORTICULTURE PRODUCTS MARKETED AT HARAR MARKET
(SEPT. 2005 TO AUG. 2006) (BIRR PER KG) ......................................................................................................... 61
TABLE 49: MARKETING MARGIN (BIRR/QT) .................................................................................................................. 62
TABLE 50: PRICES OF MAJOR FRUITS AND VEGETABLES EXPORTED TO DJIBOUTI .......................................................... 63
v
List of Figures
FIGURE 1: COMPOSITION OF CONSUMERS BY INCOME SOURCE (%) ............................................................................... 11
FIGURE 2: TYPICAL CROPPING PATTERN IN EASTERN HARARGHE, EASTERN ETHIOPIA ................................................. 14
FIGURE 3: PROPORTION OF HOUSEHOLDS HAVING CROPLAND AND IRRIGABLE LAND ................................................... 18
FIGURE 4: TYPES OF SEEDS USED BY FARMERS TO PRODUCE HORTICULTURAL CROPS (N=128) .................................... 21
FIGURE 5: FARMERS' ASSESSMENT OF CHANGES IN VOLUME OF SALES OF HORTICULTURAL PRODUCTS........................ 23
FIGURE 6: POTATO YIELD (QT/HA) ............................................................................................................................... 25
FIGURE 7: INPUT SUPPLY CHANNEL............................................................................................................................... 30
FIGURE 8: MAJOR HORTICULTURE MARKETS AND FLOW IN EASTERN ETHIOPIA ............................................................ 38
FIGURE 9: MAJOR MARKET ACTORS ALONG THE MARKET CHANNEL ............................................................................. 45
FIGURE 10: TREND OF EXPORT OF HORTICULTURAL PRODUCTS .................................................................................... 48
FIGURE 11: CHANGE IN QUANTITY AND REVENUE ........................................................................................................ 48
FIGURE 12: AVERAGE PRICE OF POTATO AT KOMBOLCHA MARKET .............................................................................. 60
vi
ACRONYMS
AIQCI Agricultural Input Quality Control and Inspection

AISE Agricultural Input Supply Enterprise
ARDO Agriculture and Rural Development Office
CATVC Chiro Agricultural Technical and Vocational Training College
DAs Development Agents
DCG Drylands Coordination Group
ECC-SDCOH Ethiopia Catholic Church Social and Development Coordinating Office of
Harar
ETFVMSC Ethiopia Fruits and Vegetables Marketing Share Company
FGD Focus Group Discussion
IPC International Potato Center
MD Man days
MOARD Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development
MOTI Ministry of Trade and Industry
NGOs Non Governmental Organizations
OARD Oromia Agricultural and Rural Development
PA Peasant Association
PRA Participatory Rural Appraisal
QSCAE Quality Standard and Control Authority of Ethiopia
qt Quintal (100 kg)
USD United States Dollar
WARDO Woreda Agriculture and Rural Development Office
ZARDO Zonal Agriculture and Rural Development Office
vii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Several people contributed to the successful accomplishment of this work. The management
of DCG Ethiopia in general and Mr. Abiy Alemu in particular were very helpful facilitating
the assignment. Staffs of CARE Ethiopia especially Ms. Komi Alemu and Mr. Asmare Ayale
were helpful in facilitating the logistic and the data collection process. The eastern Hararghe
and western Hararghe zone Agriculture and Rural Development Offices, Haramaya, Kersa,
Kombolcha, and Chiro Agriculture and Rural Development Offices, the Harari Agricultural
and Rural Development Office, Trade and Industry Development Agency, Dire Dawa
Agriculture and Rural Development Office, Quarantine and the Dire Dawa Customs Office
are among the many organizations that cooperated in providing the necessary data and
facilitated the data collection in their respective areas.
Without the willingness of the traders, farmers, consumers, middlemen, and experts to
respond to the questions, this work would not have been possible. Mrs. Hedija Mohammed
helped in the data analysis.
Mrs. Lauren Naville and Mr. Moti Jaleta read the draft report and gave useful comments
which helped to improve the report.
The authors appreciate their contributions and thank them all.
The authors
viii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The study was conducted in selected major horticulture producing woredas, namely
Kombolcha, Haramaya, Kersa (for vegetables) and Dire Dawa (for fruits). The study aims at
assessing the marketing channels, organizations, linkages and lines of movements of
horticultural products and production inputs to understand the major constraints of marketing
functions and opportunities to improve horticulture production and marketing.
The data collection was conducted in September 2006. A survey was conducted using
structured and semi-structured questionnaires to collect primary data from 141 producers and
95 consumers. Moreover, PRA tools were used to collect information from groups and key
informant producers, traders, transporters, exporters, institutions involved in extension, input
supply and marketing. The following provides a brief summery of the findings of the study.
Production:
Different types of vegetables are grown in the study area with different intensities in terms of
land and other input allocation, purpose of production, and marketability. The most
commonly grown vegetables in terms of the number of growers are Irish potato, cabbage,
onion, carrot and beet roots. Only 23% of the respondents (N=141) produce fruits. The
production is concentrated in the lowland areas. Most of the households have few plants often
grown for consumption although a limited amount is also sold. Vegetables provide the most
intensive production system where some farmers produce them in three cycles within the
same year. But two cycles are very common.
Irrigation water is crucial for horticulture production. Hence, most of the vegetable producers
rely on irrigation mainly to harvest their products during the dry season when the price is also
high. High fertilizer and animal manure intensity is used. Since the land size is small, the
fertilizer use intensity is high. About 31% of the vegetable producers used local varieties.
Improved varieties needed to produce the desired product are said to be unavailable.
Pesticides are used by some 33% of the sample respondents. About 74% of them acquired it
from known sources while some 11% purchased it from unknown sources. There are
observations of adulteration of inputs affecting germination qualities of seeds and efficacy of
pesticides.
Input supply system:

Improved seeds, fertilizers and pesticides are supplied through different channels. Seeds and
pesticides are either collected from local producers or imported for further distribution.
Fertilizers are imported. The role of unions in importing and distributing inputs is growing.
Currently there are some 11 unions importing fertilizer. The regional governments deal and
facilitate input supply through the unions to member cooperatives and then to farmers. The
Ethiopian Agricultural Inputs Supply Enterprise (AISE) is a major public institution involved
in inputs importing, collecting and distributing through its branch offices at woreda level.
Traders also play a crucial role in supplying inputs.
Production constraints and opportunities:

The major horticulture production constraints include pests, drought, shortage of fertilizer,
and price of fuel for pumping water for irrigation. Lack of desired seed variety was also
stated. The opportunities for increasing horticulture production include the increase in market
integration, the need for intensive production in response to increasing population pressure,
farmers' awareness of the benefits, the current outreach program in relation to supportive
government policy, attempts made in water harvesting, etc.
ix
Horticulture marketing:
Vegetables and fruits are produced in some specific locations in the eastern part of Ethiopia
and supplied to the local markets and to the neighboring countries. The major markets
identified for collection and distribution of large volumes of vegetables are Haramaya,
Finkile, Harar, Kombolcha and Dire Dawa. The market actors namely producers, collectors,
brokers, transporters, traders, consumers, and exporters play different roles along the market
chain.
Irish potatoes and onion/shallot are the most commonly marketed vegetables accounting for
about 60 and 20% of the marketed products. The other products such as cabbage, beetroots
and carrot, garlic, green pepper, Baharo, lettuce and tomato are marketed at relatively smaller
quantities by few farmers.
The leafy vegetables are often supplied from the woredas within the eastern region to markets
in the eastern towns including Djibouti while relatively less perishable and highly demanded
vegetables such as Irish potatoes and onion, are also supplied from markets in Addis Ababa
and eastern Shewa zone of Oromia to these markets depending on the seasonal supply deficit
in the region.
The production is seasonal and price is inversely related to supply. During the peak supply
period, the prices decline. The situation is worsened by the perishability of the products.
Storage facilities are poor. Along the market channel 25% of the product is spoiled.
Farmers’ bargaining power is low due to the lack of alternative market outlet. The most
common marketing channel immediately available to the farmer is through brokers. There are
up to three brokers between the producer and the trader. Each of the brokers makes a known
margin of Birr 5-10 per quintal. The traders/wholesaler and the producer do not have any
contact in which case the broker is decisive in setting the price, often making his own margin
(unknown to both trader and producer). There is no norm or regulation governing the acts of
the brokers and their behavior negatively affects the farmers.
Every market actor makes its own market margin. Hence, the more the farmers organize
themselves and access the terminal market, the more they benefit.
Marketing problems:
The major constraints of marketing include lack of markets to absorb the production, low
price for the products, large number of middlemen in the marketing system, lack of marketing
institutions safeguarding farmers' interest and rights over their marketable produces (e.g.
cooperatives), lack of coordination among producers to increase their bargaining power, poor
product handling and packaging, imperfect pricing system, lack of transparency in market
information system mainly in the export market.
Informal transaction prevails in the export system. Producers and local traders receive value
for their products only after the exported product is sold. There is a lack of standard for
quality control and hence lack of discriminatory pricing system that accounts for quality and
grades of the products.
Recommendations:
Different recommendations are forwarded. The most crucial ones are organizing the traders
and the producers to work as partners. Building their business capacity and overcoming their
constraints and capacitating them to use market information are important. Putting the market
right through institutionalizing the marketing system, the commission agents' functioning,
x
grades and standards, improving the export system by improving the transparency in the price
setting and credit system are crucial interventions. Finally, the government should review the
export price, which is determined through negotiations.
xi
Constraints and Opportunities in Horticulture Production and Marketing in eastern Ethiopia
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND
More than 85% of the Ethiopian population, residing in the rural area, is engaged in
agricultural production as a major means of livelihood. However, the agricultural productivity
is low due to use of low level of improved agricultural technologies, risks associated with
weather conditions, diseases and pests, etc. Moreover, due to the ever increasing population
pressure, the land holding per household is declining leading to low level of production to
meet the consumption requirement of the households. Hararghe highland is one of the highly
populated areas in Ethiopia. As a result, intensive production is becoming a means of
promoting agro-enterprise development in order to increase the land productivity. Horticulture
production gives an opportunity for intensive production and increases smallholder farmers'
participation in the market.
The production of horticultural crops is a major element of the farming system of some of the
woredas1 in the eastern part of Ethiopia such as Fedis, Haramaya, Kombolcha, Kersa, Meta,
Kurfa Chelle, Grawa, Jarso in eastern Hararghe zone and some other woredas such as
Gemechis in western Hararghe zone, and Dire Dawa Provisional Administrative City Council.
In the areas where irrigation water is available and farmers have access to the market,
horticulture production is a major source of cash income for the households. Horticultural
products are supplied to the local markets and exported to Djibouti and Somalia. Horticulture
production and marketing is one of the major sources of livelihood for a large number of
farmers, transporters, middlemen and traders in the area.
The Ethiopian Rural Development Strategy document has given emphasis to market-led
agricultural development that will be achieved by establishing and implementing grades and
standards, improving the provision of market information, expanding and strengthening
cooperatives, and improving and strengthening private sector participation in the agricultural
system. The growing government support for market integration and agro-enterprise
development provides an opportunity for the horticulture growers and market actors. This
indicates that the government is using policy support as one of the mechanisms for creating
investment opportunities in the horticulture sector for production, transportation, grading,
exporting and financing the venture. It has been, however, witnessed that farmers are price
takers and the middlemen and exporters are major gainers of the business. Farmers are often
losers or receive a marginally low share of the price paid by the consumers for the
horticultural products.
The few studies available were made on few commodities such as potatoes and pointed out
that there is a greater need to diversify export earning options by improving the quality of
produces supplied to the export market and enhancing the efficiency of the marketing system
to contribute to the economic growth of the country. Nevertheless, little or no information is
available on how to do this and particularly on how to improve the life of poor producers by
increasing their share of the market price and enhance farm productivity.
In order to address these issues and generate further knowledge on the production and
marketing of horticulture in the study area and inform policy makers as well as use the
1
Ethiopia is a federal state of regions. Every region is administratively structured into zones and zones are
divided into woredas, which is similar to the district level administrative unit. Every woreda is divided into
Peasants Association (PA), which is the lowest administrative unit. The PAs are called kebeles in the urban
areas.
1
Drylands Coordination Group
knowledge gained as basis for designing local level development programs, this study was
commissioned by CARE Ethiopia and DCG Ethiopia to two national consultants (Dr. Bezabih
Emana and Mr. Hadera Gebremedhin).
The study was conducted in the major horticulture producing woredas and major horticulture
market centers in the eastern part of Ethiopia and the data collection was done in September
2006.
1.2 OBJECTIVES
The overall objective of the study was to assess constraints of maximum use of opportunities
in vegetable production and marketing in the eastern part of Ethiopia. The specific objectives
were:
1. To assess the marketing channels, organizations, linkages and lines of movements of
horticultural products and production inputs;
2. To assess major constraints of marketing functions (production, processing, grading,
buying and selling, transportation, storage, financing, etc.);
3. To analyze national and local government policies, strategies and practices related to
marketing and production of horticulture crops;
4. To identify and inform government, chambers of commerce and NGOs with possible
strategies that would support horticulture production and marketing to improve the
economy of the region and more specifically the income of poor farmers.
The first three objectives have been addressed in the study process and results have been
documented while the fourth objective involves continuous attempts and forums to
disseminate the results and advocate on how to overcome the constraints and make the
maximum use of the identified opportunities.
1.3 ORGANIZATION OF THE REPORT
The report is organized into 11 chapters. The first chapter provides background, objectives,
and organization of the report and limitation of the study. Chapter 2 describes methodology
on data collection and data analysis. Chapter 3 describes some characteristics of producers
and consumers. Chapter 4 deals with horticulture production covering farming systems, type
of horticulture crops produced, inputs used, production level, income from the sub sector and
profitability. Chapter 5 deals with the input supply system while chapter 6 assesses the
constraints and prospects of horticulture production. Chapter 7 deals with horticulture
marketing functions covering market centers, marketing channel, facilities/infrastructure,
constraints and opportunities for horticulture marketing. Chapter 8 discusses the prices of
fruits and vegetables. In chapter 10, gender disaggregated horticulture production and
marketing decisions are highlighted. Finally recommendation and conclusions are outlined in
chapter 11.
1.4 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY
Marketing of horticulture products in the eastern part of the country extends to markets in the
neighboring countries. The time and logistics budgeted for the study could not, however,
allow for an assessment of the markets in Somalia and Djibouti, which are the export markets
for fruits and vegetables. Thus, only a few key informants and secondary information have
been used as source of information to obtain preliminary information about the external
markets.
2
The secondary data collected at different levels sometimes show inconsistence. In this case,
the research team was forced to rely on grassroots primary data.
There is also administrative restructuring where some PAs and woredas are split, as it was the
case in Chiro woreda in west Hararghe zone. Since this is a new phenomenon, the structure
during the last production season was used.
3
2. METHODOLOGY
2.1 DATA COLLECTION
The major vegetable producing woredas in Hararghe are Kombolcha, Haramaya, Kersa, Kuni,
Meta, Hirna and Jarso woredas. Kombolcha, Dire Dawa and Haramaya are serving as a
medium for both export and domestic vegetable marketing centers, because of their long
border with Somaliland and Djibouti and transport network (air, train and road).
The study was conducted in eastern Ethiopia during September 13 - 28, 2006 in selected
horticulture producing woredas and horticulture marketing towns/cities. A survey was
conducted in four sites, namely Haramaya, Kersa, Kombolcha and Dire Dawa to collect
primary information on production, marketing and consumption of horticulture products. The
four study sites were purposefully selected in consultation with the clients and concerned
Offices in eastern Hararghe, western Hararghe and Dire Dawa. The Hararghe Zone
Agriculture & Rural Development Office was instrumental for the selection of the major
vegetable suppliers since the woredas in eastern Hararghe are the major producers of
vegetables for marketing. Dire Dawa Provisional Administrative City Council Agriculture
and Rural Development Office were also consulted in the sampling of appropriate PAs for the
assessment of fruit production in the woreda.
The data collection intended to generate the necessary information along the horticulture
production and marketing channel/chain. Accordingly information about production potentials
and constraints, transportation, storage, product handling, prices, marketing systems and
constraints, consumption, etc. were collected. The data collection, therefore, required visiting
different actors along the marketing channel2. Accordingly, the primary data were collected at
three levels: from producers, consumers, and intermediaries. The following sub-sections
provide the tools used for data collection from the different sources.
2.1.1 Producers’ survey

A two stage sampling technique was used to select the producers. Firstly, in consultation with
the respective Woreda Agriculture and Rural Developments Offices, the PAs in each woreda
were clustered into two: horticulture producers and non-producers. Two horticulture
producing Peasant Associations (PAs) were randomly selected in each of the woredas.
Secondly, the sample farm households were randomly selected for the interview from the
selected PAs. It was originally planned to interview 40 farmers in each woreda, though it was
difficult to access the intended number in Dire Dawa Provisional Administrative City
Council3. Table 1 shows the specific study sites and the number of horticulture producers
included in the survey.
2
We chose to use the Marketing Channel when discussing the product flow between producers, market actors
and consumers. Since there is no value adding process as such in horticulture marketing in the study area, the
value chain analysis is not appropriate at this moment.
3
Farmers producing fruits in Dire Dawa woreda were suspicious of the land tenure system and did not want to
appear for the interview during the data collection period. Those found were convinced about the purposes of
the study and cooperated to provide the necessary information.
4
Table 1: Distribution of sample horticulture producers included in the survey

Sr. Woreda
No. Kebele Kombolcha Haramaya Kersa Dire Dawa Total
1 Chefe
Anani/Walta'a
Lammi 20 20
2 Bilisumma 20 20
3 Finkile/Bate 20 20
4 Ifa-Oromiya 19 19
5 Kosum/Burqa
Jalala 20 20
6 Metaqoma 20 20
7 Bishan Bahe 10 10
8 Lega Dol/Lega
Harree 12 12
Total 40 39 40 22 141
Source: Own sampling (September 2006)
Structured and semi-structured questionnaires and checklists were used to collect data from
producers and consumers. The survey questionnaire was administered by experienced and
qualified enumerators employed from Haramaya University. The producers' questionnaire
includes questions relevant for assessment of production potential, input use, constraints of
production, marketing extent of horticulture products, market centers, marketing agents,
pricing, packaging, transportation and associated cost, marketing problems and potentials
perceived by the producers, etc. (see Annex 1).
2.1.2 Consumers’ survey

Consumers were interviewed in major towns along the horticulture marketing channel,
namely Haramaya, Kersa, Kombolcha, Harar and Dire Dawa. The consumers were selected
based on systematic random selecting technique. Firstly, the kebeles in the town were
randomly selected and then respondents were systematically randomized in such a way that
the enumerators were guided and visited to the residences of the respondents at fixed intervals
and interviewed 20 households per kebele. The major purpose of the consumers’ survey was
to get an impression of local consumption of horticultural products and assess constraints
associated with consumption so that possible interventions for improvement of horticulture
production and marketing can be identified. In total 95 consumers were interviewed using a
structured questionnaire (see Annex 2) of whom 74% were female. The fact that the
household activities including purchasing and cooking of food is mainly the responsibility of
women and girls, the high ratio of female respondents reflects the reality on the ground. Table
2 shows the distribution of respondents by sex and town.
Although some farmers also purchase horticultural products, which they do not produce,
emphasis was given to urban dwellers. The sample size is proportional to the size of the
town/city where population is taken as an indicator of size. Accordingly, the sample size is
larger for bigger towns (42% for Dire Dawa), 24% for Harar, 16% for Kombolcha, 11% for
Haramaya and 7% for Kersa.
5
Table 2: Number of consumers included in the survey by sex
Sex of the respondent

Location Male Female Total
Haramaya 4 6 10
Dire Dawa 9 31 40
Kombolcha 6 9 15
Kersa 1 6 7
Harar 5 18 23
Total 25 70 95
Source: Own survey (September 2006)
2.1.3 Focus group discussion

Besides the primary data collection from producers and consumers, general information about
the production potential, constraints, marketing channels, marketing functions and constraints
were assessed in the intensive focus group discussions using a detailed checklist prepared for
this purpose. Focus Group Discussions (FGD) and key informant interviews were made with
groups and community leaders, key informants, and knowledgeable people on the subject in
the study areas covering five woredas in both eastern and western Hararghe zones of Oromia
Regional States, Dire Dawa and Harari Regional State. The discussions were held with elders,
youth, and women farmers, and responsible persons of different institutions. Moreover, the
data generated in collaboration with experts at various levels was supported by field
observations. Furthermore, FGD were conducted with traders, transporters, brokers, etc. in
Dire Dawa, Harar, Haramaya, Kersa, Kombolcha, Finkile and Chiro towns. From the 51
participants of the FGD, 39 were involved in production while 12 were involved in marketing
(see Annexes 3 and 4).
Furthermore, six exporters were contacted in Dire Dawa where they were clearing and
loading their products to Djibouti and three other wholesalers at Kafira market in Dire Dawa
were also approached to discuss marketing of vegetables and fruits.
2.1.4 Secondary data

Additional data were also collected from secondary sources. Different offices such as the
Agriculture and Rural Development Offices of the zones and woredas, Micro and Small Scale
Development Enterprise, Trade and Industry, Customs Office, etc. in Dire Dawa were major
sources of secondary data. Time series bid price information was also collected from
Haramaya University to understand the trends in vegetable prices. The Dire Dawa Plant
Quarantine, Federal Seed Agency, Horticulture Development Enterprise, and Ethiopian Fruits
and Vegetables Marketing Share Company, and Quality Standard and Control Authority of
Ethiopia have all provided information on the subject.
2.2 DATA ANALYSIS
The data collected from primary sources were coded and entered into SPSS computer
software. The data were checked for consistence and completeness and analyzed.
Frequencies, cross-tabulations, means and ratios were computed. Moreover, factors
determining the productivity of major horticultural crops and marketed volumes of
vegetables, price situations, etc. were computed. The following chapters present the results of
the analysis.
6
3. SOME CHARACTERISTICS OF THE RESPONDENTS
3.1 PRODUCERS
3.1.1 Demographic features

Age and sex composition are the major demographic features used to characterize the
producers. Although efforts were made to account for gender representation, the actual
random sampling resulted in only 2 female headed households from the 141 sample
producers. But attempts were made to interview the household head in the presence of his
spouse so that the responses account for the views of the women. In the study area (eastern
Ethiopia), men are often responsible for farm work and the woman has the major
responsibility in the reproductive tasks, marketing of smaller quantities of farm products and
purchase of food and non-food items for consumption.
The respondents' age ranges from 16 to 68 with an average of 38 years. About 24% of the
producers fall below 30 years and 50% of them are more than 40 years old. The respondents
have an average of 17 years of experience in horticulture production (ranging from 2 to 50
years) and hence could provide information related to the constraints and potentials of
promoting the horticulture sector.
The horticulture production system is often intensive and requires more labor for cultivation
than the cereal production does. The household provides a major source of labor for crop
production. The labor available for work per household is directly proportional to the family
size. The family size of the respondents ranges from 1 to 13 with an average of 7. On average
43% of the household members are able to work (Table 3). Accounting for children below 16
and elders of above 60 years as dependents4, the dependency ratio was calculated. The results
show that 57% of the households depend on the active labor force of the household since they
are unable to take part in the income generation process.
Table 3: Average household size and dependency ratio

Dependency
Household size Working members ratio
Woreda Male Female Total* Male Female Total*
Kersa 4.03 3.51 7.45 1.78 1.28 2.89 0.61
Kombolcha 3.97 3.64 7.36 1.67 1.69 3.00 0.59
Dire Dawa 3.19 4.14 7.33 1.52 2.12 3.05 0.58
Haramaya 3.33 3.23 6.33 1.82 1.77 3.18 0.50
Total 3.69 3.57 7.09 1.72 1.66 3.03 0.57
* Weighted average and accounting for intra household gender differences
In terms of the marital status of the producers, 93% of all the sample respondents were
married while about 4.5 and 2.2% of them were unmarried and widows respectively. There
are no significant differences among the sample respondents in terms of age, sex and marital
status (Table 4).
4
Although some children below 16 years of age are involved in farming, they significantly contribute to herding
rather than cultivation per se.
7
Table 4: Marital status of the household heads by woreda

Woreda Married Unmarried Widowed Total
Kersa (N=40) 92.31 5.13 2.56 100.00
Kombolcha (N=40) 100.00 - - 100.00
Dire Dawa (N=22) 95.45 4.55 - 100.00
Haramaya (N=39) 86.49 8.11 5.41 100.00
Total (N=141) 93.28 4.48 2.24 100.00
3.1.2 Education
Education is a crucial factor for skill development and enhancing effective production and
marketing decisions. The survey shows that 58% of the producers do not have formal
education while about 16% attended high school level education. The smallest proportion of
those who attended high school level education is found in Haramaya woreda (Table 5).
Table 5: Level of education of the household heads by woreda

Woreda
Education Level Kersa Kombolcha Dire Dawa Haramaya Total
No formal education 60.0 65.0 45.5 56.4 58.2
Primary education 22.5 20.0 31.8 33.33 26.2
Secondary 17.5 15.0 22.7 10.3 15.6
Total 100 100 100 100 100
No. of respondents 40 40 22 39 141
As children share information with parents, the knowledge gained in school is instrumental in
influencing parents' decisions. The importance of education is getting momentum whereby
82% of the respondents have at least one child attending school with an overall average of
about 3 children per household attending school (Table 6). Education is an instrument for
bringing about attitudinal change and enabling girls to take part in making decisions affecting
their future.
Table 6: Average No. of children in school per sample household

No. of children in school
Woreda Male Female Total
Kersa 2.6 1.8 3.2
Kombolcha 1.5 1.7 2.7
Dire Dawa 1.6 1.9 3.3
Haramaya 2.0 1.5 2.2
Total 2.0 1.7 2.8
3.1.3 Means of livelihood

The respondents depend on different means of income generation strategies. Crop production
is a major source of income for the majority of the producers. About 96% of the respondents
earn their living from horticulture production as a primary source. Grain and legume crops
production is considered as the second major means of livelihood of the producers. The area
that does not have any irrigation possibility is allocated to maize, sorghum and haricot beans.
Khat (Catha edulis) or coffee production takes the 3rd and 4th rank respectively in terms of
the number of households that depend on them as a means of livelihood (Table 7). This shows
8
that the study sites are appropriate for the assessment of horticulture production and
marketing constraints.
Livestock production is limited by the shortage of grazing area and hence by critical shortage
of feed. Only 44% of the sample respondents have oxen, which is 1.6 on average. Cattle are
reared for milk production, which is an important dietary source in the hoja5. On average
there are two cattle of which at least one is a milking cow per household. Moreover, there are
about 3 sheep and 3 goats per sample households though only 42% of the respondents own
sheep and 65% own goats.
Farmers also participate in off-farm activities to generate supplementary income during slack
production seasons. Petty trade is a major off-farm activity. The participants of such trading
activity could make an average income of Birr 59 per market day. About 10% of the sample
producers stated that they participated in off-farm income generating activities. Among the
respondents, only 3% make subsidiary earnings from trading of Khat and vegetables.
Table 7: Major means of income generation of the horticulture producers

Relative
Income sources/livelihood strategies Frequency Percent
importance
96.5 1
Horticultural production 136
Grain and pulse production 92 65.2 2
Livestock production 68 48.2 3
Khat /coffee production 66 46.8 4
Income generating activities such as 5
5.0
retailing and flour mill service 7
Khat trading 3 2.1 6
Horticulture trading 1 0.7 7
Total 141 100
3.2 CONSUMERS
As stated above, 74% of the respondents are females that are involved in the purchase and
preparation of vegetables. The respondents are adults of ages ranging from 22 to 74 years
with an average of 37. The consumers have an average of 21 years (minimum 4 and
maximum 67 years) of experience in purchasing fruits and vegetables for consumption.
3.2.1 Demographic features

The household size determines the volume of purchase of horticultural products. The average
family size of the consumers is 5 persons and ranges from 1 to 13. On the other hand, the
purchasing capacity of the household depends on the income the household generates. In a
labor based household economy where the income of the household depends on the labor
availability, the number of able family labor determines the income level. The survey result
shows that for every one working person there is a minimum of one dependent person. The
number of female members of the household is only slightly higher than the number of male
members, which is consistent with national statistics.
5
Hoja is a stimulant drink prepared from coffee pulp or leaves to be used like tea when chewing Khat.
9
Table 8: Consumers' household size and family labor availability

Sr.
No. Number of members in the household N Minimum Maximum Mean
1 Male members of the household 95 0.00 7.00 2.51
2 Female members of the households 95 1.00 6.00 2.71
3 Total family size 95 1.00 13.00 5.19
4 Male working persons in the household 95 0.00 6.00 1.23
5 Female working persons in the
95 0.00 4.00 1.17
household
6 Total number of working persons 95 0.00 9.00 2.40
With regard to the level of education of consumers, the survey result shows that about 43% of
the respondents attended education until secondary school or the level above. On average, the
sample consumer household has two children attending school, with insignificant difference
between the number of school boys and girls.
Table 9: Level of education of the household head (consumers)

Level of Education No. of respondents Percent
No formal education 21 22.1
Primary education 33 34.7
Secondary 32 33.7
Collage level (Diploma) 8 8.4
University level (Degree) 1 1.1
Total 95 100.0
3.2.2 Means of livelihood of the consumers

The urban consumers earn their income from different sources and the purchasing power of
the consumer depends on his/her income level. Figure 4.1 shows the composition of the
consumers included in the survey. The largest proportion of the respondents (48%) earns its
income from employment while the next largest proportion earns it from trading. About 8%
of the sample includes consumers who earn their income from skill based activities such as
mechanics, drivers, etc. Some three percent of the consumers are also involved in farming
although they are urban/town dwellers.
10
Figure 1: Composition of consumers by income source (%)
Other means
(skill based)
Renting 8% Farming
houses 3%
2%
Trade
39%
Employment
48%
In Hararghe, vegetables are commonly used as part of the diet. Onions, potatoes, carrots,
tomatoes and cabbage are consumed even by poor households at different intervals. The
consumers were asked to estimate their monthly/annual income and the proportion of income
they spend for the purchase of horticultural products. The result shows that the average annual
income per household is Birr 11,841, which means that the per capita income is about Birr
2,370 (USD 272). There is, however, a difference in income level of the sample consumers in
different towns/cities which increases with the size of the town/city (Table 10). On average
about 10.5% of the income is spent for horticulture consumption.
Table 10: Annual income and its proportion allocated for the purchase of horticultural
products
No. of Mean income Proportion of income used for
Location respondents (Birr per year) consumption of horticulture (%)
Haramaya 10 12,728 12.0
Dire Dawa 41 13,352 9.6
Kombolcha 15 13,820 12.3
Karsa 6 4,655 17.5
Harar 23 9,344 8.2
Weighted average 95 11,841 10.5
11
4. HORTICULTURE PRODUCTION
In Ethiopia, vegetables and fruits are produced in smallholders and some state-owned farms.
The lion share in terms of area and produce comes from the smallholder sector. According to
MOARD (2005), about 99% of the area allocated to horticulture production is cultivated by
smallholders, which produced 428,752 tons of fruits and 2,107,292 tons of vegetables. The
total share of smallholders' produce during 2003 was 97% of the national supply. It is reported
that in 2004 about 45,0392ha of land was used for vegetable and fruit production which is
0.05% of the total area under cultivation, while in 2003 the total production of vegetables and
fruits was 24,526,712 qt.
4.1 FARMING SYSTEM IN THE AREA
The farming system in both highland and lowland areas is mixed farming. Farmers produce
different crop enterprises in order to secure their family food supply and also cover various
household expenses. Keeping animals in their homestead to provide feed by the cut and carry
system is commonly practiced in the highland areas where the farmland is small. The
production system in the study area can be described in two ways, i.e., rain-fed and irrigated
systems. The rain-fed production system is most dominant and is practiced by the majority of
the farmers in the study area. Farmers mostly produce potato, sweet potato, and local cabbage
together with cereals. The horticultural crops are often produced using irrigation.
Intercropping is also practiced by farmers to grow two or more crops simultaneously on the
same land. The crops may or may not be planted or harvested at one time. Intercropping has
numerous advantages such as:
• Greater stability of yield over different seasons;
• Increased fertility of the soil;
• Better use of resources;
• One crop provides physical support to the other crop;
• Erosion control through providing continuous leaf cover over the ground surface.
In addition to this it serves as insurance if in case one crop fails since different crop varieties
have different merits in terms of tolerance to diseases, pests, moisture stress, etc. The system
is very good for small farmers owning limited land area as they can produce two or more
crops on the same piece of land they own. The findings of the study reveal that only 12% of
the horticulture producers intercropped vegetables with other crops during the last production
year. This is due to the small area allocated to vegetable production, economic use of
irrigation water and expected high yield for cash generation. On the other hand, different
parcels of the same plot are allocated to different types of vegetables and fruit trees, which are
intercropped with other horticultural crops. The vegetable production system depends on
several factors such as the land size, availability of water, existence of adequate market
demand, and availability of inputs such as seeds, fertilizers, pesticides, etc.
Eastern Hararghe has different geographical and ecological conditions. For instance, in the
relatively highland areas of Jarso, Deder, Haramaya and Meta, the farmers plant potato and
sweet potato during the short rainy season (early March) and harvest it in early June so that
the land will be used for the long season cereal crop production (wheat, barely, oat, and other
legumes). In areas where there is irrigation water in the two main production seasons (March-
June) and meher (June to September), vegetables are produced during the dry season on land
used for cereals and other crop production as rain-fed. In areas like Haramaya, Kombolcha
and Kersa, vegetable production is determined by the market situation.
12
Double cropping is the production of two crops on the same plot of land in a year. Such a
practice is possible in the study area due to the bimodal nature of the rain. The farmers
produce the first crop during the short rainy season in February/March (1st cycle) and harvest
it in June/July and plant the 2nd crop in June/August to harvest it in October/November. Some
farmers indicate that they could produce vegetables in three cycles during a year. But the
technical production requirement indicates that crop varieties should be synchronized in order
to use the land three times a year (See Figure 2).
The extent of the third cropping is very low in the low land areas due to a very short growing
period and uncertainty of rainfall during the short rainy season. In some of the study woredas,
farmers use irrigation either to supplement certain crops or use irrigation throughout the dry
season of the year. Under such circumstances, a limited 3rd cycle of production may be
possible. The notion of increasing crop intensity requires a strong technological improvement
through research so that short cycle varieties are introduced. Table 11 shows the extent to
which farmers practice double/multiple cropping in vegetable production.
Table 11: Area allocated to vegetables during the different production cycles
Cycle I* Cycle II** Cycle III***
Area Area Area
Vegetables N (Qindi)+ N (Qindi)+ N (Qindi)+
Cabbage 38 0.39 36 0.42 8 0.57
Beetroots 24 0.35 25 0.44 7 0.47
Carrots 20 0.41 22 0.47 5 0.31
Onion 36 0.88 19 0.50 4 0.56
Irish potato 87 1.09 57 1.33 24 0.99
Tomatoes 10 0.65 3 1.00
Baharo 6 0.37 8 0.33 3 0.42
All vegetables 119 1.51 84 1.62 32 1.20
* Feb./March to May/June; ** July/August to October; *** November/December to January/February
+ 1 Qindi = 0.25 ha
The results show that cabbage, onion, potato, carrot and beetroot are the most commonly
grown vegetables during the two cycles. On average 0.35 ha of land is allocated to vegetable
production during the two cycles and helps increase land use intensity. The first cycle which
involves planting of vegetables in February/March requires irrigation supplementation while
the third cycle indicated by the farmers starts from October/November and depends entirely
on irrigation.
13
Figure 2: Typical cropping pattern in eastern Hararghe, eastern Ethiopia

Type of crops Quarter I Quarter II Quarter III Quarter IV
Jan. Feb. March April May June July August Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec.
Rain-fed system
Sorghum /maize
Vegetables 2nd cycle
Crops Sequence of vegetable production with irrigation (3 cycles)/year

Onion/potato 1st cycle
Beet roots
Carrot/cabbage 3rd cycle 3rd cycle
Free
Source: Own survey (September, 2006)
14
Constraints and Opportunities in Horticulture Production and Marketing in Eastern Ethiopia
4.2 TYPES OF HORTICULTURE PRODUCED IN THE AREA
4.2.1 Vegetables
Different types of vegetables are grown in the study area with different intensities in terms of
land and other input allocation, purpose of production, and marketability. The most
commonly grown vegetables in terms of the number of growers are Irish potato, cabbage,
onion, carrot and beetroot (Table 12). As a result, emphasis is given to these vegetables for an
in depth analysis.
Table 12: Proportion of households producing vegetables (2005/06 production year)

Sr. No. Crops No. of producers Percent Relative importance
1 Irish potato 118 83.7 1
2 Cabbage 48 34.0 2
3 Onion 43 30.5 3
4 Carrots 34 24.1 4
5 Beetroots 34 24.1 4
6 Tomatoes 12 8.5 6
7 Baharo 11 7.8 7
8 Kale 9 6.4 8
9 Pepper 8 5.7 9
10 Lettuce 7 5.0 10
11 Sweet potatoes 2 1.4 11
Sample size 141 100.0
4.2.2 Fruits
Only 23% of the respondents (N=141) produce fruits. The production is concentrated in the
lowland areas. Some of the respondents grow 1-4 different types of fruit trees while others
have none. Papaya is relatively widely grown followed by mandarin, gishta and orange. Most
of the households have few plants often grown for consumption although a limited amount is
also sold. The production is based on gardening (for non-irrigated) and field level production
under the irrigated system. About 52% of the fruit producers use irrigation, mainly in the Dire
Dawa area. Table 13 shows the number of farmers owning fruit trees and the number of plants
owned.
A good quality species of papaya was introduced to the Dire Dawa area through the
government extension system. The buyers also confirmed that the quality of the newly
introduced papaya is preferred. The output is appreciated by the producers since a papaya tree
produces 75-150 fruits attracting a good price of Birr 1.00 per piece. In the highland area, the
Hararghe Zone Agriculture & Rural Development Office is striving to expand fruit production
such as mango and other fruits conducive for highland areas.
15
Table 13: Number of fruit trees per household

Sr. No. of Minimum Maximum
No. Type of fruit producers % of HH number number Mean
1 Orange 8 24 3 70 38
2 Mandarin 10 30 15 100 59
3 Mango 7 21 2 15 7
4 Papaya 16 48 2 100 39
5 Gishta 8 24 1 15 4
6 Guava/Zeituna 2 6 3 5 4
7 Banana 1 3 10 10 10
8 Peaches 1 3 1 1 1
9 Others 2 6 8 30 19
No. of
33 100
respondents
Due to the small number of producers of fruits, a detailed production related analysis was not
done in this study. However, the opinions from the experts and field observations confirm the
existing potential to expand fruit production in this part of the country.
4.3 INPUT USE FOR HORTICULTURE PRODUCTION
4.3.1 Land allocated for horticulture production

The assessment of the landholdings of the woredas included in the study shows that the
overall holding averages at about 1.05 ha. Table 14 shows the landholding in each of the
sample woredas and the proportion of land that can be irrigated. Overall, the sample
producers irrigate only 45% of the land under their disposal. Although vegetables are
produced using rainwater, high income is earned from the production of vegetables produced
under irrigation since the harvesting time can be scheduled for the period of high price i.e. the
dry seasons. Thus, the irrigable area and availability of irrigation water determine the area
allocated to vegetables and thereby determine the extent of income generated from vegetable
production. The woreda level data shows that the area allocated to vegetable production
accounts for 5-30% of the total crop area, where the lowest proportion is found in Dire Dawa
and the highest is in Haramaya. In Harari region, the proportion of land allocated to
vegetables is reported to be high although the absolute figure was low.
Table 14: Average cropland holding, irrigable land and use intensity (ha)
Kersa Kombolcha Dire Dawa Haramaya Total
Land type N Area N Area N Area N Area N Area
Crop area 39 1.5 40 0.5 18 0.80 36 0.94 133 1.05
Irrigable area 29 0.75 40 0.28 22 0.35 38 0.51 129 0.49
Total 40 40 22 39 141
Smallholder farming is characterized by fragmented farmland. Due to land scarcity, land

fragmentation, in terms of number of plots, is not a serious problem in the study area. About
86% of the farmers have a plot in just one place with only a few farmers having scattered
plots at 3 sites. Horticulture growers have plots in relatively flat (83% of respondents), with
medium (65% of plots) and high (29% of the plots) fertility status as judged by the farmers.
16
Irrigation water, good weather conditions, absence of pests and diseases, and land suitability
are key factors essential for horticulture production.
4.3.2 Irrigation
In the three woredas of eastern Hararghe and two woredas of western Hararghe zones of the
Oromia Regional State, Dire Dawa Provisional City Administration and Harari Regional
State, farmers use irrigation to supplement horticulture production during the dry seasons. The
information gathered during the focus group discussions made with the development agents
and the zonal and woreda experts of ARDO, shows that 81 of the 200 peasant associations
(i.e. 40%) produce vegetables and fruits under the irrigation system. The survey also indicates
that 89% of those using irrigation apply it for vegetable production (Table 15).
The amount of water needed for irrigation depends on the stage of crop growth, the depth of
the rooting zone, and the field capacity of the soil. Thus, the amount of water applied should
vary according to the stage of plant growth. Vegetables grown for their fruits must get
sufficient water during the time between flowering and fruit maturity. The other vegetables
should be irrigated at regular interval and the amount of water depends on the stage of growth.
In the study area, frequency of irrigating vegetable fields is on average 7 times during dry
season while the rate declines for fruits and Khat to 4 and 3 times respectively.
Regarding soils, under the same climatic conditions, soils with low field capacities (sand and
sandy loam soils) require a small amount of water for irrigation per application but more
frequently than soils with high field capacities (silt loam and clay loam soils).
Table 15: Types of crops produced by using irrigation

Crops Frequency %
Vegetables 119 89
Fruits 16 12
Khat 20 15
Sugar cane 1 1
Total No. of respondents 133 100
The amount of water needed for irrigation is also a function of land size. The study result
shows that 80% of the producers have less than 0.75 ha (3 Qindi) of irrigable land while 45%
have less than 0.25 ha (1 Qindi) (Figure 3). Thus, the farmers with a relatively large size of
land will obviously require more water for irrigation than the farmers with a small land size.
As a result, they invest in an irrigation water pumping motor while those with smaller farm
sizes rely on exchanging the irrigation service with labor for field work or just mutual
assistance of the neighbors to use the irrigation facility by covering only the operating costs.
17
Figure 3: Proportion of households having cropland and irrigable land
45.0
40.0
35.0
30.0
Percent
25.0
20.0
15.0
10.0
5.0
0.0
0 < 1.0 1.1-3.0 3.1-5.0 5.1-7.0 >7
Area in Timad
% of household having cropland % of household having irrigable land
Irrigation water comes from different sources including boreholes, river/springs, ponds and
lakes. Most of the farmers rely on boreholes and river/springs for irrigation (Table 16). The
agricultural development strategy of the country encourages farmers to harvest rain water by
constructing ponds. The survey shows that the sample farmers did not consider ponds as
major sources of irrigation water (Table 16). On the other hand, there are 735 boreholes and
803 pumps in operation in the studied woredas. The most commonly used irrigation system is
furrow followed by sprinkler (Table 17).
Table 16: Source of water for irrigation

Source of irrigation water Frequency % of farmers
Ponds 9 7
Boreholes 97 73
River/springs 46 35
Lakes 4 3
Total 133 100
Table 17: Proportion of households with different methods of irrigation

Methods of irrigation Frequency % of farmers
Furrow 138 104
Sprinkler 12 9
Basin 5 4
Total 133 100
18
4.3.3 Labor
Labor is an important factor of agricultural production. Smallholder farmers rely on family
labor for land preparation, planting, cultivation, weeding, irrigation, fertilizer application,
pesticides application, harvesting and transporting of the product. The assessment of the
different sources of labor used in horticulture production shows that 80% of the respondents
rely on family labor while 60% work on reciprocate labor exchange system where the work is
done in group and at the end everybody gets its share (Table 18). This system is useful to
accomplish a given farm activity in a limited timeframe to ensure uniform planting, plant
growth and maturity. The different vegetables produced require different amount of labor
inputs. The average labor input per ha of the major vegetables was 165 man-days.
Table 18: Sources of labor for horticulture production

Source of labor % of respondents
Family labor 80
Labor exchange 60
Hired labor 13
Assistance 2
Total No. of cases 141
Table 19: Labor use for selected vegetable crop production

Irish
Labor inputs Cabbage Beetroots Carrots Onion potato
Labor used in man days (Md) 15.2 17.5 16.4 19.9 28.4
Labor input per ha (Md) 136.0 206.0 198.3 183.9 104.3
4.3.4 Fertilizer and manure

Farmers apply animal manure and chemical fertilizers such as DAP and Urea to improve soil
fertility and increase production. The use of manure is common in the study area while the use
of composite is not. Animal manure is transported from homestead to the field mostly during
the dry season and spread in the field. From the sample producers interviewed, 72% used
manure to fertilize land used for potato production. To some extent, farmers also used manure
for onion, cabbage, beetroots and carrot production (Table 20).
19
Table 20: Number of respondents applying animal manure to vegetables

List of crops produced with
inputs Frequency % of all farmers
Irish potato 102 72.3
Cabbage 40 28.4
Onion 36 25.5
Carrots 31 22.0
Beetroots 28 19.9
Tomato 11 7.8
Pepper 8 5.7
Baharo 8 5.7
Lettuce 6 4.3
Kale 6 4.3
Sweet potato 2 1.4
Sample size 141 100.0
Although there are some aggregation errors due to the small area allocated to the vegetables,
the fertilizer application rate appears to be high. More than 2.5 qt of DAP and Urea is applied
to potato and beetroots although the recommended rates are 100 - 150 kg/ha of DAP and 150 -
200 kg/ha of Urea. On the other hand, only a small amount of fertilizer is applied to some of
the vegetables such as cabbage and carrot (Table 21).
Table 21: Use of chemical fertilizer for selected vegetable crops

Irish
Inputs Cabbage Beetroots Carrots Onion potatoes
Amount of DAP fertilizer used (qt) 0.3 2.0 0.4 0.4 2.5
Amount of Urea fertilizer used (qt) 0.3 2.0 0.4 1.0 2.5
Dap input (qt/ha) 2.7 7.1 4.6 4.0 4.0
Urea input (qt/ha) 2.9 7.1 5.3 6.5 4.0
4.3.5 Seeds/seedlings
Adequacy and quality of vegetable seeds are crucial for increased production. This means that
the seed of needed traits should be timely acquired from reliable sources to ensure high
determination and increased yield. The existing traditionally irrigated areas are affected by
insects like cut worm causing severe damage. Therefore, treated seeds should be used and if
treated seeds are not available the untreated seed should be distributed only after applying
seed treatment with suitable chemicals against seed borne and soil borne diseases.
From the sample producers who identified the sources of the vegetable seeds, 56% used both
improved and local varieties while 31% used only local varieties (Figure 4). This goes in line
with the fact that the participants of the group discussions underscored the problem of lack or
shortage of appropriate type of improved seeds of vegetables which are needed by the market.
20
Figure 4: Types of seeds used by farmers to produce horticultural crops (N=128)
Local
31%
Local and
improved
56%
Improved
13%
4.3.6 Pesticides
The provision or availability of suitable pesticides, especially for vegetable production, is an
important input. Pests can considerably affect the yield of all crops under irrigated conditions,
so that the farmers might lose interest in its cultivation as observed in other areas. One cannot
speak of cultivating vegetables under irrigation without appropriate pest and disease control
mechanism. Farmers in the study area including Dire Dawa, Kersa, Kombolcha, Haramaya,
Chiro, Gemachis and Harari control Aphids, bollworm, leaf eaters, thirps, fruit flies powdery
mildew and blights on vegetables and fruits by pesticides.
The results of the survey show that 46 farmers (33%) used pesticides at an average amount of
1 kg/liter. The amount ranges from 0.02 to 3.5 liters. Under emergency situations such as
invasive occurrence of army worms and desert locusts, chemicals are sprayed by the
government and farmers do not pay anything to purchase the chemicals6. Under normal
farming situations, however, farmers purchase pesticides from different sources as given in
Table 22. Most of the farmers purchase pesticides from known sources in the market (74%)
including traders and shops while about 11% purchase it from unknown sources. Shortage of
pesticides and high price could be the reasons why farmers opt for illegal sources. About 9%
of the respondents received pesticides through the Agriculture and Rural Development Office.
Cooperatives also provided pesticides to only a few farmers. Unlike local seeds, farmer to
farmer transfer of pesticides is rare.
Table 22: Source of pesticides purchased by farmers
Source Frequency %
Agriculture and Rural Development Office 4 8.7
Known market source 34 73.9
Unknown market sources/illegal 5 10.9
Cooperatives 3 6.5
Total number of respondents 46 100
As displayed in Table 23, the high price of pesticide is the most common constraint of using
pesticides. The low quality of pesticides is encountered by 24% of the users, which is a
significant problem. A large number of farmers purchased pesticide from illegal sources,
indicating that the quality problem exists in the pesticides’ distribution channel.
6
The side effect of chemical use in the study area is not studied.
21
Table 23: Problems encountered in using pesticide

Problems associated with use of pesticides Frequency %
Low quality (adulterated) 11 24
High price 43 93
Lack of safety devices 1 2
Unavailability when it is needed 5 11
Total No. of respondents 46 100
4.4 VEGETABLE PRODUCTION, SUPPLY AND INCOME
The average land allocated for the production of vegetables during the first cycle of
production (March to June) and the long rainy season (July to October) is about 0.41 and 0.38
ha respectively. The third cycle was practiced by only a few farmers (Table 24). The results
show that land allocated to vegetable production during the third cycle is larger at Kersa and
Haramaya due to relatively better access to irrigation during the dry season.
Table 24: Area allocated to vegetables and number of producers in different woredas
Cycle I Cycle II Cycle III
Woreda N Area (ha) N Area (ha) N Area (ha)
Kersa 37 0.50 23 0.67 4 0.33
Kombolcha 31 0.26 24 0.24 13 0.28
Dire Dawa 16 0.27 3 0.29 2 0.15
Haramaya 35 0.41 34 0.36 13 0.35
All woredas 119 0.38 84 0.41 32 0.30
An average of 25 qt of vegetables could be produced per producer during the two production
cycles, and about 12 qt during the third cycle though the number of farmers engaged in the
production during the third cycle is small.
Table 25 shows the mean production and cash income from sales of vegetables as reported by
the respondents. From the total production of vegetables, 88% was sold while the remaining
12% was consumed. For certain vegetables, the seeds needed for the next production cycle are
provided from the own production. In the case of potato, for example 80% was sold, 11%
consumed and 1% used for seed whereas 89% of the onions were sold and 1% was used for
seed the remaining balance being consumed. Seeds of some vegetables such as cabbage and
tomato need to be purchased for very production cycle.
22
Table 25: Production and utilization of vegetables

Cycle I Cycle II Cycle III All Cycles
Sales Sales Sales
Production income Production income Production income Sales Consumed
Vegetables (qt) (Birr) (qt) (Birr) (qt) (Birr) (%) (%)
Cabbage 11.4 690 11.0 505 6.7 335 89 11
Beetroots 8.1 527 8.3 599 10.1 636 87 13
Carrots 7.3 591 8.7 626 9.4 598 92 8
Onion 10.4 953 7.8 886 9.3 562 89 10
Irish potato 17.3 1540 17.5 1670 15.9 1366 80 11
Tomato 12.1 1453 4.7 420 89 11
Baharo 8.7 684 9.0 541 9.7 700 91 9
All
vegetables 25 2102 26 2032 20 1551 88 12
The farmers involved in vegetable production generated a cash income of about Birr 2,000
during the first and second production cycles (Table 25). The observations made during the
field visit shows that the farmer who produces for the market is relatively in a better position
and has a water pumping motor to effectively use his/her land during the two production
cycles.
A crop loss due to different factors is significant. The farmers estimate pre-harvest vegetable
loss at an average of 14% while the post harvest loss was 12% of the yield. Traders could lose
up to 25% of the product due to poor storage and unfavorable weather conditions. Poor
packing and transportation systems also aggravate the damage.
In order to understand the changes in the supply of vegetables, farmers were asked to express
their opinion. As shown in Figure 5, 64% of the respondents believe that the supply of
vegetables over the last five years increased.
Figure 5: Farmers' assessment of changes in volume of sales of horticultural products
The same
10%
Dcreasing
26%
Increasing
64%
The major reason for the increased yield of vegetables is farmers' awareness of the benefits of
production and marketing of vegetables and that farmers have given more attention to
vegetable production due to its comparative advantages to generate a higher income (Table
26). This might also be the reason why some farmers rent in land to expand vegetable
23
production and use yield increasing inputs such as improved seeds, fertilizer, pesticides and
irrigation.
Table 26: Reasons why production/supply increased during the last 5 years
Sr.
No Reasons Percent of respondents
1 Vegetables yield higher income than cereals, hence
more attention is given 26.5
2 Increased yield compared to cereals 22.7
3 Use of commercial inputs and increase land size (rent) 21.2
4 Large number of farmers are producing them 18.2
5 It needs a short period of time for production 7.6
6 Good market for the products 3.8
No. of respondents 91
Other studies also confirm the opinion that the overall vegetable production, especially of
potato, over the last 10 years increased due to the remarkable increase in the market outlet to
Hargessa, Bossaso, Hamer, Djibouti and Hartishek. Increasing intensification of production is
a mechanism for overcoming the impacts of land shortage and the farmers use this strategy to
increase income (Zemede, 2006).
On the other hand, 26% of the respondents felt that the supply decreased. The opinion
revolves around respondents’ own experiences. Those indicating a reduction in the amount
they supply to the market state low price or lack of demand as a cause of reduced production
(51%). Some of the producers attribute the reduction to natural factors such as floods (29%)
and some attribute it to lack of inputs (20%). The conclusion from the assessment is that the
overall supply of vegetables increased due to the expansion of the area under production or
increased productivity while individual producers might have encountered reduced production
at different woredas.
In conformity with the farmers' opinion, the yield of potato, the most widely marketed
vegetable in the study area, fluctuated much in Kombolcha woreda and was stable at
Haramaya, with a very slight increment during the last five years (Figure 6). This justifies the
differences in opinion of the respondents.
24
Figure 6: Potato yield (qt/ha)
140
120
100
Yield (qt/ha)
80
60
40 Kombolcha
Haramaya
20
0
1997/98 1998/99 1999/00 2000/01 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05
Production year
Source: Computed based on Zemede (2006)
4.5 PROFITABILITY OF HORTICULTURE PRODUCTION
4.5.1 Cost of production

The cost of producing vegetables and associated gains in terms of yield and profit was
demonstrated taking two sample products at different locations. Potato production at Finkile
and cabbage production at Ifa Oromia of Haramaya woreda were considered. The calculations
are based on typical case studies, representing average farmers, in the two sites where the
parameter estimates were made in a participatory manner with the community members who
are involved in the production and marketing of these products. A half-hectare of land was
used as a case study for the production of potato and a quarter hectare was used for cabbage
production. The total variable cost of producing potato in Finkile area is Birr 5,310 per ha
while cabbage production costs Birr 6,152 per ha in Ifa Oromia area (Table 27).
An important cost parameter in this calculation is the unit cost of production which
determines the decision to continue production or not when it is compared to the unit revenue.
The case study demonstrates that the unit cost of producing a quintal of potatoes at Finkile is
about Birr 45 while that of cabbage is about Birr 52 at Ifa Oromia of Haramaya woreda. The
high unit cost of cabbage is due to its low yield as compared to potato. This calculation,
however, does not account for overhead costs, though the opportunity costs of the fixed asset
are small.
25
Table 27: Cost of production of selected vegetables
Potato production at Finkile Cabbage production at Ifa

Oromia (Haramaya) Oromia (Haramaya)
Value
Physical Value (Sales at Physical (Sales at
Items quantity Finkile market) quantity Haramaya)
Area (ha) 0.5 0.25
Irrigation frequency 5 4
Irrigation running cost (fuel) 500 232
Fertilizer
Urea (qt) 2 0.5
Dap (qt) 2 0.5
Cost of fertilizer (Birr) 800 400
Labor for crop management (Md) 20 16
Harvesting (Md) 20 10
Cost (@10 Birr/Md for Finkile
and @5 for Ifa Oromia) 400 260
Pesticide (birr) 30 40
Depreciation of pump (birr) 550 550
Seed (Birr) 375 56
Total variable cost (Birr) 2,655 1,538
Unit cost (Birr per ha) 5,310 6,152
Unit cost (Birr per qt) 44.25 51.3
Yield (qt/ha) 120 120
4.5.2 Production and marketing efficiency

Production efficiency is measured by computing the gross margins and profits earned from
production and marketing of horticultural products. Cost and yield data given in Table 27 and
marketing cost information are used to compute the desired efficiency indicators. Alternative
markets for selling the products were assumed. That is the producers can choose between
selling the potato to a wholesaler at Finkile market or transport it to Dire Dawa while the Ifa
Oromia farmer can either sell the cabbage to traders in Haramaya or transport it to Dire Dawa.
Gross margin is the difference between the Production value and the variable cost. The
production value is quantity produced multiplied by the market price while the variable cost is
the amount of money spent for the purchase of direct inputs such as fertilizer, seed, etc. or
estimates of the opportunity costs of inputs not purchased (e.g. labor cost). The gross margin
per ha of potato is Birr 9,690 if the product is sold at Finkile and Birr 13,890 if it is sold at
Dire Dawa (Table 28). Selling the product at Dire Dawa, however, involves marketing costs
of Birr 1,020. Hence, the profit per ha becomes Birr 11,850. That means, the benefit accruing
to the farmer by producing a quintal of potato increases from Birr 80.75 to 98.75 indicating a
22% gain due to marketing at the terminal market. Similarly, the gain from producing a
quintal of cabbage increases from Birr 73.7 to 86.7 which is an increase by 17.6%. The
implication is that as the producers access the terminal market and sell their produce at higher
prices, the marginal gain increases.
26
Table 28: Production and marketing efficiency at primary and terminal markets
Value (Sales at
Identification Value (Sales at Sales at Dire Sales at Dire
Parameters Haramaya
and Explanation Finkile market) Dawa Dawa
market)
A Production ( 0.5 ha at Finkile and 0.25 at
60 60 30 30
Ifa Oromia, Haramaya) (qt)
B Price (Birr/qt) 125 160 125 150
C={AxB} Income (Birr) 7,500 9,600 3,750 4,500
D Total cost (Birr) 2,655 2,655 1,538 1,538
E={C-D} Gross margin 4,845 6,945 2,212 2,962
F={E/Area} Gross margin per ha (birr) 9,690 13,890 8,848 11,848
G Transport cost to DD @10 Birr/qt from
Finkile and @5 from Ifa Oromia , 600 150
Haramaya
H Loading unloading @2 Birr /qt 120 60
I Commission/broker @5 Birr per qt 300 150
J={G+H+I} Total marketing cost 1,020 360
K={E-J} Gross profit 4,845 5,925 2,212 2,602
L={K/Area} Profit per ha 9,690 11,850 8,848 10,408
M=K/A} Profit per qt 80.75 98.75 73.7 86.7
N={J/(J+D)x100 Proportion of marketing cost in total cost 27.8 19.0
O Marketing gain 1,080 390
P Incremental gain due to marketing (%) 22.3 17.6
27
5. INPUT SUPPLY SYSTEM
5.1 INSTITUTIONS AND POLICIES
In its economic development policy and strategy document, the Ethiopian government has
stressed the need to accelerate the transformation of the agricultural sector from subsistence to
a more business/market-oriented agriculture (EFDR, 2005). The poverty reduction strategies
are implemented using key intervention instruments under PASDEP including developing
market infrastructure, development of agricultural credit markets, specialized extension
services for differentiated agricultural zones and types of commercial agriculture,
development of national business plans and tailored packages for specialized exports, area
irrigation through multipurpose dams, measures to improve land tenure security and reforms
to improve the availability of fertilizer and seeds; provision of market information; and
strengthening private sector participation in agricultural marketing; strengthening and
diversifying autonomous cooperatives; strengthening agricultural research, expanding the
water harvesting techniques and small-scale irrigation, water resources development and
utilization, and building the capacity of the labor force. The strategies listed above that the
government uses as instrument to transform the agricultural sector are crucial for
smallholders' market oriented development and increased marketability.
Although policy, strategy and practices on vegetables and fruit as a sub-sector of agriculture
lack specific reference to horticulture as outlined in proclamations and regulations of the
various ministries and agencies of the government, it has not received enough attention when
compared to the other sectors such as coffee, pulses and oil crops. However, recently it is
receiving attention within the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development and is now
elevated from an obscure unit/section to a Department status (MOARD, 2005). Regional
States such as Oromia have also established regional marketing agencies to strengthen the
marketing functions.
There are policy frameworks that would enable marketing, distribution and use of agricultural
inputs. Particularly, there is no policy limitation at the highest level concerning seeds,
fertilizers and pesticides as indicated in proclamations and regulations (EFDR, 1990; ESA,
1990). Proclamation No. 137/1998 of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia specifies
the mechanism of fertilizer trade in Ethiopia. Fertilizer is imported from abroad, while seeds
and pesticides are either imported or locally produced and formulated. Formal engagement in
the trade business of these inputs requires competence assurance certificates from relevant
government agencies.
At the lower levels of the administrative structure, there is a serious limitation on the
strategies and practices in terms of enforcement, regulation and control of qualities and
procedures related to distribution, marketing and handling of inputs and outputs. Particularly,
the relevant agencies lack experience and capacity to implement the policies and strategies at
the grass root level. In fact agencies like the Quality Standard and Control Authority of
Ethiopia in Dire Dawa have stopped certifying outgoing fruit and vegetable exports to
Djibouti.
5.2 INPUT SUPPLY CHANNEL
Seeds, fertilizers, and pesticides are the three major inputs used to increase horticultural
production in the study area. The survey results show that seeds, pesticides, implements like
spraying machines and water pumps are imported and distributed to the countryside through
28
various channels. This section discusses the major input supplying mechanisms and the
constraints of production.
Currently, there are 26 seed, 14 fertilizers, and 27 pesticide importers formally registered to
operate in the country. Two semi-private companies, one public (Agricultural Inputs Supply
Enterprise (AISE)) and 11 Unions are the major agricultural input importers in Ethiopia. On
the other hand, research institutes and higher education institutions also import vegetable
seeds through international research partnerships for experimentation purposes, which
ultimately reach farmers. The imported or locally supplied inputs reach farmers from retailers,
cooperatives, ARDO and AISE branch offices found at zonal or woreda levels.
Modern/improved agricultural technologies are therefore accessed by farmers through

different mechanisms. One notable mechanism is the free market channel in which traders
import inputs or collect them from local supplies and sell them to retailers or large farms. This
is the mechanism through which farmers access the inputs in the market and purchase the
inputs on their own terms. The other means of getting improved seeds, pesticides and
fertilizer is the channel involving unions and AISE as importers and then government
institutions such as the regional, zonal and woreda agriculture and rural development office
and cooperatives. In this case, farmers' needs are assessed at woreda level by the staff of the
woreda agriculture and rural development office. Then a request for the amount of inputs
needed is submitted to the zonal Rural and Agriculture Development Office, which will
further submit the request to the regional agriculture and rural development office. The
regional office then solicits a credit arrangement for the input supply (serving as a collateral),
and purchases the needed input from Unions or AISE. The unions channel the inputs to zonal
and/or woreda level cooperatives while the AISE channels them to its branch offices. The
respective bodies at zonal/woreda level then distribute the inputs to farmers. This channel is
inefficient in that it leads to delays in the supply of inputs.
Moreover, the inputs can reach farmers through demonstration of research activities by
researchers and academia and through NGOs in the form of development support using seeds
as tools of interventions (Figure 7). There is also farmer to farmer improved inputs transfer as
for example farmers in Kersa and Dire Dawa woredas get potato tubers supplied by Haramaya
University from fellow farmers.
29
Figure 7: Input supply channel
Input Supply system for Horticulture in Eastern Ethiopia
Import Local Supply

Federal/regional level
Researchers Traders Union AISE

Zonal/woreda level
Retailers ARDO Cooperatives AISE - NGOs

Branch
Farmers Farmer
Source: Own structuring based on PRA information in the study area (September 2006)
30
5.2.1 Seeds/seedlings
Seeds and other propagation materials (seedlings, suckers, etc.) should only be obtained from
a reliable source7. The knowledge of identifying the right varieties and use of the respective
inputs based on the recommendations given either from the research institutions or from
agricultural extension by the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, are crucial for
increased productivity. In the study area, it was observed that the seeds were, in some
instances, selected based on price. Seeds should be selected based on quality rather than price
as cheap seed often proves to be expensive in the end. Almost all vegetable seeds and planting
material are imported with import licenses and production permits with the exception of local
seeds. There are 26 registered importers, 31 producers, 40 distributors, 4 processors and 4
exports of seed. Apparently, most of the firms are dealing with field crops such as cereals and
pulses while the importers also import vegetable seeds.
Agricultural Input Supply Enterprise (AISE) is a major supplier of improved seeds in all
woredas surveyed. The ARDO is reported as one of the suppliers of the vegetable seeds in
only two of the seven woredas (Table 29). Farmer to farmer seed transfer is the most popular
way of accessing vegetable seeds. Potato seeds/tubers are accessed from fellow farmers.
Private sector involvement in seed supply is also indicated. In this case, farmers purchase
vegetable seeds from shops. Cooperatives are not active in the distribution of seeds.
Table 29: Sources of improved seeds of horticultural crops in the study area
PA/Woreda Seeds
NGO Office of AISE Farmer Private Cooperatives
Agriculture traders
Haramaya -
Kombolcha - - - -
Kersa - - -
Dire Dawa - - -
Harari
Chiro -
Gemechis - -
Total 3 2 7 7 5 2
Source: Own PRA study (September 2006)
The results of the producers’ survey also indicate that, from those who are using improved
seeds, more than 90% of them purchase improved seeds from known market sources such as
shops. Interesting is also that some farmers purchase improved seeds from unknown sources.
This is attributable to shortage of the required varieties of seed from known sources. The fact
that farmers reported poor germination of some of the seeds they purchase indicates inherent
risk of failure of seeds from unknown sources. Table 30 shows the different sources of
improved seed supply.
7
Expired seeds and pesticides were observed in Haramaya, Kombolcha, and Dire Dawa.
31
Table 30: Farmers' response on sources of improved seed

Sr. No. Sources of seed N % of respondents*
1 Agriculture office 3 3
2 Known market source 83 94
3 Unknown market sources 7 8
4 Cooperatives 1 1
5 Fellow farmers 3 3
6 Own source 6 7
No. of respondents 88 100
* Multiple sources possible
The farmers indicated that the role of research institutions such as Haramaya University in the
improved seed supply system is very much limited. Apparently, there are proven vegetable
varieties at the University which could benefit the farmers. However, an appropriate system of
extension and seed supply has not been in place.
5.2.2 Fertilizer
DAP and Urea fertilizers are imported from abroad and distributed mainly by the Ministry of
Agriculture and Rural Development, Cooperatives and the Agricultural Inputs Supply
Enterprise. Fertilizer is packaged in 50 kg bags which is sometimes not conducive for
farmers having a small irrigated area that needs smaller packages such as 12.5 kg and 25 kg.
The fertilizer distributed by the government institutions does not, sometimes, arrive on time
for application.
The sample producers indicated that most of the producers who used fertilizer procured it
from the markets (Table 31). In the study area, fertilizer is sold in the shops and at the AISE
branches from where traders can also purchase and sell. Moreover, the ARDO is the second
most important source of fertilizer supplied to the farmers. The fact that government
institutions are involved in the supply of these inputs creates a burden on the development
agents in making an assessment of who needs what and how much, distribution of the inputs
and then collection of the credit. Fertilizer is not distributed during the off-season whereas
horticulture production particularly using irrigation needs special consideration. In a market
oriented production system such as horticulture production, making the necessary inputs
available and providing technical support for the farmers would yield a better result.
Table 31: Source of fertilizer for horticulture production

Sources of fertilizer % of respondents
Through Office of Agriculture 28
Market 59
Cooperatives 13
Total N 131
5.2.3 Pesticides
The provision/availability of suitable pesticides, especially for vegetable production is crucial
in horticulture production. Pests can considerably affect the crop yields under irrigated
conditions, so that the farmers might lose interest in its cultivation as observed in other areas.
Aphids, bollworm, leaf eaters, thirps, fruit flies, powdery mildew and blights on vegetables
32
and fruits are protected by pesticides8 in Dire Dawa, Kersa, Kombolcha, Haramaya, Chiro,
Gemachis and Harari.
Farmers purchase pesticides from different sources. The major suppliers of pesticides are
given in Table 32. Pesticide is supplied from different sources including from farmers, private
traders, cooperative shops, AISE and through the agriculture and rural development office.
Table 32: Institutions supplying pesticides

PA/Woreda Institutions
Office of Private
Farmer Cooperatives AISE
Agriculture traders
Haramaya
Kombolcha - -
Kersa - -
Dire Dawa -
Harari - -
Chiro -
Gemechis -
Total 7 4 7 1 6
Source: Own PRA study (Sept. 2006)
In the group discussions, farmers emphasized the fact that they have suffered from buying
adulterated and fraudulent pesticides and vegetable seeds with very low germination capacity.
There is not as such accountability for the chemicals supplied. Licensed and traceable sources
of pesticide supply would help to overcome this problem. On the other hand, there should be
legal provisions for this type of act.
5.2.4 Farm equipment

As in almost all parts of the country, the farm implement used in the area is mostly an oxen
drawn implement called Marsha9 and hand tools. Some farmers are aware of some modern
technologies such as pesticide spraying equipment and water pumps. Most of the farmers use
pumping motors for irrigating their horticulture farms. Some of these farmers even rent the
equipment and render services to fellow farmers thereby earning income. The well to do
farmers purchase water pumping motors while others rent or make certain arrangements for
using the motors available in their villages. Sprayers are also acquired from different sources.
These two important equipments are supplied by different organizations (Table 33). In this
case as well, the role played by the cooperatives is low except in Kombolcha and Haramaya
woredas.
8
These include insecticides, fungicides, herbicides, rodenticides, avicides, etc.
9
Marasha is an iron bar with a sharp tip used for ploughing and cultivation.
33
Table 33: Institutions supplying sprayers/water pumps

Institutions
PA/Woreda Office of Private
NGO Farmer AISE Cooperative
Agriculture traders
Haramaya
Kombolcha -
Kersa - - -
Dire Dawa - -
Harar -
Chiro - -
Gemechis - -
Total 4 7 6 5 6 2
34
6. CONSTRAINTS AND PROSPECTS OF HORTICULTURE

PRODUCTION
6.1 CONSTRAINTS
There are factors that hinder the production of horticultural products in the study area. The
majority of the sample producers indicate pests, drought, and shortage of fertilizer and price
of fuel for pumping water for irrigation as major constraints of horticulture production. Table
34 shows the proportion of sample producers ranking the constraints of horticultural
production as the top three problems of the specified crops. The problems are sometimes
specific to certain vegetables. For instance, most farmers indicate that shortage of fertilizer,
diseases, and frost are the most priority problems of producing potato. On the other hand
fertilizer, pests and diseases, and shortage of pesticides are top constraints of production of
beetroots and carrots. Water shortage or drought on the one hand and lack of fuel for pumping
irrigation water, frost and fertilizer shortage on the other hand are the most important
problems for onion production, which is also location and season specific.
Table 34: Top three production problems (% of respondents)

Irish
Cabbage Beetroots Carrots Onion
Constraints potatoes
Oxen shortage 50 36 45 50 28
Insects 70 79 85 63 45
Diseases 76 65 71 61 71
Drought 69 78 67 78 62
Weeds 63 55 69 67 29
Flood 59 44 58 52 52
Frost 67 39 63 70 70
Shortage of seeds 11 18 11 15 13
Shortage of fertilizer 78 89 86 80 77
Shortage of pesticides 61 76 70 58 63
Expensive fuel for
irrigation 78 67 71 83 64
The constraints of horticultural production could be viewed from the farmers’ context,
institutional factors, natural factors and infrastructure related factors.
1. Farmer related: horticulture production in the eastern part of the country is based on
tradition, which is poorly supported by scientific recommendations. Although one can
associate this constraint to institutional factors, it is apparent that inadequate farmer
skills and knowledge of production and product management affects the supply.
Farmers attempt to select varieties and practice traditional crop management practices.
Farmers’ know-how of product sorting, grading, packing and transporting is
traditional, which severely affects the quality of horticultural products supplied to the
market. This skill gap should be addressed to improve the quality of marketable
horticultural products.
2. Institutional factors are related to the provision of improved horticultural production
technologies including supply of relevant varieties, agronomic practices and improved
product management techniques. The study reveals that the farmers are not receiving
the varieties they wish to cultivate. The capacity to distinguish between varieties is
also low in the area. Institutions failed to bring up farmers’ capacity to the expected
35
level. Research based practical recommendations on agronomic practices and pre- and
post harvest management are lacking at farmers level. Moreover, inputs such as
fertilizer, seed and pesticides should be available through known and accountable
sources. Conducive policies and enforcement mechanisms should be put the in place.
3. Quarantine of exotic pests through the enforcement of laws by exercising
phytosanitary inspection at points of their entry is essential. Institutions like the
marketing agency should also make available the market information needed for
production planning. The data available should enable to forecast demand to adjust
production planning. The extension system lacks highly qualified staff at woreda and
field level. The observation in the field depicts that some of the development agents
have little knowledge compared to the farmers.
4. Natural factors such as rainfall, water supply, flood and pests are often beyond the
control of farmers and institutions. There is a shortage of irrigation water mainly in the
lowland areas. Yet, contingency planning and forecasting of the events which may
help to minimize the effect is not available perhaps due to traditional ways of
production. Moreover, an appropriate management system including variety selection
and diversification would reduce the effect of natural factors. Improving the
institutional constraints discussed above will be instrumental for improving the
management system.
5. Infrastructure such as rural roads and means of communication for efficient flow of
goods and market information is a limiting factor. Most of the rural area is not
accessible by vehicle. The products are transported to the road side by donkeys or by
people. This requires longer time to reach the market and affects the quality of the
products. Moreover, there is no telephone or other fast communication systems to
access market information that would assist decision making.
6.2 OPPORTUNITIES FOR HORTICULTURE PRODUCTION
The major prospect for expanding the production of horticulture starts from the ultimate
decision maker, the producer. The survey result shows that 97% of the producers intend to
expand production. The opportunities they foresee to realize the intended plan are given in
Table 35. The most commonly mentioned opportunities are related to the use of improved
production technologies including irrigation facility, government support and existence of
high demand for products in the market.
The government encourages private sector development which is instrumental for the
commercial activities. The government also supports smallholders' market integration through
the production of marketable agricultural commodities. The current government Plan for
Accelerated and Sustainable Development to End Poverty (PASDEP) sets intensification and
commercialization of agriculture as a development path during the next five years. Provision
of improved agricultural technologies, provision of extension packages and farmers' capacity
building, etc. are major areas of support the government has planned to provide farmers.
36
Table 35: Opportunities for expansion of horticultural crops production

Opportunities % of respondents
Increase in price of the product 3.2
Relatively high demand in the market 13.9
Possibility of using improved inputs and rent land 38.0
Having a pumping machine 15.8
Government support 15.2
Increased production skills 7.0
Availability of nearby water 5.1
Land suitability 1.3
Labor availability 0.6
As discussed above, horticultural production provides good opportunity for farmers in the
study area to generate income. Despite the constraints identified above, there are opportunities
for increasing horticulture production in the area. Some of them are:
1. Increasing market integration: Since horticulture production enables livelihood
diversification of the population, and since farmers' awareness of the marketability of
horticulture production is increasing, the prospect to expand horticulture production is
high. Increasing export of potato to Somaliland and Djibouti is a major motive.
2. The culture of intensive crop production in the area: In response to declining farm
size, farmers have been focusing on an intensive production system such as animal
manure application, intercropping, etc. Intensive production is also consistent with the
government development strategy10. Vegetable production fits into the existing cereal-
pulse system to increase productivity. Potato and onion do have comparative
advantages to improve the food security of smallholder farmers in the area. Irrigation
water availability is an integral factor for intensive production.
3. Farmers are increasingly becoming aware of production technologies and improved
inputs. If the supply of these inputs is facilitated at reasonable prices, and farmer'
knowledge on sustainable use of the technologies is improved, there is a potential to
increase yield. In this regards, farmers training and adequate extension system play
crucial role.
4. The government policy and development strategy (EFDR, 2005) identified intensive
production and commercialization of agriculture as its development path. Attempts to
implement this plan provide opportunities for increased horticulture production in the
area. In the long run, investment in the country opens up the possibility of investment
venture in vegetable and fruit processing such as potato chips and juices. This will
create a reliable market for the producers, stabilize the price and motivate the
producers to expand the supply.
10
The environmental effects of intensive production system that includes chemical fertilizers and pesticides in
the area should be further investigated.
37
7. HORTICULTURE MARKETING IN EASTERN ETHIOPIA
7.1 MARKETS FOR HORTICULTURE PRODUCTS
Vegetables and fruits are produced in some specific locations in the eastern part of Ethiopia
and supplied to the local markets and to the neighboring countries. The major markets
identified for collection and distribution of large volumes of vegetables are Haramaya,
Finkile, Harar, Kombolcha and Dire Dawa. The market actors namely producers, collectors,
brokers, transporters, traders, consumers, and exporters play different roles along the market
chain.
Vegetables, notably, Irish potatoes, onion/shallot, kale, cabbage, beetroots and carrot are
major vegetable products offered in the horticulture market. Many other products such as
garlic, green pepper, Baharo, lettuce, tomato, etc. are also offered at relatively smaller
quantities by a few farmers.
The leafy vegetables are often supplied from the woredas within the eastern region while
relatively less perishable and highly demanded vegetables such as Irish potatoes and onions,
are also supplied from markets in Addis Ababa and eastern Shewa zone of Oromia. The flow
of products is dictated by seasonal supply deficit. Hence, these products (especially
onion/shallot and potatoes) are transported from eastern Ethiopia to Addis Ababa and vice
versa. Figure 8 shows the marketing channel for major vegetables in eastern Ethiopia.
The study reveals that Kombolcha, Finkile, Haramaya and Harar markets serve as vegetable
collection centers where the exporters collect and export the products through Jijiga to
Somalia and through Dire Dawa to Djibouti.
Figure 8: Major horticulture markets and flow in eastern Ethiopia
Hudane,
Babile (fruits) Rural
Fedis; Jarso
Dire
Jijiga/
Hargessa; Harar
Artishek,
Dire Dawa Djibouti
Market
Kombolcha
Market Haramaya/Finkile
Kurfa Challe; Shashemene/ Rift

Grawa; Kobo, valley/
Deder; Kersa; Addis Ababa/
Woter, etc.
38
7.1.1 Finkile market

Finkile is one of the emerging rural towns located in Finkile PA of Haramaya woreda. Due to
fertile land and irrigation water potential, the area is conducive for vegetable production.
Some fruits are produced in this woreda only for consumption. Some 75% of the households
in the PA, with 700 households, and Qerensa (an adjacent PA to Finkile) engage in
horticultural production. As a result, business particularly in horticulture and Khat marketing
is flourishing. Irish potato, lettuce, beetroots, carrot, onion/shallot, cabbage, tomato, etc. are
grown in the area. The farmers who used to sell their products at Haramaya market now sell
them at Finkile. Brokers or collectors collect the products for traders and receive Birr 5 per qt
of the amount collected. Traders in Kombolcha also use brokers or collectors in this area to
purchase potato.
There are about 12 horticulture traders each having the capacity to buy and sell 60 qt of
horticultural products per week. Two traders have a larger capacity (three times that of the
twelve traders) in terms of the capital they own for horticultural products marketing. They
also own trucks for transporting vegetables to Dire Dawa and Jijiga. They provide transport
services also for the other traders and collect rent.
The major sales outlets are Dire Dawa and Jijiga where the traders sell their products to
wholesalers and exporters in Dire Dawa and Jijiga towns. Small traders also sell products to
retailers in Dire Dawa through brokers who also provide warehouse services and charge for it.
The exporters in Dire Dawa collect the horticultural products every Tuesday, export them and
make the payment on Friday. This implies that the collectors in Finkile also collect the
products from the producers on promissory basis rather than actually paying for the
commodities, which involves the risk of downward price negotiation, after the products
changed hands.
Different vegetable types are loaded and transported to the market centers outside Finkile.
The 12 traders at Finkile market transport a truckload (about 60 qt) per week. The load is
composed of the following items with an estimated proportion as shown in the following
Table 36.
Table 36: Major horticulture traded at Finkile Market and Outflow

Type Amount per truck load % of product loaded
Potato 20 33.3
Shallot/onion 10 16.7
Baharo 7 11.7
Lettuce 4 6.7
Carrot 2 3.3
Garlic 1.5 2.5
Beetroot 2 3.3
Cabbage 10 16.7
Pepper 2 3.3
Chinese Lettuce 1.5 2.5
Total 60 100.0
Based on the estimated proportion of different horticultural products, and with a supply period
of 4 months during the two horticulture production cycles, a trader handles 960 qt of
vegetables making the total product handled by the 12 traders 11,520 qt per year all of whom
transport the vegetables to Dire Dawa. Including the large vegetable traders a total of 20,160
39
qt of vegetables is marketed by traders in Finkile. These traders also sell most of the products
in Dire Dawa and transport only a small portion to Jijiga (about 600 qt).
The products are supplied from the producers in the vicinity. During off-season, the traders
also buy potato from the other woredas such as Kobo, Gara Mulata, Kurfa Challe, etc. to sell
it to traders coming from Jijiga or Artishek.
7.1.2 Haramaya market

This market used to be the major horticulture collection center in eastern Hararghe including
producers in Kersa woreda and other woredas in eastern Hararghe. There was a horticulture
marketing cooperative in Haramaya which could not compete with traders and went bankrupt.
There are several retailers in Haramaya which purchase vegetables supplied in small
quantities, a phenomenon common in many markets in the eastern part of the country.
There are seven traders, two in Haramaya main town and five in Bati sub-town. They collect
vegetables and supply them to Dire Dawa or Kombolcha towns. Some of these traders also
supply vegetables for institutions such as Haramaya University, which requires vegetables
and fruits for students throughout the academic year, to hospitals, hotels, etc. The traders also
receive vegetables supplies (mainly onion, pepper, and potato) from Addis Ababa, and the
central rift valley areas, mainly during the slack production seasons of the year ranging from
January to May. It has been reported during the focus group discussions that about 500 qt. of
vegetables are transported to Dire Dawa per week while nearly the same quantity is marketed
within Haramaya, Harar, Jijiga and is sometimes transported to Addis Ababa (see Tables 37).
Table 37: Vegetable marketing in Haramaya Market

Destination Amount per week (qt) Proportion (%)
Total supply to Dire Dawa per week 500 46
Haramaya 77 7
Harar 154 14
Addis Ababa 115 11
Jijiga 231 22
Total amount marketed in
1,077 100
Haramaya
Different vegetables are marketed in the Haramaya market. As shown in Table 38, however,
potatoes account for the largest volume (60%) followed by onion/shallot (20%). All other
types of vegetables account for the remaining 20% of the quantity traded.
Table 38: Proportion of vegetables transported to Dire Dawa

Type Proportion (%) Amount (qt)
Potato 60.0 300
Onion/shallot 20.0 100
Carrot 5.0 25
Cabbage 5.0 25
Baharo 5.0 25
Lettuce 3.0 13
Chinese lettuce and others 2.0 12
Total 100 500
40
The finding is consistent with the previous reports which identified the volumes of potato in
the market operations at 60-75% and that of onion at 15-20% (Zemede, 2006).
7.1.3 Kombolcha market

Kombolcha, which is the district town, is only 15 km away from Harar town. It is accessed
from two sides, from Harar and from Funyan Bira of Jarso woreda which is also one of the
potential vegetable producing areas in eastern Hararghe. Kombolcha woreda is situated
between Hundane, Jarso and Haramaya woredas and is conducive for vegetable production.
Potatoes, beetroots, cabbage, carrot, tomato, pepper, and lettuce are produced in the woreda in
order of priority in terms of quantity supplied to the market. Producers have access only to the
Kombolcha market. It has been indicated that Haramaya and Kombolcha woredas supply
cabbage, beetroot, tomato and carrot (25% and 75% of the supply respectively) to Kombolcha
market.
Traders from Jijiga and other Somali towns access Kombolcha market through Funyan Bira
(Jarso) without passing through Harar town. There are some 20 traders handling vegetables in
Kombolcha market. The traders compete with each other to get buyers coming from Jijiga and
Somalia while on the other hand the buyers collaborate with each other and decide on the
prices.
Kombolcha is the major source for marketing onion and potatoes to Jijiga and Somali towns
near the border and beyond. According to the key informants, an average of 4,000 qt of
vegetables is transported per week to Jijiga, Artishek, and Hargessa and as far as Mogadishu
during peak supply seasons and the sum could reduce to about 1,000 qt during the slack
production seasons. It has been estimated that the peak production period covers 4 months
whereas the remaining eight months are slack seasons. It has been indicated that the shortage
of vegetable supply occurs during two months of the year. During the slack periods,
vegetables are transported from distant markets. The following illustration shows the flow of
potato from producers to Kombolcha markets and the duration of the supply.
Table 39: Major supply of potato to Kombolcha market
Sr. Supply source to Kombolcha Ranking of the Duration of Remark
No. market quantity supplied supply
1 Jarso 1st 3 months
2 Kurfa Challe/Gara Mulata/
2nd 2-3 months
Kersa
3 Haramaya/Kombolcha 3rd 3-4 months
4 Kobo/Deder/Chelenko 4th 2 months
5 Shashemene Quality
5th 1 months not
preferred
Key informants' interview and group discussions made with producers and traders in
Kombolcha town show that nearly all the vegetables are transported to the eastern part of the
country. It was estimated that 95% of the amount traded in Kombolcha town is sold to the
Somali traders who sell the products at different towns in the Somali region and beyond the
border. The remaining 5% is used for local consumption. Some of the low quality potatoes
that are sorted out are sold for local consumption including in Harar. Accounting for the
seasonal variation, an average of about 91,200 qt of vegetables is transported to these markets
from Kombolcha market per year. The Kombolcha potato market benefits a number of people
41
involved in the process. The collectors, brokers and the workers involved in loading and
unloading make a large income.
7.1.4 Woter market

The Woter market is one of the local markets near the producers located in Kersa woreda. The
area is suitable for vegetable production due to irrigation water availability. During the peak
vegetables supply time, a large volume of onion, potato, tomato, carrot, beetroots, etc. is sold.
This is a typical market where most of the producers suffer from a coordinated price cut by
the traders or brokers. It has been reported during the group discussions that traders abstain
from purchasing any products until the farmers feel frustrated by the lack of buyers and the
vegetables, as the products perish due to hot weather. The traders, then offer low prices which
the farmer cannot reject since if rejected other traders would offer only a smaller price.
Farmers call it "better than just dumping". This type of coordinated manipulation of vegetable
price to the disadvantage of the producers is also done by collectors or brokers at the farm
gate (this will be discussed under section 7.2.3).
7.1.5 Harar market

Harar is the second largest town with a large number of consumers (both institutions and
households), next to Dire Dawa. There are several hotels, hospitals, clubs, and households
especially employees demanding vegetables. Districts around Harar such as the Erer valley
which supplies fruits and vegetables, Hundane woreda, Fedis, the major supplier of
onion/shallot, and other neighboring areas supply their products to Harar market.
Onion/shallot and potato are the two major vegetables handled by the traders in Harar. Fedis
is the major supplier of shallot/onion between July and October. The onion from this area is
transported to different markets including Dire Dawa, and other nearby towns. Moreover,
onion is also transported to Addis and other regional towns in Amhara, Tigray and Oromia
regional states. Depending on the seasonal availability, Harar also gets onion from other areas
such as Shashemene, Arsi, Addis Ababa, etc. There are four major market days in Harar.
During these days, an average of 1000 qt. of onion could be supplied during peak periods of
July to September, which mostly overlaps with the harvest in Fedis. This indicates that about
120,800 qt of onion/shallot is traded in Harar per year. The following table shows the
seasonal flow of onion from different sources to Harar.
Table 40: Supply of onion
Amount per No. of Total amount
Timeframe day (qt) months (qt) Source
July to Sept. 1000 4 64,000 Fedis, Kombolcha, Haramaya,
Langay, Kersa, Chelenko, West
Hararghe, Arsi/Sire, Woliso,
Oct. to May 500 7 56,000 Addis Ababa
June 200 1 800 Outside Hararghe
Total
amount in a
year 120,800
About 14,000 qt of potato is traded in Harar. The supply channel shows that potato is supplied
to Harar market from different sources, depending on the seasonal availability. More than
70% of the supply is produced in eastern Hararghe. Other sources of supply are Shashemene,
Arsi and east Shewa. According to Sisay (2004), potato is produced throughout the year in
Ethiopia. Moreover, the peak potato supply period in Arsi zone of Oromia is between
November and March, which is the period of little supply in the eastern part of the country.
42
An estimated average of 75% of the supply is sold in towns in the Somali region while the
remaining amount is used for local consumption. The market survey in Kombolcha revealed
that the quality of potato supplied from Shashemene is inferior to the local variety produced in
Hararghe in terms of perishability and shape of the tuber. This indicates that most of the local
potato produce is exported through Kombolcha and the Harar market relies on the inferior
quality transported from outside Hararghe.
Table 41: Supply of potato

Total amount No. of Total amount
Time frame per day (qt) months (Qt) Source
For the year 14000
Kombolcha,
Haramaya, Langay,
July to Sept. 500 5 10000 Kobo, Chalenko, etc
Oct. to May 225 4 3600 Shashemene/Arsi
June 100 1 400 Shashemene
April -May 0 2 0
Supply to Somali 75% 10500
Harar market also provides a marketing opportunity for the fruits produced in the surrounding
areas and that are transported from outside Hararghe. As stated earlier, Erer Gota in the
Bisidimo area supplies some mangos and banana to Harar market. Guava, orange, lemon and
other fruits are also produced in small quantities. Ethfruit11 supplies some fruits, mainly
oranges from the fruit farms in the Awash valley. There are many fruit retailers in Harar town
that purchase fruits from farmers and sell them to make profit. There are only a few fruit
shops which heavily compete with Ethfruit to trade fruits. The fruit traders also purchase
fruits from large scale producers in Awash valley.
7.1.6 Dire Dawa market

Dire Dawa is the largest city in the eastern part of the country. Hence, it is a destination of
many of the agricultural commodities such as khat, vegetables, fruits, etc. It is also an export
route for legal trade due to its connection to Djibouti. Kafira market is the terminal market for
vegetables and fruits sold by small scale traders coming from Finkile, Haramaya, Kersa, rural
Dire Dawa, etc. Fruit producers near the Dire Dawa town sell their produces at kafira to
wholesalers or retailers or to exporters. Brokers have warehouses where the farmers/traders
can unload their vegetables/fruits and the broker facilitates the sales and pay Birr 5 per quintal
for the service. In case these products are not sold, they would stay but the sellers prefer to
cash it due to fear of deterioration of quality as time lapses. Retailers, consumers, hotels, etc.
purchase from this market.
Dire Dawa market is also the export market where the products are brought from the different
supply sources by truck into the compound of the railway station (Legahar). The wholesalers
from these towns transfer their horticulture products to exporters in Dire Dawa. At the gate,
plant quarantine inspectors make visual observations to reduce soil, dirt, sheath and straws
used as packaging material. Even parthenum hystrophorous is used as packaging12.
11
Ethfruit is a public fruit marketing company in Ethiopia
12
It is to be remembered that parthenium hystorium is a dangerous weed that entered into the country earlier
with food aid challenging the plant quarantine system of the country.
43
Before the product leaves the country, it should pass through two processes, i.e., physical
material movements and accompanying procedures that involve numerous institutions. These
institutions have parts to play in the export process and the regulation of the exportable
products. Institutions involved are Trade and Industry, Bank, Customs Office, Agriculture,
Transport, Transit agents.
7.1.7 Djibouti market

The Djibouti market is an important outlet for fruits and vegetables produced in the eastern,
central and southern regions of Ethiopia. According to Sisay (2004), there are 10 types of
vegetables and 10 types of fruits Ethiopia is exporting to Djibouti market. The major
vegetables exported through this route are potatoes, onion, and tomatoes while the fruits are
dominantly orange, banana, mango and mandarin. Smallholder farmers supply vegetables,
mango and banana fruits while the state farms supply orange, mandarin and lemon. Some
farmers who are using irrigation for production around Dire Dawa also supply fruits for the
export market, through exporters.
7.2 MARKETING CHANNEL AND THE MAJOR ACTORS
The marketing channel in the horticulture marketing system can be broadly categorized into
four levels, namely the producers, the middlemen/brokers, traders and consumers. There are
different brokers and traders with different roles in the marketing system (Figure 9). Along
the marketing channels, there are different actors contributing to different and complementary
marketing functions. These include production, facilitation, buying and selling, transporting,
packing, sorting and, processing, etc. It is interesting to note that some key functions such as
packaging, sorting and processing are poorly developed and the sense of value adding is
practically not observable. The changes in the value of products as they move away from
production along the marketing channel to the consumers is the increased utility by making
the goods available rather than adding value in terms of increased shelf life or increased
safety. This section discusses the major market actors and identifies the constraints of an
efficient marketing system and the opportunities for improvement.
44
Figure 9: Major market actors along the market channel
Producers in Hararghe and Dire Dawa
Farm level broker (B1) Assembler/

Collectors
Traders outside Hararghe

Broker at local
market (B2) center
Broker from large market center (B3)
Wholesalers Retailers
Consumers
Exporters
Source: Own sketching based on the market survey (September 2006)
7.2.1 Producers
Horticulture crops are produced in Kersa, Haramaya, Kombolcha, Chelenko, Grawa, Kurfa
Challe, Hundane, Dire Dawa area, Fedis, western Hararghe, etc. Vegetable production by
smallholders in the eastern part of the region is more popular compared to fruit production.
Production of fruits such as banana, mango, and papaya, orange and mandarin is limited at
household level except at a few places such as the Erer Gota, Chiro (for banana) and some
PAs near Dire Dawa. Farmers who produce small quantities of fruits sell them in the local
markets to consumers or retailers. Orange production is made around Dire Dawa using
irrigation.
A large number of producers of vegetables and fruits sell their products through brokers or
collectors to wholesalers or exporters. There is no direct transaction or linkage between the
producers and exporters or large buyers. The wholesalers have contact persons/brokers who
identify vegetables to be purchased, negotiate the price, and purchase and deliver the
products. These brokers play a decisive role in the marketing system and determine the
benefits reaching the producers. Onion, potato, tomato, orange and mandarin (in Dire Dawa)
are often purchased in the field through this process. There are numerous actors handling the
product along the channel between producers and consumers.
7.2.2 Collectors
Collectors are found in small towns like Woter, Finkile, Haramaya, Langay and Kombolcha
to collect vegetables and deliver them to traders in big market centers such as Haramaya,
Harar, Finkile, and Dire Dawa. The collectors have small capital. Hence, the recipient traders
advance some amount of money to the collectors and through this make sure that the product
45
will be delivered to them. The collectors are closely associated with brokers who work at
grassroots level as well as with those coming from bigger marketing centers. In the markets
where the producers sell their products, mainly during the peak supply period, the collectors
fix the prices, which is often very low.
7.2.3 Brokers
There are middlemen in all locations with the exception of Dire Dawa and Harar since in
these cases the suppliers and consumers are in close proximity. Three types of brokers are
common. The farm level broker/agent identifies plots with good produces and links the
producer with a local broker. High in the hierarchy of the channel is the local broker, located
in the small nearby towns. The local broker (B2) links the farm level broker (B1) and the
urban broker (B3) in Figure 9. The local broker is a key marketing agent who communicates
with the farmer and conveys the decisions made by the local broker or collector. The
producers have contact with the local agents and do not have direct contact with the other
intermediaries. The urban broker (B3) gets the information from ultimate buyers and sets the
price. Neither the farmer nor the trader set actual prices for the products. If the farmer insists
on negotiating the price, the brokers gang up and boycott purchasing of the product, leaving
the product to rot.
The vegetable brokers receive commissions from the traders ranging from Birr 5 to 10 per qt.
The farm level and local broker gets Birr 5 while the urban broker gets Birr 10 per qt. The
price may embed an undeclared margin. This price is communicated to the farmer through the
lower two agents. If there are several brokers in an area, they negotiate not to compete on the
price offered by one broker. Some reasons provided by the brokers when telling the farmer
about the low price is "lack of demand or buyer in the terminal market". They may also tell
the buyers in the terminal market about low supply and high competition and inflate the
prices.
The commission for fruit collectors in the Dire Dawa area is higher than what is paid for
vegetables. The farm level broker gets 10 Birr/qt, while the local broker/collector gets 20
birr/qt in the market center and the third collector gets 30 birr/qt. These three are syndicate
and well organized. As the trader always makes his/her own profit margin, it is the producer
who bears the cost and hence benefits least from the marketing system.
7.2.4 Retailers
There are three types of traders, namely retailers, wholesalers, and exporters. Retailers include
supermarkets, green grocers, vendors, hotels, restaurants, cafeteria, etc. which are available in
all the markets studied. The retailers purchase vegetables and fruits from producers,
assemblers/collectors, wholesalers or Ethfruit. Some of the retailers have fixed working
spaces and licenses while others work as street vendors. Retailers provide opportunities for
producers who offer products in smaller quantities to sell their products.
Some vegetables such as onion/shallot, potato, tomato, pepper, etc. are needed in the hotels
and restaurants. Fruits are sold as juices in the cafes. The purchasing capacity of the hotels
depends on the demand they have and their capital and 20 to 50 qt of horticultural products
could be purchased per market day for such processing and sales to consumers, as finished
product.
7.2.5 Wholesalers
Wholesalers purchase from other traders, collectors, or producers. But the major channel of
supply for quantities large enough to supply to exporters is collected following the longest
market chain: Producers-Brokers-wholesalers-Exporters. Retailers are many in number and
operate in all the towns. Wholesalers are available only in larger horticulture market centers
46
such as Finkile, Haramaya, Harar, Kombolcha and Dire Dawa. Exporters to Djibouti are
found in Dire Dawa while those exporting to Somalia come from the Somali region.
7.2.6 Exporters
According to Sisay (2006), in 2002 alone about 36 countries imported Ethiopian fruits and
vegetables. About 74% of the quantity exported was imported by Djibouti. The revenue
generated from the export was Birr 11,279,211 of which 59.529% was received from the
export to Djibouti. Other major importers were Sudan (5.2% of the volume and 6.6% of the
value), Yemen (3.8% of the volume and 3.7% of the value), India (2.3% of the volume and
2.01% of the value), Netherlands (1.6% of the volume and 9% of the value), Italy (1.8% of
the volume and 4.8% of the value), etc. About 80% of the horticulture export was made
through Dire Dawa.
The survey results also show that a total of about 98,660 qt of vegetables is transported
towards Somali region per year. The information from the traders indicates that most of these
products may cross the border to Somalia. In the key informants’ interview, farmers and
traders indicate that the export outlet is the major motive for increased production and
marketing of potatoes. This indicates that horticulture products worth a million Birr are traded
in this manner. Exporters purchase from wholesalers or collectors. A large volume of
different fruits and vegetables passes through collection centers, towns and is finally
transported to Dire Dawa and Jijiga for export to Djibouti and Somalia. There are about 35
licensed exporters engaged in exporting horticultural products to Djibouti. Seven transistors
are involved in processing all the necessary paper work concerning banking and customs
clearing on behalf of the exporters.
Vegetables and fruits arrive in bulk or in sacks, baskets, leaves and straws. They are unloaded
from trucks within the compound of the customs office and railway station. The trucks are
checked before they enter the compound. The compound is crowded with exporters,
transistors, loaders, truck drivers and their supporters. The compound is heaped with litter of
rejected products and their packaging material such as leaves, sheaths and straws. Potatoes,
onions, tomatoes, oranges, mandarins, and bananas are loaded on the carriage of the train in
sacks and wooden boxes.
The plant quarantine and custom office jointly work in the railway compound in Dire Dawa to
facilitate the export process. The customs office checks and compares the product presented
for export with the accompanying necessary papers in collaboration with other institutions.
The plant quarantine and customs office inspect the product physically before it is loaded on
the train for export.
The data collected from the Dire Dawa Trade and Industry Office show an increasing trend in
export of horticulture products through Dire Dawa mainly to Djibouti both in terms of
physical quantity and revenue (Figure 10). The analysis shows that the export volume
increased on average by 13% over the last 15 years while the export earning increased by
33%. There is, however, significant fluctuation in the export of horticultural products (Figure
11).
47
Figure 10: Trend of export of horticultural products
80000
Quantity (ton)
70000 Revenue ('000 Birr)
60000
50000
Quantity
40000
30000
20000
10000
0
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Year
Source: Computed based on data from Dire Dawa Trade and Industry Office, Foreign Trade Office, (2006)
Figure 11: Change in quantity and revenue
250 237
200
Change in quantity
Change in revenue (%)
150
Percent
100
71
48 52
50
15 27 26 24
15
3
0
-9 -15 -8
-18
-50
1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Year
Source: Computed based on data from Dire Dawa Trade and Industry Office, Foreign Trade Office, (2006)
7.2.7 Consumers
Sources of supply to consumers
Consumers are those purchasing the products for consumption. Two types of consumers could
be recognized: private consumers and institutions. The private consumers are employees,
urban and rural dwellers who purchase and consume horticultural products. The institutions
include universities/colleges, hospitals, etc.
48
Private consumers purchase horticultural products directly from producers, retailers and
wholesalers. As shown in Table 42, the majority of the consumers purchase cabbage, tomato,
beet roots, carrot and onion/shallot, orange, banana, etc from retailers. These products are also
purchased from different sources (often multiple sources). Purchases from wholesalers and
producers are limited.
Table 42: Sources of supply of horticultural products to consumers (%)
Horticultural Where the consumer buys horticultural products
crops
purchased Multiple
Wholesalers Retailers Farmers Ethfruit sources Total
Cabbage 2.1 74.7 4.2 8.4 7.4 97
Beetroots 1.1 67.4 2.1 6.3 4.2 81
Carrots 3.2 62.1 3.2 6.3 4.2 79
Kale 61.1 3.2 5.3 6.3 76
Onion/shallot 1.1 75.8 4.2 6.3 10.5 98
Irish potato 2.1 75.8 4.2 8.4 8.4 99
Sweet potato 15.8 7.4 3.2 26
Pepper 9.5 1.1 4.2 15
Tomato 69.5 4.2 11.6 9.5 95
Garlic 13.7 3.2 17
Orange 51.6 15.8 14.7 82
Mandarin 24.2 16.8 10.5 52
Lemon 27.4 7.4 15.8 51
Avocado 10.5 7.4 4.2 22
Banana 1.1 53.7 10.5 12.6 78
Mango 49.5 1.1 10.5 14.7 76
Papaya 24.2 3.2 6.3 34
Average 1.8 45.1 3.3 8.0 8.6
Horticultural products are not necessarily purchased on the major market days since retailers
market their products throughout the week in the major market centers. The respondents
indicated that they purchase an average of 1-2 kg of major vegetables such as cabbage,
onion/shallot, tomato and potato per market day (Table 43). The average purchasing
frequency is two days per week. At least 250 gm of each of the major vegetables is purchased
per market day i.e. 0.5 kg per week per family.
Table 43: The quantity purchased per market day in Kg

Vegetables Respondents (No) Mean Fruits Respondents (No) Mean
Cabbage 93 1.9 Orange 77 1.8
Beetroots 78 1.4 Mandarin 50 1.3
Carrots 77 1.3 Lemon 49 0.6
Kale 72 1.4 Avocado 21 3.3
Onion 94 3.0 Banana 76 1.5
Irish potato 95 2.9 Mango 75 1.7
Sweet potatoes 26 2.3 Papaya 32 1.5
Pepper 14 0.5
Tomato 90 2.4
Garlic 16 0.9
49
The prices of vegetables depend on the supply situation. Vegetables are available for lower
prices for an average of 4 months. This low price period is associated with local supply from
the surrounding area. The remaining 8 months represent the time when the products are
transported from distant places and sold at higher prices.
Government institutions purchase horticultural products through the bid system. Mostly
wholesalers compete and supply the products.
Purchasing frequency and prices

All the consumers know the benefits of consuming fruits and vegetables and only 5% of them
feel that there can be problems with the consumption of horticultural products. This has
something to do with hygiene and sanitation rather than the product itself. The implication on
this is promotion of the home economics aspect, and education and skill building regarding
the preparation and consumption of vegetables. Appropriate storage and handling techniques
are also an issue.
Cabbage, beetroots, carrots, onion/shallot, potato and tomato are purchased by most of the
consumers (Table 44). Regarding fruits, orange, banana and mango are purchased by the
largest number of consumers as compared to other type of fruits. The amount the consumers
purchase depends on how frequent they visit the market, their income level, and the storage
possibility/capacity of the household. The consumers purchase vegetables two times a week
and on average purchase 2 kg per week. The differences among the consumers in terms of
frequency of purchasing are the quantities purchased. Those frequently visiting the market
purchase smaller quantities (as low as 0.25 kg) and it depends on the types of products. Onion
for instance can be kept for about a week and can be purchased once in a week while more
perishable products should be purchased in smaller quantities but relatively frequently.
The average price of horticultural products depends on the supply and seasonal demand. The
lowest prices occur during the peak harvest time while the highest prices occur during dry
seasons when the supply is low. In Ethiopia, the demand for vegetable production also
increases during the fasting periods, when the Christian avoid eating animal products.
50
Table 44: Purchasing frequency and quantities purchased by the consumers (eastern towns)
Quantity No. of Number of Number of
Low High
Type of purchased market months month
price price N
Horticulture per market days per with low with high
(Birr/kg) (Birr/kg)
day in Kg week price price
Vegetables 2.2 2.0 3.1 4.1 7.2
Cabbage 1.9 2.6 1.2 2.1 4.3 6.9 93
Beetroot 1.4 2.5 1.3 2.1 4.2 7.0 78
Carrots 1.3 2.4 1.3 2.1 4.4 7.0 76
Kale 1.4 2.3 1.1 1.9 3.6 7.5 71
Onion/shallot 3.0 2.5 1.8 3.1 4.3 7.4 92
Irish potatoes 2.9 2.8 1.5 2.5 4.6 7.0 93
Sweet
potatoes 2.3 2.5 1.5 2.4 4.1 6.4 26
Pepper 0.5 1.0 1.7 2.9 4.3 7.2 14
Tomato 2.4 2.8 1.9 3.2 4.3 7.4 87
Garlic 0.9 1.0 6.4 8.4 3.3 8.8 16
Fruits 1.7 2.7 4.0 3.6 6.5
Orange 1.8 1.7 3.0 4.4 3.7 7.0 73
Mandarin 1.3 1.7 3.1 4.1 3.6 5.9 44
Lemon 0.6 2.0 2.0 3.3 3.9 7.1 47
Avocado 3.3 2.0 3.3 4.5 3.4 6.4 20
Banana 1.5 1.6 3.0 4.2 3.5 6.9 69
Mango 1.7 1.6 2.7 4.0 3.1 5.5 68
Papaya 1.5 1.3 2.1 3.5 3.7 6.9 31
Consumption constraints
Marketability of horticultural products depends on the demand. The feeding habit and demand
parameters determine the level of local consumption of these products. The consumers were
asked to rank the factors constraining purchases of horticultural products. The larger the
number of consumers ranking the constraints indicates the relative importance of the problem.
The proportion of respondents who ranked the constraints as one of the top three problems is
shown in Table 45. The results show that high price of the products is the most important
constraint for the majority of the consumers. This could be associated to the relatively low
income level of the consumers, which is the second most common constraint of the
consumers. The observed and recorded price information shows that fruits are more expensive
than vegetable. The proportion of consumers putting price and income related constraints at
the top of the list is also high for fruits compared to vegetables.
About 63% of the consumers feel that shortage of supply is one of the top three problems
affecting the purchase of horticultural products. Poor storage of the vegetables is also an
important constraint for half of the consumers.
51
Table 45: Proportion of consumers who ranked the constraints of purchasing the respective
products as the top three problems (%)
Horticultural
Constraints
Poor High
products
storage price of Lack of

Shortage Low at the Poor Perish- Broker market
of supply income home product handling ability interference information
Cabbage 61 56 54 77 56 13 55 21
Beetroot 64 66 52 85 53 18 52 24
Carrot 65 63 54 85 44 20 49 22
Kale 66 63 57 72 44 42 50 14
Onion 67 77 37 95 38 18 59 34
Potatoes 69 77 44 98 43 21 56 34
Orange 77 83 54 92 38 18 43 18
Mandarin 51 78 57 92 24 13 36 30
Lemon 65 87 37 85 40 22 15 22
Banana 64 87 52 87 28 33 51 10
Mango 60 85 60 90 47 24 51 17
Tomato 46 54 52 75 36 59 54 16
Average 63 73 51 86 41 25 48 22
In terms of what should be done to improve consumption of horticultural products, consumers

give different suggestions. Table 46 shows some of the interventions suggested to improve
consumption of horticultural products. Increasing the supply of the products and stabilizing
the market are most commonly mentioned. Both of these suggestions affect the supply side
and increase purchases. Moreover, changing the consumers' behavior to make vegetables and
fruits as part of the diet has been suggested.
Table 46: What should be done to improve consumption of horticultural products?

Sr. % of
No. Suggestions given respondents
1 Provision of storage facilities in the nearby fruit stores 7
2 Stabilize the market 30
3 Increase production/supply 30
4 Teach society to consume fruits and vegetables 16
5 Improve quality of the products 8
6 Nothing 4
7 No comment 6
Total 100
7.3 MARKET FACILITIES/INFRASTRUCTURE
7.3.1 Transportation
Most of the woredas in the study area are served by a gravel/rock and all-weather secondary
road that connects the woreda towns to the Dire Dawa-Harar – Addis Ababa asphalt road.
Most of the production sites in the rural areas are not accessible by car during the rainy
season. The farmers use donkeys, human portage and light vehicles to transport vegetables to
the nearby collection centers on roadsides. Transporting irrigated vegetables is much easier
52
since the harvest occurs during the dry season and the traders use pickups, which are capable
of traveling and transporting the vegetables to the market centers. This involves loading and
unloading from donkeys to vehicles. The farmers who do not have donkeys rent them for
transporting their products at a cost of 10-20 birr per trip depending on the distance to the
market.
Some of the wholesalers own ISUZU trucks and can easily transport the collected products to
the terminal markets. But most of the collectors and medium and small scale traders rely on
rent to transport their products. For instance, a trader rents a truck individually or in
collaboration with others and pays Birr 10 per qt to transport goods from Finkile, Woter or
Harar to Dire Dawa while it costs only Birr 5 per qt. from Haramaya to Dire Dawa. Compared
to the other parts of Ethiopia, the transport service in the study areas is relatively better. What
is rather difficult is the way vegetables are handled and transported, which exposes the
products to weathering and physical damage. Most of the spoilage of the products occurs at
the level of packing into sacks, loading and transporting on the rural rough road which causes
a loss of an estimated 20-25%. There is no special transportation facility for transporting fruits
and vegetables and they are packed like any other commodity on the trucks, taxi or any other
vehicles.
Photo 1: A truck loaded with vegetables on a poor road from Finkile to Haramaya
Loading and unloading costs vary from Birr 1 to 2 per qt. The loading and unloading is often
monopolized by a few individuals who consider it as means of their livelihood. These people
prevent other individuals from entering into the business. Hence, the traders and farmers are
not allowed to unload their goods in big market centers like Harar, Dire Dawa and
Kombolcha. In so doing, some of the loaders/unloaders (e.g. in Kombolcha) live a better life
compared to the producers. Though it is encouraging to see the living condition of every
working person, the question of unfair benefit sharing is the worry of the farmers.
In the group discussion at Bilisuma Oromia PA, the participants stated:

'We the producers could not support ourselves for the entire year and are
forced to look upon the government for food aid; the laborers who load
and unload our produces are privileged enough to be able to purchase
vehicles."
53
7.3.2 Storage
The warehouses used by the traders are ordinary rooms with cemented or ground/soil floor
and with no shelves. The storage facilities are in poor conditions. Cooling and preservation
systems are unavailable, and perhaps unaffordable. Potato is stored spread on the floor and
some traders take special care to keep potatoes for about a month without quality
deterioration. Some of the mechanisms include keeping potatoes on soiled floor, with no
aeration and sunlight. They also choose potato species with relatively longer shelf life.
According to the key informants, potatoes with a red flower have this desired quality.
Vegetables are harvested by many farmers at a similar period. Therefore, the supply increases
and the price declines. On the other hand, techniques for storing vegetables are not known to
many of the farmers. As a result, several farmers complain about the lack of appropriate
technology and know-how for post harvest horticulture management to allow them a gain
from price changes.
Due to the lack of improved storage facilities, the different market actors keep vegetables only
for a limited number of days. Leafy vegetables and tomatoes are sold as soon as harvested and
the wholesalers and retailers may keep them for only a few days. Products like potato could
be kept by the producers for up to 7 days; the wholesalers may also keep them for 7-12 days
while the retailers may keep them for up to 10 days, with a total of up to 25 days all along the
marketing channel. Other vegetables such as onion could be properly managed and kept for
more days or some months except under wet and moist soil conditions where the producers
and other market actors cannot store it.
Photo 2: Storage condition in most markets in the study area
7.3.3 Grading, standardization and packaging

The organization and market forces within the domestic arena are obscure and hard to
understand since many of the market infrastructures are not yet developed in terms of
information, transportation, units of measurement, grading, storage and processing to name
just a few. There are no norms and procedures to abide with for every actor to play his role in
a fair and equitable manner. In the case of eastern Ethiopia, in the vegetables and fruits sector,
middlemen are considered like a burden to the producer and an expense to the consumer.
In general, there is no norm to define quality and set prices accordingly. Regulatory
institutions protect all market actors from unfair transactions. In the vegetables and fruits
54
marketing of the study area, such norms do not exist. The price of vegetables and fruits are
often fixed arbitrarily based on the judgment of the traders and/or brokers rather than the
demand and supply. Exporters attempt to get uniform and undamaged products for export and
there is not as such a standard to pay a significantly different price based on quality.
In Kombolcha market for instance, the Somali traders need quality potato for export. It has
been indicated that "Large Size Potatoes" are needed in Hargessa while the consumers in
Mogadishu prefer "Smooth Surfaced and Medium Size Potatoes". The traders try to sort the
potatoes into three grades: Grade 1 being the best and attracting good price (Birr 110 per qt. in
Kombolcha in September 2006), grade 2 with some cuts on the surface but still usable for
local consumption (sold at Birr 75 per qt), and grade 3, sold for Birr 40 per qt or rejected due
to very small size and damage. While attempts at grading and pricing based on quality are
encouraging, the way the sorting is done and the prices are set it puts farmers in a
disadvantageous position in the transaction because:
• There is no norm guiding the buyers and the sellers in defining quality and grading;
• There is no institution enforcing the norm;
• Sorting is done by the buyers or their agents;
• Price is set arbitrarily.
Sorting and grading is advantageous for both buyers and sellers including the consumers.
Firstly, it builds confidence and trust in the marketing system and secondly it avoids
unnecessary risk of losses. A wholesaler in Harar estimates the amount of non-onion materials
or small sized onion that should be discarded at 20% in a quintal of onion purchased. This is a
significant loss. As a result, traders purchase the onion per sack and the weight is
underestimated with a margin of 20-40 kg per sack. This principle is applied all over the study
area even when the potato or onion/shallot is filled into containers from the "Dora-collection
field of unpackaged vegetables". The under weighting is not only a means to compensate
possible adulteration but is also taken as a means to maximize the price margin. Producers are
price takers and do not attempt to negotiate the terms of the transaction.
One really wonders the extent of lack of law and order in the vegetables
marketing system in Hararghe and would ask why farmers are not
protected?
In general, the East Ethiopian Horticulture Marketing system suffers from lack of processing,
packaging, storage and labeling. In the short run, fresh vegetables and fruits are the major
form of supply to the consumers. The results of the consumers survey shows that 96% of the
consumers do not want packed fruits. 97% do not want packed vegetables. They rather want
fresh vegetables and fruits.
7.3.4 Financing
The horticulture sector is financed through different mechanisms. Firstly, farmers finance
horticulture production from their own savings. Secondly, farmers receive credit from
different sources to purchase farm inputs. The survey result shows that 26% (N=141) of the
sample horticultural producers received credit during the last production year (2005/06). The
average loan size was Birr 520 with a minimum and maximum of Birr 30 and 1750
respectively. The majority of the farmers who received credit used it for the purchase of farm
inputs such as fertilizer, seed and pesticides. Operating capital is crucial for the farmers to
purchase farm inputs and cope with seasonality. Some studies made in the area show that
resource poor farmers borrow 1 qt of potato tuber for planting (equivalent to Birr 200) to pay
the sum of money after harvest. Whenever the price falls to Birr 50 per qt. 4 qt of the harvest
55
is required to repay the credit. In some instances, traders lend farmers money to buy all the
produce at the harvest price (Zemede, 2006).
Capital is crucial for commercial activities. During the group discussions and key informant
interviews, the traders appreciated the seriousness of capital shortage to expand vegetable
trading. Credit is not available for the traders. Only 3% of the producers who wanted to
become involved in horticulture trading received credit (average Birr 535). Another credit
system applied in the area to overcome capital shortage is that of the wholesalers providing
advance payment to collectors so that they will ensure the supply of vegetables. Sometimes
wholesalers also get working capital from Somali importers with restrictive requirements.
Similarly, exporters collect the supply from traders without settling the cost. The exporter
collects the products, registers the name of the supplier, type and amount of the product but
the price is determined after sales in Djibouti. Products are supplied every Tuesday, and sacks
are delivered every Thursday and payments are made every Friday. There is no formal
collateral or insurance system for the suppliers. What works here is mere trust. Unfortunately,
the suppliers mention that there are often payment delays and several rounds of export are
done before settling the previous bill. The suppliers do not have options since refusal to
supply would lead to deterioration of the product.
A supplier from Haramaya market emphasizes the shortcomings of the

payment system stating as follows: "Our exported vegetables are not paid
until consumed."
Worse is also when the exporters revise the price claiming that they could not sell the
products for good prices in Djibouti. This in fact contradicts the argument of lack of revision
of horticulture prices in Djibouti, which was fixed some years back.
7.3.5 Market information

The main sources of market information are traders and brokers. The majority of farmers
become aware of the price upon their arrival at the market place. In most cases, the prevailing
prices from the previous market days are considered when the farmers deliver the vegetables
to the wholesalers without allowing remunerations for the difference in quality, seasons and
the change in market conditions. Brokers often deliver information about declining prices in
the terminal markets to farmers so as to convince them to receive lower prices for what they
will sell.
Traders themselves lack market information outside their vicinity. Traders in Kombolcha and
Harar, for instance, do not get precise information about prices in Somali to adjust the sales
prices. Lack of market information severely affects the producers since they are the ones
bearing losses sooner or later.
7.4 CONSTRAINTS OF HORTICULTURE MARKETING
Marketing constraints have been identified from the producers’ and traders’ perspectives. The
producers’ top three marketing constraints have been identified and presented in Table 47.
The results show that lack of market and associated low prices of the products, lack of market
information and brokers/middlemen's hindrances to getting a better price for the products are
the top three constraints in the marketing system.
As discussed earlier, lack of direct communication between the wholesalers and the
producers, which could be attributed to lack of coordination between the traders on the one
56
hand and producers on the other, created a conducive environment for the brokers to play
decisive roles. The brokers’ role is significant if its function is in a responsible manner and
governed by law. Traders compete for buyers by offering cheap products while the effect of
the low price is put on the farmers.
Table 47: Proportion of respondents who ranked the marketing problems as one of the top
three problems (%)
Constraints Cabbage Beetroots Carrots Onion Irish potatoes
Lack of market 74 74 86 65 68
Low price 96 97 97 95 97
Lack of storage 57 54 65 65 61
Lack of transportation 61 45 53 74 48
Lack of market
information 76 75 75 71 71
Brokers hindrance 71 71 71 58 59
Perish-ability 47 46 43 63 31
The constraints of horticulture marketing were also inquired from experts, traders and
transporters. The analysis of results of all possible sources would lead to the following list
(not in order of severity) of major constraints of horticulture marketing in the region. These
are:
1. Lack of market to absorb the production;
2. Low price;
3. Large number of middlemen in the marketing system;
4. Absence (weakness) of marketing institutions safeguarding farmers' interest and rights
over their marketable produces (e.g. cooperatives);
5. Lack of coordination among producers to increase their bargaining power;
6. Lack of coordination among traders to increase their capacity to search for potential
markets and control the activities of the middlemen;
7. Poor product handling; packing is traditional and only in sacks or covered with leaves
(e.g. cabbages and lettuce);
8. Imperfect pricing system. The middlemen decide on the price of horticultural
products. Producers cannot negotiate since they may be denied even a low price and
their products could be liable to rotting, since it is perishable.
9. Limited access to external markets. Absence of strong cooperatives and lack of
coordination between producers and traders aggravated the problem.
10. Lack of transparency in the market information system mainly in the export market.
Due to lack of transparency, farmers' negotiation skills are limited.
11. Informal transaction prevails in the export system. Producers and local traders receive
value for their products only after the exported product is sold. Horticultural products
are transported every Tuesday and payment may be effected the following Friday. The
ultimate price of the product depends on the exporter's decision to pay. Although the
prices are determined based on previous market price of each type of product, the
exporter may declare that he/she did not sell it for the expected price and pay less than
agreed. The supplier does not argue against it in fear of losing a customer in the future.
Payments are often delayed and several lots may be exported before settling the
previous bill. The same effect is rolled back to the producers and the producers bear
the ultimate cost. The trading system is also informal in the sense that no formal
collateral is involved in the transaction, indicating the lack of legal commitment to
settle debt.
57
12. Lack of standard for quality control and hence lack of discriminatory pricing system
that accounts for quality and grades of the products. The attempt made in Kombolcha
market to sort the products and pay accordingly should be encouraged and legally
supported; institutionalized. Transaction based on local measurement units (Gonfa13)
exposes producers to unfair pricing. The existing marketing system limited the
farmers’ bargaining capacity.
13. Lack of motivation for sorting and improving quality of products. Since there is no
price discrimination and payments on well established quality parameters, the sellers
often add externalities to the products. There is no marketing extension that aims at
improving the marketing system in the country.
14. Poor storage and transport system for vegetables. Transportation to extreme rural areas
is also a problem;
15. Lack of capital for horticulture trading;
16. Limited research or extension system related to horticulture marketing;
17. Lack of semi-processing industries.
7.5 OPPORTUNITIES FOR INCREASED HORTICULTURE MARKETING
Horticulture marketing has increasing opportunities for expansion. The opportunities stem
from the production potential. These include:
• Farmers are motivated to expand horticulture production by using traditional irrigation
and using improved agricultural inputs;
• NGOs have been involved in the promotion of the poor, particularly women, in
vegetable production;
• The government policies support horticultural production as means of increasing
household food security.
It is obvious that creating appropriate market linkages through efficient marketing

arrangements and appropriate production systems would boost the living standards of millions
of horticulture crop farmers, traders and transporters operating in Ethiopia, Somalia and
Djibouti. In particular, the government policy that is focusing on the promotion of market-
oriented (mainly export) agriculture is very much in support of this approach. Moreover, the
new water harvesting approach, which is being widely promoted by the government, is
expected to increase vegetable and horticulture crop production in the study area.
However, there is little experience, knowledge and deliberation in the region to create and
promote supportive strategies within the local government system and create coordinated
efforts among producers and traders. As a result, farmers often do not have access to
improved production technologies or they are expensive to acquire. In addition to these due to
an inefficient market system, farmers are receiving a low price for their products and traders
are not operating under optimal conditions to maximize their gains without exploiting the
producers.
Some of the opportunities are also growing and expanding fast. For instance:
• Mobile phone technology is reaching many zonal capitals, major towns in the region
and even the rural areas along the major road networks. This is important for
horticulture crops market information exchange.
• The Ethiopian Road Development Program has created a road infrastructure that has
attracted many to invest in freight transportation.
13
Gonfa is an expression for over filling sacks with potatoes. Extra space is added to normal sacks and filled
with potatoes, as shown on the cover page photo.
58
• The Ethiopian and Djibouti governments have planned to reinforce and strengthen the
Ethio-Djibouti railways.
• The number of vegetable and fruit exporters is increasingly growing. This is a
significant opportunity. In a competitive market, an increasing number of exporters
can create demand for the products and result in an increase in the producers'
marketing margin.
• The expansion of Ethiopian Airlines and the foundation of Transnational Airways
have come with new cargos to transport export products.
• The increasing market outlet through the Somali border provides an opportunity for
improving the marketing of horticultural products.
Therefore it is critical to maximize these opportunities and solve the problems that are
restricting the growth of this sub-sector.
59
8. PRICE ANALYSIS
8.1 PRICES OF HORTICULTURAL PRODUCTS IN THE DOMESTIC

MARKET
Prices of horticultural products show significant variations depending on the supply situation.
During harvesting time the price falls quite significantly. For instance, the price of cabbage
falls below Birr 40 per qt during the peak harvest period in areas like Haramaya and
Kombolcha and reaches Birr 200 per qt in the same market during the slack period. Similarly,
the price of beetroots could vary from Birr 35 to 350 per qt. The price of potato varies from
Birr 100 per qt to 200 per qt at the farm gate depending on the seasons. Figure 12 shows the
variation in the price of potato at the Kombolcha market during different months of year
2005.
Supply of most of the vegetables in the eastern part of the country occurs from July to
October. During this period, the price of onion, potato and other vegetables decline. This
coincides with the minimum price of vegetables in Harar market, which is also reflected in the
price of potato. The period between January and April shows the period of slack supply and
the gap is filled by transporting potatoes from the rift valley area and central part of Ethiopia.
Figure 12: Average price of potato at Kombolcha market
200
200 191
180 165
160 149 149
140 133
Price (Birr/qt)
114
120 105 112 107
102
97
100
80
60
40
20
0
April
July
February
Aug ust
Sept ember
November
June
January
March
May
October
December
Month
Similarly, there is a significant variation between prices of other horticultural products during
different months. The minimum prices are computed by averaging out the lowest prices
occurring during different weeks of a month while the highest prices were averaged to
compute the average maximum price. The overall average shows the mean price of each
product during the year (Table 48). As the price continues to change, the traders involved in
different markets maintain their price margins. The difference between the maximum and
minimum prices of the respective products shows the extent of price fluctuation in response to
the supply situation. As shown in Table 48, the overall average price of vegetables is about
Birr 3.20 per kg and could increase to an average maximum of Birr 4.7 per kg, with
60
significant variations among the vegetable types. The price of the major products of the sub-
region such as potato, tomato, onion/shallot and cabbage are analyzed. Garlic is supplied in
limited amount but has a high value in the market.
Table 48: Average monthly consumer price of horticulture products marketed at Harar Market
(Sept. 2005 to Aug. 2006) (Birr per kg)
Mean Mean Overall
Type of crop Minimum Maximum Average
Beetroot 1.0 2.0 1.8
Carrot 1.5 3.5 2.5
Potatoes 1.5 2.5 2.1
Tomatoes 2.5 3.5 2.9
Onion/shallot 2.0 4.0 3.1
Garlic 5.0 12.0 7.8
Pepper 3.0 8.0 6.1
Cabbage 2.0 8.0 4.9
Kosta 1.5 3.0 2.1
Baharo 2.0 3.0 2.5
Cucumber/Zikuni 3.0 4.0 3.3
Local cabbage 0.5 6.0 1.3
Lettuce 1.0 1.0 1.0
Average vegetables 2.0 4.7 3.2
Banana 3.0 4.0 3.3
Orange (open market) 2.5 6.0 4.0
Orange Eth-Fruit 2.0 4.5 2.9
Papaya 2.0 2.0 2.0
Lemmon 2.0 8.0 5.1
Mango 2.0 4.0 3.3
Average fruits 2.25 4.8 3.4
Source: Summarized from weekly records of the Agriculture and Rural Development Office of Harari Region
(2006)
Fruits are also sold for a minimum of Birr 2.25 per kg and the average price during the year
was Birr 3.40 per kg. The extent to which price changes due to changing positions and hands
could be visible through market margin analysis.
8.2 MARKETING MARGINS
The marketing margin fluctuates due to perishable quality of the product, the number and
levels of participants in the marketing channel, the marketing service provided, and the risk
and uncertainty born by each of the market participants (Scott, 1995). In this analysis, the
overall potato and onion marketing margins are computed for four market actors: primary
buyers, wholesalers, retailer and consumers.
The marketing margin reflects the benefits the marketing agent/actor generates by
participating in the product flow or the marketing system. The price paid by the primary buyer
is what the producer gets. This buyer encounters additional costs of transporting the
commodities from the points of production to the next buyer. In this case, the wholesaler
makes a margin of Birr 23 and 48 from marketing a quintal of potato and onion respectively.
These prices are actual prices estimated by the wholesalers in the respective areas. Retailers
also make Birr 17 and 37 from the respective products and hence the price paid by the
consumer for the two products increases to Birr 180 and 300 respectively. The result clearly
61
shows the benefit the producer would get by accessing the terminal market and reducing the
marketing channel.
Table 49: Marketing margin (Birr/qt)

Actors Type Potato Red onion
Primary buyer Farm gate price at Finkile/Haramaya 100 150
Transporter Transport to Dire Dawa +10 +10
Loading/unloading +2 +2
Middlemen Broker's commission +5 +5
Wholesaler Wholesaler's price 140 215
Wholesaler's margin +23 +48
Retailer Retailer's buying price 163 263
Retailer's margin +17 +37
Consumer Consumers'price 180 300
Source: Own computation using PRA data (September 2006)
Similar calculation of the price margins made by traders in Harar was made using data
collected using PRA tools. The data generated is consistent with the recorded price data
(Table 48). The assessment shows that a wholesaler in Harar market purchases potato at an
average price of Birr 110 per qt and sells it to retailers at Birr 125 during the peak supply
period. The loading/unloading cost is Birr 2 while brokers charge Birr 2 per qt. Hence, the
wholesalers make a margin of Birr 11. As stated by the key informants, this will account for
losses. In this case, the retailer makes a margin of some Birr 25 per qt. According to the key
informants, wholesalers make high profit from increased turnover. Likewise, the trader
purchases onion for Birr 145 and sells for Birr 165 making a margin of Birr 16 per qt. The
retailers then make a margin of about Birr 35 per kg. Unfortunately, storage facilities
available to the producers do not allow storing of the products for a longer period to receive a
high price. Nor is any vegetable processing available to add value.
8.3 DJIBOUTI MARKET
The existence of railways, road transport and flights to Djibouti and Somaliland has given
comparative advantage for the vegetables and fruits marketing. Exporters label the sacks
which are distributed to the supplying traders. No price negotiation is made upon receiving
the sacks but upon submission of the product. The price of the product is determined based on
the previous market but payment is effected only after the product is sold in Djibouti.
Prices for fresh fruits and vegetables exported to Djibouti are fixed based on the agreement
between the Governments of the two countries (Sisay, 2004). The prices were determined
based on C&F (Cost and Freight) terms where transportation cost to Djibouti is covered by
the exporters. Table 50 shows the prices of major fruits and vegetables that have been used by
the National Bank of Ethiopia for controlling foreign currency.
62
Table 50: Prices of major fruits and vegetables exported to Djibouti

Djibouti price Equivalent of the price Harar price
Sr. No. Product (USD per ton) in Birr (per kg)* (Birr per kg)
1 Red onion 220 1.93 3.1
2 Potato 220 1.93 2.1
3 Tomato 280 2.45 2.9
4 Carrot 150 1.31 2.5
5 Garlic 280 2.45 7.8
6 Green beans 190 1.66
7 Leek 140 1.23
8 Pepper 160 1.40 6.1
9 Orange 340 2.98 4.0
Banana
10 (green) 190 1.66 3.3
11 Papaya 190 1.66 2.0
12 Mandarin 250 2.19 2.0
13 Lime 160 1.40 5.1
14 Mango 250 2.19 3.3
15 Pineapple 400 3.50
16 Avocado 160 1.40
* USD 1.00 = Birr 8.75 (September 2006)
Source: Sisay (2004) for Djibouti price; Own survey for Harar price (September 2006)
The official prices of horticultural products in Djibouti appear to be lower than the local
prices in Djibouti. Although an adequate Djibouti market assessment is needed to provide
concrete reasons and explanations for the price variation, it can be argued that no product
would have been exported under such a market situation and exporters cannot operate if they
incur losses. The possible explanation from the local market point of view could be that the
exporters purchase the products at lower than actual consumer price and the producers bear
the margin of loss.
Key informants also indicate that the Ethiopian horticultural exports are of low quality due to
poor post harvest management. Hence the products are sold in the open markets of Djibouti to
the poor while products imported from other countries are sold in supermarkets at premium
prices.
63
9. GENDER ASPECT OF HORTICULTURE PRODUCTION AND

MARKETING
9.1 PRODUCTION PARTICIPATION
Production of horticultural crops is the responsibility of the household in general. In the

eastern part of Ethiopia, especially in the study area, land preparation, planting, fertilizer
application and irrigation are often done by men. Women play a great role in providing the
providing for the labor force and assist in weeding, harvesting, transporting and threshing.
The survey result also shows that both men and women share the responsibility of producing
horticultural crops often equally.
9.2 MARKETING DECISION
The decision to sell valuable agricultural products and control the income generated from the
sales of the products is a question of entitlement. In the study area, men and women appear to
make decisions regarding the sale of horticultural products. The entire sample indicates that
men decide on who should sell horticultural crops while more than 90% of the respondents
also indicated that women also participate in decision making regarding who should sell the
products. But only 35% of the respondents indicated that children are involved in decision
making regarding who should sell the product.
Moreover, the decision on who controls the income from horticultural products is also
narrowly equitable. Only a few respondents (2%) indicated that women do not decide on the
sale of horticultural crops. The result confirms the fact that women sell smaller quantities of
vegetables and fruits to purchase items needed for the household while men sell these
products in larger quantities.
64
10. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
10.1 CONCLUSIONS
Horticulture production provides an opportunity for market integration for smallholder

farmers in eastern Ethiopia. Due to the declining land holding size, horticulture production
allows intensive use of the land and reduces risk of crop failure since it can be produced in a
shorter production cycle compared to maize and sorghum. Availability of irrigation water,
quality seeds and seedlings, pests and disease, and the perishable nature of the product all
limit the marketability of the products and constrain expansion of horticultural crops in the
area.
Horticulture marketing is a means of livelihood providing business opportunities for all actors
in the market chain including the producers, brokers/commission agents, transporters, traders,
processors, and consumers. The role of brokers in horticulture marketing is significant. They
isolate the producers from the traders and make price margins often to the disadvantage of the
producers. The brokers provide, however, market links by identifying sources of supply. The
brokers' function is not formal and there is no legal framework that makes them accountable
for any shortfalls in the service delivery. As a result, they act as major agents setting the
prices of vegetables without much negotiation with the producers. Coordinated acts of traders
and producers and institutionalizing the functioning of brokers are essential.
The supply of horticultural products is seasonal with the peak supply being accompanied by
low price. Due to lack of adequate storage facilities, and poor transportation facilities,
spoilage is as high as 25% of the yield all along the marketing channel. The seasonal demand
gap in the study is filled by products transported from other parts of the country including
Shashemene and the rift valley area. Fruits are supplied by small scale farmers in a very small
quantity. A large supply of fruits comes from the Awash basin farming enterprises. Some
farmers in Dire Dawa and Eror Gota also supply mango, orange, mandarin and other fruits.
Proximity to Djibouti and Somalia as export outlets has created good market opportunities.
But not much is known about the two market outlets. Several traders export fruits and
vegetables to Djibouti. Although products are exported fulfilling formalities, there are
limitations in terms of lack of transparency regarding price information, informal credit
system between suppliers and exporters, lack of adequate standardization and grading system,
poor packaging, etc. These aspects should be improved.
Producers are in a disadvantageous position in terms of marketing margin. The more

producers approach the terminal market, the higher their marketing margin. The price of
horticultural products exported to Djibouti is said to be fixed some years back and lacks
flexibility. Action of the government in this case is crucial.
10.2 RECOMMENDATIONS
10.2.1 Improving the horticulture production

• Improve the existing production system. This can be done by introducing vegetable
varieties that best fit into the crop calendar pattern, the rotation and enable efficient
utilization of the crop production cycle used by the farmers. The role of research in
identifying varieties of high demand having required traits such as taste and shelf-life
and that are compatible with the production system is crucial. Technologies that
increase productivity such as irrigation are needed.
65
• Improve the input supply system so that farmers receive the right type of production
inputs, the quantity needed at the right time. Improving the system will protect farmers
from buying adulterated and fraudulent products.
• Adapt the production system so that it fills the supply gap and benefits from market
opportunities during the slack supply seasons. This will ensure regulating production
throughout the season to secure sustainable income.
• Upgrade the knowledge, skill and experience of key actors like producers,
cooperatives' and unions staff members, development agents, supervisors and subject
matter specialists to increase production and productivity. The intervention areas
should be associated with the constraints identified in this report. Producers and
extension agents need adequate skills in production management practices starting
from seed selection to post harvest technology suitable at their level. Marketing
principles, bargaining skills, business planning, quality management and post harvest
handling of horticultural products are some of the interventions needed.
• There is a lack of qualified, skilled and experienced individuals on the subject at the
lower hierarchy of the rural and agricultural development office. Knowledge and skill
in variety selection, agronomic practices, pests and disease management and post
harvest management should be further built on.
10.2.2 Improving marketing of horticultural products

The market improvements revolve around institutional, legal frames, education, developing
market facilities. The following concrete recommendations will improve the marketing
system and enable fair and equitable distribution of the welfare generated from the marketing
system:
• Establish and enforce a legal system in the marketing management. Defining quality
parameters, standards, grades and putting regulatory frameworks to enforce pricing
based on standards is important. The "gonfa" measurement system should be replaced
by scientific units such as weighting on a standard balance. In this connection, the
negotiation capacity/skill of the producers should be developed.
• Legalize the functioning of brokers in such a way that they will be accountable for
their practices and enforce true functioning of a competitive marketing system;
• Organize (voluntarily) traders and producers and establish trustful and strong trade
agreements between the two institutions. Attempts to organize the traders and
producers without establishing a linkage between the two have resulted in rival
relationships between them. Neither the traders nor the producers succeeded. There is
a strong need to organize them as business associations and build their business
management capacities to operate as partners rather than rivals. Traders in Kombolcha
are trying to organize themselves while producer cooperatives have been weak to do
business. In some instances, the producers’ cooperatives failed to withstand unfair
competition with traders.
• Improvement of the market information delivery system in this process is necessary.
With a strong relationship between traders and producers, searching for market
information and dissemination will be crucial.
• The Government must adopt legal measures to review the horticulture export prices to
Djibouti. The fact that the export price is lower than the consumer price in Dire Dawa
means that the exporters are purchasing the commodities at lower prices from the
suppliers which is pushed down to the producers.
• The informal business deal between the suppliers and exporters also needs adequate
attention. There is no collateral system, fixed and binding price agreement, etc. made
between the exporters and the suppliers. The consequence of such a deal is a reduced
price for the producers.
66
• Improving the marketing functions such as the packaging, storage and transportation
system should be improved.
• In order to fully understand the horticultural marketing system, undertaking a
horticultural marketing study in the neighboring countries is essential.
• Interventions which will improve local demand for horticultural products is also
necessary. In this regard, education on the nutritional value of vegetables, home
economics and promoting consumption of horticultural products would help.
• Undertake research to support producers and traders with post harvest storage
technologies.
• Build the marketing extension capacity in terms of institutions and human resources.
67
11. REFERENCES
CARE-Ethiopia. 2003. Ethiopian Market Linkage Workshop Report March 17, 2003
conducted in Dire Dawa, Ethiopia.
CARE-Ethiopia. 2005. Market Improvement Projects for Kurfa Chelle. Addis Ababa,
Ethiopia.
Eskinder Getachew. 2006. Agricultural Market Analysis of Four Crops in Girawa and Kurfa
Chelle Woredas. Research Report of CARE Ethiopia.
Ethiopia Authority for Standardization (ESA). 1990. Fruits and Vegetables. Vol. 10, No.25,
Addis Ababa.
Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia (FDRE). 1990. Council of Ministers Regulation to

Provide for standard mark No. 13/1990 (No. 26): 180-186.
Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia (FDRE). 1997. Commercial Registration and

Licensing Council of Ministers Regulations, No. 13/1997 (3): 433-466
Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia (FDRE). 2005. Plan for Accelerated and Sustained
Development to End Poverty, Addis Ababa
Grillo J. & Browne, S.J. 2005. Market-led Livelihoods for Vulnerable Populations (MLVP),
Kurfa Chelle Woreda Livelihoods Analysis, Addis Ababa
Horticulture Development Enterprise. 2001. Basic Principles of Production Practices on

Major Horticultural Crops, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
MOARD. 2005.Vegetables and Fruits Production and Marketing Plan (Amharic Version),
Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Scott J.G. 1995. Prices, Products and People, An Analysis of Agricultural Markets in
Developing Countries, Lynne Rienner Publishers.
Sisay Habte. 2004. Fresh Fruits and Vegetables Production and Marketing Study. Ethiopian
Export Promotion Agency, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Zemede Abebe. 2006. Potato Sub-Sector Analysis in eastern Ethiopia Agro Enterprise
Territory, Ethiopian Agro enterprise development Program, HCS, Dire Dawa, Ethiopia.
68
ANNEXES
ANNEX 1: PRODUCERS'QUESTIONNAIRE (PRODUCTION AND MARKETING)
Remark: The following questions have been set to understand Opportunities and Constraints of
Horticultural Production and Marketing in the eastern part of Ethiopia. The answers are
confidential and will not have any consequence on you personally in any ways. Please give
correct answers to the following questions.
I. Identification:
1.1. Name of the Enumerator:______________________
1.2. Education Level (fill grades completed, or certificate earned) ________
1.3. Affiliation of the Enumerator: ________________________________
1.4. Date of the Interview: _______________________
1.5. Name of the respondent (he/she must be head of the household:
____________________
1.6. Age of the respondent: [ _______ ] years
1.7. Sex of the respondent ( ): 1. [ ] Male 2. [ ] Female
1.8. Education level of the respondent: 1. [ ] No formal education
2. [ ] 6th grade or less 3. [ ] 7th to 12th grade 4. [ ] Certificate
5. [ ] Diploma 6. [ ] Degree
1.9. Marital status ( ) 1. [ ] Married 2. [ ] Unmarried 3. [ ] Divorce
4. [ ] Widowed
1.10. Woreda: __________________________
1.11 Kebele: __________________________
1.12. Distance to nearest town: [______ ] km OR [ ______ ] hrs walk
1.13. What is your major means of income generation?
1. [ ] Khat/coffee production 2. [ ] Horticulture production
3. [ ] Grain and pulses production 4. [ ] Grain trading
5. [ ] Horticulture trading 6. [ ] Khat trading
7. [ ] Livestock production 8. [ ] Livestock trading
9. [ ] Other income generation
1.14 How long have you practiced production of horticultural products? _____ years
II. Household and Resource Data

2.1. Family size: [ ___] Male [ ___ ] Female [____] Total
2.2. Number of working persons: [ ___ ] Male [____ ] Female [ ____ ] Total
2.3. No. of children in school: [ ___ ] Male [ ____] Female [ ____ ] Total
2.4. Total crop land: _______ Qindi _______ ha
2.5. Total irrigable area: ____ Qindi _______ ha
2.7 What is the size of land used twice in a year? _____ Qindi
III. Crop production
3.1. Crop production during the last cropping season

Crop type Area -Rainfed (Qindi) Area -Irrigated (Qindi)
1. Horticulture: Vegetables
2. Cereals
3. Pulses
69
4. Coffee
5. Khat
6. Fruits (give # of trees)
3.2 How many plots and which land type do you allocate to horticulture crops (soil type,
slope, fertility, etc.)?
Type of production No. Of plots Slope1 Fertility status2 Soil type3
Citrus
Vegetables
1
Slope: 1) Flat 2) Steep slope 3) Medium
2
Fertility status: 1) Highly fertile 2) Medium 3) Low in fertility
3
Soil type: Write the type stated by farmers
3.3 What type of horticultural crops do you produce? Area and production during last
season?
Crop type Area - Area - Productio Production % % Income generated
productio productio n (cycle (cycle 2) Sold Consu from sales (both
n cycle1 n cycle 2 1) (qt) (qt) med seasons), Birr
(Qindi) (Qindi) Cycle1 Cycle2
Cabbage
Beetroots
Carrot
Kale
Onion
Irish
potato
Sweet
potatoes
Pepper
Others
(specify)
3.4 Inputs of horticulture crop production during last season? (Specify quantity)
Crop type Labor Seed (kg) DAP Urea (qt) Compost Manure Pesticide
(manday) Local Impr (qt) (yes/no)* (yes/No)* (Lt/kg,
oved specify)
Cabbage
Beetroots
Carrot
Kale
Onion
Irish potato
Sweet
potatoes
Others
(specify)
* Give local unit
70
3.5 What is the source of labor used for horticulture production?

1. [ ] Family labor 2. [ ] Hired labor 3) Labor exchange 4) Cooperation
3.6 If you use fertilizer, where do you get it?
1. [ ] Development agents/Agriculture office 2. [ ] Market
3. [ ] NGOs 5. [ ] Cooperatives 6. [ ] Others (Specify) ______
3.7 If you use pesticide, where do you get it?
1. [ ] Development agents/Agriculture office 2. [ ] Legal market/known
source
3. [ ] NGOs 5. [ ] Cooperatives 6.[ ] Illegal market/unknown
source
7. [ ] Fellow farmers 8. [ ] Others (Specify) ___________________________
3.8 What type of seeds of horticulture do you use?
1. [ ] Local 2. [ ] Improved 3. [ ] Both
3.9 If you use improved seeds of horticulture, where do you get them?
1. [ ] Development agents/Agriculture office 2. [ ] Known source in market
3. [ ] Unknown source in market 5. [ ] Cooperatives
6.[ ] Fellow traders 7. [ ] NGOs 8. [ ]Others (Specify)
__________
3.10 If you use pesticides, where do you get them?
1. [ ] Development agents/Agriculture office 2. [ ] Legal/Known source in market
3. [ ] Illegal/Unknown source in market 5. [ ] Cooperatives
6.[ ] Fellow traders 7. [ ] NGOs 8. [ ]Others (Specify) _________
3.11 Where do you keep/store pesticide?
[ ] 1. Separate/isolated room [ ] 2. In home where we live
[ ] 3. Others (specify) ______________________________________________________
3.12 If you have ever encountered problems with the use of improved seeds, what type?
1. [ ] There is germination problem 2. [ ] Low quality (taste)
3. [ ] High price 5. [ ] Unknown origin
6. [ ] Others (Specify) ___________________
3.13 If you have you ever encountered problems with the use of pesticides, what type?
1. [ ] Poisoning when applying 2. [ ] Low quality (taste)
3. [ ] High price 5. [ ] Unknown origin
6. [ ] Lack of safety device 7. [ ] Others (Specify) ___________________
3.14 If you use irrigation, what is source, method, frequency of use, and costs of irrigation
Crop type Source: Method: How many Cost of using
1= pond 1= Furrow times irrigation (Birr)
2=borehole 2=sprinkler applied? Own Rented
3= river/spring 3=basin pump* pump
4=lake 4=drip
1. Vegetables
2. Citrus
3. Khat
* Annual use cost includes fuel cost, wage (if employed labor is used),
71
3.15 What type of farm implements do you use for horticulture production? Give year of
purchase and the price?
Type of farm Number Year of purchase Cost of purchase (Birr)
implement/equipment
Plough
Hoe
Rake
Harrow
Pump
Others (specify)
3.16 What type of horticulture production system do you adopt?

[ ] 1. Sole cropping [ ] 2. Mixing different horticultural crops
[ ] 3. Mixing with other crops [ ] 4. Others ___________________
3.17. How many bushes/tree of the following citrus do you have in your farm?
Type No. of trees/ Income per year (if Income from sale during
bushes all sold) last season (Birr)
1. Orange
2. Mandarin
3. Lemon
4. Avocado
5. Banana
6. Mango
7. Papaya
8. Others
3.18. Whose responsibility is the following production? (Tick)

Crop type Men Women Children
Vegetable
Citrus
Other crops
3.19 How is the trend of volume of horticultural crops production during the past 5 years?
(Tick)
Crop type Increasing Decreasing Same
Vegetable
Citrus
Other crops
3.20 If the production increases, what are the reasons?______________________________

3.21 If the production decreases, what are the reasons? ______________________________
3.22 Would you like to expand horticulture production? [ ] 1. Yes [ ] 2. No
3.23 What opportunities exist to expand horticulture production?
________________________
72
3.24. What are the horticulture production constraints on your farm? Rank horizontally*
Crop type Oxen Insects Diseases Drought Weeds Flood Frost Seed Fertilizer Lack of Others (specify)
shortage shortage shortage pesticide
Vegetables
Cabbage
Beetroots
Carrot
Kale
Onion
Irish potato
Sweet
potatoes
Others
(specify)
Citrus
Orange
Papaya
Lemon
Avocado
Banana
Mango
Others
* 1 =most severe, 2= second severe, etc.
73
4. Marketing
4.1 Where do you sell your horticultural products? Please respond to the following questions.
Crop type Market Distance Means of Transport How many How much How much By how No. of To
place to transport* fee per trip times do do you sell do you sell much do months whom
(Name) market (Birr) you sell this this product per week? you sell you may do you
(km) product per per week? (kg) it (Birr) sell so? sell?**
week?
Vegetables
Cabbage
Beetroots
Carrot
Kale
Onion
Irish potato
Sweet potatoes
Others (specify)
Citrus
Orange
Papaya
Lemon
Avocado
Banana
Mango
Others
* 1= On donkey 2= Vehicle 3= On foot (Being carried)

** 1=Whole sellers; 2=Retailers; 3= Household consumers; 4=Institutions/organization such as university, factory, hotels;
5= Exporters; 6 = Processors; 7= Brokers; 8=Others (Specify) ___________________
74
4.2. How is the trend of price per unit of sales of horticultural product during the last 5 years?
(Tick)
Crop type Increasing Decreasing Same
Vegetable
Citrus
Other crops
4.3 If the price increases, what are the reasons?_______________________ ___________

4.4 If the price decreases, what are the reasons?___________________________________
4.5 Would you like to expand horticulture trading? [ ] 1. Yes [ ] 2. No
4.6 What opportunities exist to expand horticulture
trading?______________________________
4.7. Does your horticultural products have preferred qualities by buyers? [ ] 1. Yes [ ]
2. No
4.8 If No., what interventions are needed to improve quantity and quality of horticultural
crops production to attract better prices? __________________________________
4.9 Whose responsibility is the selling of the following production? (Tick)

Vegetable
Citrus
Other crops
4.10. Who decides on the income generated from the following products? (Tick)
Vegetable
Citrus
Other crops
4.11. What are the horticulture marketing constraints? Rank horizontally*

Crop type Lack Low price Lack of Lack of Lack of Brokers Perish Others
of of product storage transport market (hinder ability (specify)
market information fair sales
Vegetables
Cabbage
Beetroots
Carrot
Kale
Onion
Irish potato
Sweet
potatoes
Others
(specify)
Citrus
Orange
Papaya
Lemon
75
Avocado
Banana
Mango
Others
4.12. Is storage of horticultural production a problem for you? [ ] 1. Yes [ ] 2. No
4.13 If yes, how much of the production of the product is damaged in the field and after
harvest?
Crop type % of loss before harvest? % of loss after harvest?
Vegetable
Citrus
Other crops
4.14. Do you find buyers for all horticultural products you take to markets? [ ] 1. Yes [ ]
2. No
4.15. If you do not find buyers for your product, what do you
do?________________________
5. Non-farm activities
5.1 Do you also purchase and sell horticultural products? [ ] 1. Yes [ ] 2. No
5.2 Do you practice trading activities (other than trading of horticultural products)?
[ ] 1. Yes [ ] 2. No
5.3 How much do you earn from such trading per market day? ____ Birr
5.4 No. of market days in a month? _________
5.5 Did you receive credit for the trading during the last one year? [ ] 1. Yes [ ] 2. No
5.6 How much did you receive during the last one-year? _______ Birr
5.7 Did you receive credit for the purchasing of inputs for horticulture production?
[ ] 1. Yes [ ] 2. No
5.8 How much did you receive during the last one-year? _______ Birr
5.9 Where did you get the credit?
[ ] 1. Micro-finance institute [ ] 2. Cooperatives [ ] 3. Bank
[ ] 4. Friend/relatives/neighbor
6. Livestock production
Sr. Livestock type Number Purpose of Income earned by selling of animals,
No production* animal products, or renting during
last one year (Birr)
1 Oxen
2 Milking cows
3 Goats
4 Sheep
5 Mules/horse
6 Donkeys
7 Poultry
* 1= For draft (cultivation/transport), 2= Sales (live animal), 3= Milk/butter, 4= Manure 5) Egg
Thank you so much for responding to the questions.
76
ANNEX 2: CONSUMERS'QUESTIONNAIRE (PRODUCTION AND MARKETING)
Remark: The following questions have been set to understand Opportunities and Constraints
of Horticultural Production and Marketing in the eastern part of Ethiopia. The answers
are confidential and will not have any consequence on you personally in any ways. Please
give correct answers to the following questions.
I. Identification:
1.1. Name of the Enumerator:______________________
1.2. Education Level (fill grades completed, or certificate earned) ________
1.3. Affiliation of the Enumerator: ________________________________
1.4. Date of the Interview: _______________________
1.5. Name of the respondent (he/she must be head of the household: ___________________
1.6. Age of the respondent: [ _______ ] years
1.7. Sex of the respondent ( ): 1. [ ] Male 2. [ ] Female
1.8. Education level of the respondent: 1. [ ] No formal education

2. [ ] 6th grade or less 3. [ ] 7th to 12th grade 4. [ ] Certificate
5. [ ] Diploma 6. [ ] Degree
1.9. Marital status ( ) 1. [ ] Married 2. [ ] Unmarried 3. [ ] Divorce 4. [ ] Widowed
1.10. Woreda: __________________________
1.11 Kebele: __________________________
1.12. Distance to nearest town: [______ ] km OR [ ______ ] hrs walk
1.13. What is your major means of income generation?
1. [ ] Farming 2. [ ] Trade
3. [ ] Employment 4. [ ] Others ________________________
1.14 How much do you earn per year (estimate based on weekily, monthly
income):______Birr
1.15 Is horticulture consumed in your family? [ ] 1. Yes [ ] 2. No
1.16. Experience in horticultural products consumption? _____ years
1.17. Do you produce and consume or purchase?
1.18. If you purchase, what is the proportion of your income used for purchase of horticulture
product?
1.19. If no consumption of horticulture product, why? _________________________
77
II. Demand for the horticulture products

2.1 What type of horticulture products purchased for consumption? Please respond to the following questions.
Crop type Quantity No. of Low price No. of months High price No. of months From Other
purchased (per market day paid you may buy at paid (Birr/kg) you may buy at whom do issues, if
market day) per week (birr/kg) low price? high price? you buy?** any
Vegetables
Cabbage
Beetroots
Carrot
Kale
Onion
Irish potato
Sweet potatoes
Others (specify)
Fruits
Orange
Mandarin
Lemon
Avocado
Banana
Mango
Papaya
Others
** 1=Whole sellers; 2=Retailers; 3= Cooperatives; 4=Institutions/organization such as university, factory, hotels;

5= Exporters; 6 = Processors; 7= Brokers; 8= Households consumers; 9=Others (Specify) _____________
78
2.2. What are the constraints hindering consumption of horticulture? Rank horizontally*
Crop type Shortage Shortage Lack of High price Poor Lack of Brokers Perish Others
of supply of income storage at of product product market (hinder fair ability (specify)
home handling information sales
Vegetables:
Cabbage
Beetroots
Carrot
Kale
Onion
Irish potato
Sweet potatoes
Others (specify)
Fruits
Orange
Mandarin
Lemon
Avocado
Banana
Mango
Papaya
Others
79
2.3. Do you know the benefits of consuming horticulture product?

1. Vegetables , [ ] 1. Yes [ ] 2. No
2. Fruits [ ] 1. Yes [ ] 2. No
2.4. Do you think there is problem with consumption of horticulture product?
1. Vegetables , [ ] 1. Yes [ ] 2. No
2. Fruits [ ] 1. Yes [ ] 2. No
2.5. Do you prefer packed or fresh horticulture product?
1. Vegetables , [ ] 1. Packed [ ] 2. Fresh
2. Fruits [ ] 1. Packed [ ] 2. Fresh
2.6. What should be done to increase horticulture product
consumption?____________________
III. Household and Resource Data

2.1. Family size: [ ___] Male [ ___ ] Female [____] Total
2.2. Number of working persons: [ ___ ] Male [____ ] Female [ ____ ] Total
2.3. No. of children in school: [ ___ ] Male [____ ] Female [ ____ ] Total
80
ANNEX 3: LIST OF KEY INFORMANTS AND EXPERTS FROM DIFFERENT

INSTITUTIONS
No Name Institution Title Education

A. Eastern Harerghe Zone
1 Ato Kedir Mumewako Zonal Agri. and Rural Head B.Sc
Development Office
(ZARDO)
2 Ato Mohammed Nur “ Coffee, horticulture Diploma
expert
3 Ato Felke Borga “ Market and credit expert B.Sc
Alemaya Wereda
4 Dr Kebede W/Tsadik Haramaya University Department Head PHD
5 Ato Jafar Abuderahman Woreda Agri. and Head B.Sc
Rural Development
Office (WARDO)
6 Ato Shemelis Seife WARDO Livestock & Forrest Diploma
Expert
7 Ato Senesolomon zewdie WARDO Input and Credit Service Diploma
T/Head
Kersa Wereda
8 Ato Yilma Fessaha WARDO T/Leader Diploma
9 W/o Embet Alemayah WARDO Horticulture expert Diploma
Kombolcha
10 Ato Ahmed Reshid WARDO Livestock Team Leader Diploma
11 Ato Tadesse Asefa " Coffee/ V & F expert Diploma
B. Dire Dawa Provisional
Administration Council
12 Ato Abduerhman Alie ARDO Head B.Sc
13 Ato Tesfaye Alemayhu “ Coffee/ V. Fruit Expert B.sc
14 Ato Mekonnen Abate Trade & Industry A/head Bsc
15 Ato Taddle Esubalw Plant Quarantine Head MS.c
Customs
16 Ato Showel Gezaw Customs Operation section chief Diploma
17 W/t Ayne Addis Yelima Customs Registration
18 Ato Yelma Mokonnen “ Verifier
19 Ato Kider Haji “ Evaluator
20 Ato Anteneh Asseres “ Inspection chief
21 Ato Alebachew Dagnew “ Data Processor
22 W/o Fatuma Mohammed Customs Compound Exporter Read/Write
23 Ato Fitsum Berhan Tesfu “ “
24 Berhanu Kenfe “ “
25 W/o Emana Hassen “ “
26 Ato Farah Bele “ “
27 Ato Ogae “ “
81
No Name Institution Title Education

Standard
28 Ato Getachew Indale Quality standard Chief B.Sc
Control Dire Dawa
29 Ato Ferew Mitku “ Quality Inspection B.Sc
Catholic Church
30 Ato Zemede Abebe Catholic Church Program Director M.Sc
31 Ato Yeshetela Saleh Kafera Dire Dawa Wholesaler Read & Wirte
32 Ato Ibrahim Mohammed “ “ Read & write
33 W/o Iyesha Mume “ “ Read
CARE - Ethiopia
34 Ato Getachew Gutema CARE-Dire Dawa Commodity & Logistic B.Sc
Officer
C. Harari Regional State
35 Ato Berket Eshete ARDB Horticulture expert Diploma
36 Ato Mersha Lemma ARDB Marketing Strategy Diploma
expert
37 Ato Abdurselam Abdus Trade & Industry Department Head B.Sc
38 W/o Terfech Wojetu Et Fruit Branch head 12th
39 W/o Aden Legesse AISE Sales Clerk 12th
D Western Hararghe Zone
Chiro Woreda
40 Ato Abebayoh Haile CARE Project Manager B.Sc
41 Ato Wondale Tebek WARD A/Prod/Prot Team/Leader ETVET/Agarfa
42 Ato Tegegne Damtaw “ Coffee, V/F Team Leader Diploma
43 Ato Hassen Osman Keliso PA Farmer 10th
44 W/t Tshaye Telahun Areberkate Fruit vendor 6th
Gemchus Wereda
45 Ato Nurdin Adem WARD Head Agro/Engineerin
g (Diploma)
46 W/o Mesaye Desalgne WARD Planning representative Diploma
47 Ato Germew Abebe “ Coffee, V/F Team Leader Diploma
48 Ato Lemso Gemeda CATV Academic V/Dean B.Sc
49 Ato Zenbe Mokera ETFRUIT Branch Head Diploma
Metehara
F. Federal
50 Dr. Afeswork MOARD Department Head PHD
51 Ato Abera Amayo MOTI Team Leader M.SC
52 W/o Genet Zenebe MOTI Expert B.SC
53 Ato Yonas Deresse HDE Team leader B.Sc
54 Ato Desalgn Yigzaw MOARD Commodity exchange M.SC
expert
55 W/o Almaz Kahsay QSCAE Regulatory & Inspection B.Sc
Service head
56 Ato Bekele Denku AIQCI Department Head B.Sc
57 Ato Aynew Arga AIQCI Inspection Tam Leader M.Sc
58 AtoDegasa Derbaba MOARD Production and marketing B.Sc
development expert
82
ANNEX 4: LIST OF KEY INFORMANTS AND FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION

PARTICIPANTS FROM DEVELOPMENT STATION, PEASANT
ASSOCIATION & WOREDA LEVEL INSTITUTIONS
No Name Institution Title

Hara Maya Woreda PAs Position
1 Biru Abebe Fenkele PA Multipurpose PA
2 Tofik Amie Fenkele PA Collector/trader
3 Abdo Mohammed Fenkele PA Chairman
4 Abduselam Ahmed Fenkele PA Farmer
5 Kadi Jindi Fenkele PA Farmer
6 Jemal Yuye Fenkele PA Farmer
7 Ibro Aliye Fenkele PA Farmer
8 Ismael Qali Fenkele PA Trader
9 Bekele Amanu Efa Oromia PA DA
10 Mohamed Jebro Efa Oromia PA Chairperson
11 Foad Haji Abdulahi Efa Oromia PA Secretary
12 Mohammed Ame Efa Oromia PA Farmer
13 Abdela Amin Efa Oromia PA Farmer
14 Abdela Mohammed Efa Oromia PA Farmer
15 Yusuf Mahamed Efa Oromia PA Farmer
16 Abdurahiman Mume Efa Oromia PA Farmer
17 Mardiya Leli (F) Efa Oromia PA Farmer
18 Mohammed Usuman Haramaya Trader
Kersa Woreda
19 Aehmed Yayou Meda Oda PA DA
20 Musfa Hafis “ PA Chairperson
21 Jemal Yusuf Ido PA Farmer
22 Mohamed Sule Ido PA Farmer
23 Ahmed Hassen Ido PA Farmer
24 Mahamed Bakaro Ido PA Farmer
25 Jemal Abdulrahiman Ido PA Farmer
26 Amed Adem Mumie Meta Koma PA Chairperson
27 Abdealazez Yonie Meta Koma PA V/Chairperson
Kombolcha Woreda
28 Zekaria Mohammed Trader Trader
29 Ato Jafar Ahmed Belisuma PA DA (Plant Science)
30 Ato Din Abdula Belisuma PA DA (Natural Resource)
31 Ato Yasin Beke Belisuma PA PA Chairperson
32 Mahamed Yunus Belisuma PA Farmer
33 Musa Ahimed-Sahle Belisuma PA Farmer
34 Abdi Mohammed Belisuma PA Farmer
35 Ibsa Usuman Dawid Belisuma PA Farmer
36 Nuria Sahli-Woday (F) Belisuma PA Farmer
37 Risko Hussen (F) Belisuma PA Farmer
83
No Name Institution Title

Dire Dawa
38 Mohammed Ahemed Legaharee Legder PA Chairperson
39 W/o Tsegae Taddese " DA
40 Ato Mohamed Nur Bishan Bahe PA Farmer
Adem
41 Abdulrahiman Ibro Bishan Bahe PA Farmer
42 Mohamed Ahimed Lega Hare Chairman
43 Kalid Hassen Lega Hare Farmer
44 Musa Ahimed Lega Hare Farmer
45 Oumer Mohamed Lega Hare Farmer
46 Ato Abebe Mamo Harar Market Trader
Chiro Wereda
47 Ahmed Yayo Keliso PA Farmer
48 Mumie Hassen Keliso PA Farmer
49 Abedela Asuie Keliso PA Farmer
50 Hasseb Usman Keliso PA Farmer
51 Daniel Alemayoh Astako Transistor
52 Eshetu W/Yeses Maritime Transistor
53 Monnen Zewdie Make Transistor
84
List of Publications
Reports:
1 A. Synnevåg, G., Halassy, S. 1998: “Etude des indicateurs de la sécurité alimentaire dans deux
sites de la zone d’intervention de l’AEN-Mali: Bambara Maodé et Ndaki (Gourma Malien)”, Groupe
de Coordination des Zones Arides et Noragric, Agricultural University of Norway.
1 B. Synnevåg, G. and Halassy, S. 1998: “Food Security Indicators in Two Sites of Norwegian
Church Aid’s Intervention Zone in Mali: Bambara Maoudé and N’Daki (Malian Gourma)”, Drylands
Coordination Group and Noragric, Agricultural University of Norway.
2 A. Aune, J.B. and Doumbia, M.D. 1998: “Integrated Plant Nutrient Management (IPNM), Case
studies of two projects in Mali: CARE Macina programme and PIDEB”, Drylands Coordination
Group and Noragric, Agricultural University of Norway.
2 B. Aune, J.B. et Doumbia, M.D. 1998: “Gestion Intégrée de Nutriments Végétaux (GINV), Etude
de Cas de deux projets au Mali: Programme de CARE Macina et PIDEB”, Groupe de Coordination
des Zones Arides et Noragric, Agricultural University of Norway.
3 A. Berge, G., Larsen, K., Rye, S., Dembele, S.M. and Hassan, M. 1999: “Synthesis report and
Four Case Studies on Gender Issues and Development of an Improved Focus on Women in Natural
Resource Management and Agricultural Projects”, Drylands Coordination Group and Noragric,
Agricultural University of Norway.
3 B. Berge, G., Larsen, K., Rye, S., Dembele, S.M. et Hassan, M. 1999. “Rapport de synthèse et
quatre études de cas sur Les Questions de Genre et Développement d’une Approche Améliorée
concernant les Femmes et les Projets d’Agriculture et de Gestion des Ressources Naturelles”, Groupe
de Coordination des Zones Arides et Noragric, Agricultural University of Norway.
4 A. Sydness, M., Ba, B. 1999: “Processus de décentralisation, développement institutionnel et

réorganisation des ONG financées par la Norvège au Mali”, Groupe de Coordination des Zones Arides
et Noragric, Agricultural University of Norway.
4 B. Sydness, M. and Ba, B. 1999: “Decentralization Process, Institution Development and Phasing
out of the Norwegian Involvement in Mali”, Drylands Coordination Group and Noragric, Agricultural
University of Norway.
5. Waktola, A. and Michael, D.G. 1999: “Institutional Development and Phasing Out of the
Norwegian Involvement, the Case of Awash Conservation and Development Project, Ethiopia”,
Drylands Coordination Group and Noragric, Agricultural University of Norway.
6. Waktola, A. 1999: “Exploratory Study of Two Regions in Ethiopia: Identification of Target

Areas and partners for Intervention”, Drylands Coordination Group and Noragric, Agricultural
7. Mossige, A. 2000: “Workshop on Gender and Rural Development – Training Manual”,

8. Synnevåg, G. et Halassy, S. 2000: ”Sécurité Semencière: Etude de la gestion et de

l’approvisionnement en semences dans deux villages du cercle de Ké-Macina au Mali: Kélle et
Tangana”, Groupe de Coordination des Zones Arides et Noragric, Agricultural University of Norway.
85
9. Abesha, D., Waktola, A, Aune, J.B. 2000: ”Agricutural Extension in the Drylands of
Ethiopia”, Drylands Coordination Group and Noragric, Agricultural University of Norway.
10. Sydness, M., Doumbia, S. et Diakité K. 2000: ”Atelier sur la décentralisation au Mali”,
Groupe de Coordination des Zones Arides et Noragric, Agricultural University of Norway.
11. N’Dior, P. A. et Traoré, N. 2000: ”Etude sur les programmes d’épargne et de crédit au Mali”,
12. Lode, K. and G. Kassa. 2001: ”Proceedings from a Workshop on Conflict Resolution
Organised by the Drylands Coordination Group (DCG), November 8-10, 2000 Nazareth, Ethiopia”,
13. Shiferaw, B. and A. Wolday, 2001: “Revisiting the Regulatory and Supervision
Framework of the Micro-Finance Industry in Ethiopia”, Drylands Coordination Group and Noragric,
14 A. Doumbia, M. D., A. Berthé and J. B. Aune, 2001: “Integrated Plant Nutrition Management
(IPNM): Practical Testing of Technologies with Farmers Groups”, Drylands Coordination Group and
Noragric, Agricultural University of Norway.
14 B. Doumbia, M. D., A. Berthé and J. B. Aune, 2001: “Gestion Intégrée de Nutriments Végétaux
(GINV): Tests Pratiques de Technologies avec des Groupes de Paysans”, Groupe de Coordination des
Zones Arides et Noragric, Agricultural University of Norway.
15. Larsen, K. and M. Hassan, 2001: “Perceptions of Knowledge and Coping Strategies in
Nomadic Communities – The case of the Hawawir in Northern Sudan”, Drylands Coordination Group
and Noragric, Agricultural University of Norway.
16 A. Mossige, A., Berkele, Y. & Maiga, S., 2001: “Participation of Civil Society in the national
Action Programs of the United Nation’s Convention to Combat Desertification: Synthesis of an
Assessment in Ethiopia and Mali”, Drylands Coordination Group and Noragric, Agricultural
16 B. Mossige, A., Berkele, Y. & Maiga, S., 2001: “La Participation de la Société Civile aux
Programme d’Actions Nationaux de la Convention des Nations Unies sur la lutte contre la
Désertification”, Groupe de Coordination des Zones Arides et Noragric, Agricultural University of
Norway.
17. Kebebew, F., D. Tsegaye and G. Synnevåg., 2001: “Traditional Coping Strategies of the Afar
and Borana Pastoralists in Response to Drought”, Drylands Coordination Group and Noragric,
18. Shanmugaratnam, N., D. Mamer and M. R. Kenyi, 2002: “From Emergency Relief to Local
Development and Civil Society Building: Experiences from the Norwegian Peoples’ Aid’s
Interventions in Southern Sudan”, Drylands Coordination Group and Noragric, Agricultural University
of Norway.
19. Mitiku, H. and S. N. Merga, 2002. “Workshop on the Experience of Water Harvesting in the
Drylands of Ethiopia: Principles and practices”, Drylands Coordination Group and Noragric,
20. Tesfai, M., V. Dawod and K. Abreha, 2002. “Management of Salt-affected Soils in the NCEW
‘Shemshemia’ Irrigation Scheme in the Upper Gash Valley of Eritrea”, Drylands Coordination Group
86
21. Doumbia, M. D., A. Berthé and J. B. Aune, 2002: “Gestion Intégrée de Nutriments Végétaux
(GINV): Tests Pratiques de Technologies avec des Groupes de Paysans- Rapport de la Campagne
2001”, Groupe de Coordination des Zones Arides et Noragric, Agricultural University of Norway.
22. Haidara, Y., Dembele, M. et Bacha, A. “Formation sur la lutte contre la désertification atelier
organisé par groupe de coordination des zones arides (GCoZA) du 07 au 10 octobre 2002 à Gossi
(Mali)”, Groupe de Coordination des Zones Arides et Noragric, Agricultural University of Norway.
23. Aune, J. B. 2003. “Desertification control, rural development and reduced CO2 emissions
through the Clean Development Mechanism of the Kyoto Protocol - an impasse or a way forward?”
24. Larsen, K. and Hassan, M. 2003. “Sedentarisation of Nomadic People: The Case of
the Hawawir in Um Jawasir, Northern Sudan”, Drylands Coordination Group and Noragric,
25. Cissé, I. et Keita, M.S. 2003. “Etude d’impacts socio-économique et environnemental des
plaines aménagées pour riziculture au Mali.” Groupe de Coordination des Zones Arides et Noragric,
26. Berkele, Y. and Mossige, A. 2003. “Indicators to Promote Civil Society’s (NGOs and CBOs)
Participation in the implementation of Ethiopia’s National and Regional Action Programs of the
United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification. A guideline Document”, Drylands
26B. Berkele, Y. and Mossige, A. 2003. “Indicateurs visant à promouvoir la participation de la

société civile (ONG et OCB) à la mise en oeuvre en Ethiopie des Programmes d’action national et
régionaux de la Convention des Nations Unies sur la lutte contre la désertification”. Drylands
27. Assefa, F., Dawd, M. and Abesha, A. D. 2003. “Implementation Aspects of Integrated Pest
Management (IPM): Policy and Extension Gap in Ethiopia”, Drylands Coordination Group and
Noragric, Agricultural University of Norway.
28. Haile, A., Selassie, D.G., Zereyacob, B. and Abraham, B. 2003, “On-Farm Storage Studies in
Eritrea”, Drylands Coordination Group and Noragric, Agricultural University of Norway.
29. Doumbia, M.D., Berthé, A., Aune, J.B. 2003, “Gestion Intégrée de Nutriments Végétaux
(GINV): Tests Pratiques et Vulgarisation de Technologies”, Groupe de Coordination des Zones Arides
et Noragric, Agricultural University of Norway.
30. Mossige, A. and M. Macina 2004, “Indicateurs visant à promouvoir et suivre la participation
de la Société Civile (ONG et OCB) dans la mise en œuvre des Programmes d’Action National,
Régional et Communal de la Convention des Nations Unies sur la lutte contre la désertification”,
31. Tesfay, Y. and Tafere, K. 2004. “Indigenous Rangeland resources and Conflict Management
by the North Afar Pastoral Groups in Ethiopia. A Pastoral Forum Organized by the Drylands
Coordination Group (DCG) in Ethiopia, June 27-28, 2003, Mekelle, Ethiopia”, Drylands Coordination
Group and Noragric, Agricultural University of Norway.
32. Kebede, D. and Retta, S. 2004. “Gender, HIV/AIDS and Food Security, Linkage and
Integration into Development Interventions”, Drylands Coordination Group and Noragric, Agricultural
33. Kidane, A., Araia, W., Ghebremichael, Z, and Gobezay, G. 2004. “Survey on striga and crop
husbandry practices in relation to striga management and control of sorghum (Sorghum bicholor) in
87
the Goluge sub zone: Lessons to be learned and creating awareness”, Drylands Coordination Group
34. Kibreab, G., Berhane, T., and Ghezae, E. 2004. “A Study to Determine the Extent and Use of
Environmental Impact Assessment of Agricultural Development Projects – A Case Study from
Eritrea”, Drylands Coordination Group and Noragric, Agricultural University of Norway.
35. Meehan, F. 2004. “Female Headed Household in Tigray, Ethiopia. A Study Review”.
36. Doumbia, M. Berthe, A., Aune, J. B. 2005. “Integrated Plant Nutrient Management in Mali.
Summary Report 1998-2004”. Drylands Coordination Group, Miljøhuset G9, Norway.
37. Kaya, B., Traoré, C. O., Aune, J.B. 2005. “Etude d’identification des prototypes d’EcoFermes
au Mali. Rapport diagnostic et plan d’action pour 2005“. Groupe de Coordination des Zones Arides,
Maison de l’Environnement G9, Norvège.
38. Nedessa, B., Ali, J., Nyborg, I. 2005. ”Exploring Ecological and Socio-Economic Issues for
the Improvement of Area Enclosure Management. A Case Study from Ethiopia”. Drylands
Coordination Group, Miljøhuset G9, Norway.
39. Makenzi, P. 2005. “Natural Resource Management in the Didinga Hills. A Baseline Study
from Budy County, South Sudan”. Drylands Coordination Group, Miljøhuset G9, Norway.
40. Ogbazghi, W., Bein, E. 2006. “Assessment of Non-Wood Forest Products and their Role in
the Livelihoods of Rural Communities in the Gash-Barka Region, Eritrea”. Drylands Coordination
Group, Miljøhuset G9, Norway.
41. Kouyaté, S., Haidara, C. M. 2006. “Etude sur la Problématique des Périmètres Irrigués
Villageois au Nord du Mali”. Groupe de Coordination des Zones Arides, Miljøhuset G9, Norvège.
42. Haile, A. 2006. “On-Farm Storage of Chickpea, Sorghum, and Wheat in Eritrea”. Drylands
Coordination Group, Miljøhuset G9, Norway.
43. Ask, V. 2006. “UNCCD and Food Security for Pastoralists within a Human Rights Context”.
Drylands Coordination Group, Miljøhuset G9, Norway.
43B. Ask, V. 2006. « La CCD et la Sécurité Alimentaire des Pasteurs Dans le Contexte des Droits
de l’Homme ». Drylands Coordination Group, Miljøhuset G9, Norway
44. Desta, M., Haddis, G., Ataklt, S. 2006. “Female-Headed Households and Livelihood
Intervention in Four Selected Weredas in Tigray, Ethiopia.”. Drylands Coordination Group,
Miljøhuset G9, Norway.
45. Araia, W, Haile, A. 2006. “Baseline study on crop husbandry, in-situ conservation and
informal seed supply system in Eritrea”. Drylands Coordination Group, Miljøhuset G9, Norway.
46. Emana, B., Gebremedhin, H. 2007. “Constraints and Opportunities of Horticulture Production
and Marketing in Eastern Ethiopia”. Drylands Coordination Group, Miljøhuset G9, Norway.
Proceedings:
1. Drylands Coordination Group. 2000. Seminar on the Formation of DCG Ethiopia-Sudan.
Proceedings from a Seminar organised by the Drylands Coordination Group in Nazareth, Ethiopia,
April 10-12, 2000. DCG/Noragric, Agricultural University of Norway, Ås.
88
2. Drylands Coordination Group. 2001. Seminar on the Formation of DCG Eritrea. Proceedings
from a Seminar Hosted by the National Confederation of Eritrean Workers (NCEW) in Asmara,
Eritrea, March 26th-28th, 2001. DCG/Noragric, Agricultural University of Norway, Ås.
3. Amha, W. 2001. Revisiting the Regulatory and Supervision Framework of the Microfinance
Industry in Ethiopia. Proceedings from a Seminar Organised by the Relief Society of Tigray (REST),
on behalf of the Drylands Coordination Group in Ethiopia and Sudan, In Mekelle, August 25, 2001.
DCG/Noragric, Agricultural University of Norway, Ås.
4. Mossige, A. and Berkele, Y. 2001. Civil Society’s Participation in the National Action
Program to Combat Desertification and Mitigate the Effects of Drought in Ethiopia. Proceedings from
a Workshop organised by the Drylands Coordination Group (DCG) in Ethiopia, Debre Zeit,
September 13-14, 2001. DCG/Noragric, Agricultural University of Norway, Ås.
5. Maiga, S. et Mossige, A. 2001. Participation de la Société Civile dans la Mise en Oeuvre

Programme d’action pour la Convention Sur la Désertification (CCD) au Mali. L’atelier Organise par
le Groupe Coordination sur les Zones Arides (GCOZA) Au Centre Aoua Keita, Bamako, Les 5 et 6
novembre 2001. GCOZA/Noragric, Agricultural University of Norway, Ås.
6. Drylands Coordination Group. 2002. Do conventions need civil society? A critical review of
the role of civil society in the implementation of international conventions. Proceeding from a Seminar
Arranged by the Drylands Coordination Group and Forum for Development and Environment
(ForUM) in Oslo, January 15th, 2002. DCG/Noragric, Agricultural University of Norway, Ås.
7. Berkele, Y. 2002. Workshop on training of trainers in UNCCD/NAP implementation in

Ethiopia. Proceedings from a workshop arranged by the Drylands Coordination Group in Ethiopia,
Nazareth, June 10-15, 2002, DCG/Noragric, Agricultural University of Norway, Ås.
8. Drylands Coordination Group. 2002. Sustainable livelihoods of farmers and pastoralists in

Eritrea. Proceedings from a workshop organised by DCG Eritrea in National Confederation of Eritrean
Workers Conference Hall, Asmara, November 28 –29, 2002. DCG/Noragric, Agricultural University
Of Norway, Ås.
9. Drylands Coordination Group. 2003. DCG networking seminar 2002, 15th-22nd November
2002, Khartoum, Sudan. DCG/Noragric, Agricultural University of Norway, Ås.
10. Soumana, D. 2003. Atelier d’information, d’échange et de réflexion sur l’élargissement du

Groupe de Coordination des Zones Arides (GCoZA) au Mali, Au Centre Aoua Keita, Bamako, Les 18
et 19 février 2003. DCG/Noragric, Agricultural University of Norway, Ås.
11. Ati, H. A.and Nimir A. A. H. 2004. Training Course On The Role Of Local Institutions In
Regulating Resource Use and Conflict Management, Um Jawaseer, June 2003. DCG/Noragric,
Agricultural University of Norway, Ås.
12. Berkele, Y. and Ayalew, B. 2004. Training of Trainers in Implementation of UNCCD/NAP in

Ethiopia. Third Round, 10-14 Nov. 2003. DCG/Noragric, Agricultural University of Norway, Ås.
13. Macina, M. 2004. Atelier National et Campagne d’Information et de Sensibilisation sur la

CCD. Un Atelier organisé par la Coordination des Associations et ONG Féminines au Mali (CAFO)
en partenariat avec le Groupe de Coordination des Zones Arides (GCoZA). Les 29-30 novembre 2004
à Bamako, Mali. DCG/Noragric, Agricultural University of Norway, Ås.
14. Musnad, H.A. and Nasr N. K. 2004. Experience Sharing Tour and Workshop on Shelterbelts
and Fuel Wood Substitutes in Sudan. DCG/Noragric, Agricultural University of Norway, Ås.
89
15. Gakou, M. 2005. Atelier d’information et de formation des ONG membres de GCoZA sur le
montage des projets/ synergie entre les conventions de la génération de Rio et de la convention de
Ramsar. Le 28 décembre 2004, à Bamako, Mali. GCoZA, Oslo.
16. Berkele, Y., Mossige, Anne. 2005. Awareness Promotion and Experience Sharing on the
Implementation of UNCCD-NAP to Enhance Pastoralist Areas Development. Workshop organized by
the Drylands Coordination Group Ethiopia for the Pastoral Affairs Standing Committee and the
Natural Resource Development and Environmental Protection Standing Committee, Members of
Parliament - Ethiopia. December 17-19, 2004 in Nazareth, Ethiopia. DCG, Miljøhuset, Oslo.
17. Esheteu Bekele, E., Azerefegne, F., and Abate, T. 2006. Facilitating the Implementation and
Adoption of Integrated Pest Management (IPM) in Ethiopia. Planning Workshop, 13-15 October 2003,
Melkassa Agricultural Research Center, EARO. Jointly organized by the Association for
Advancement of IPM (ASAI) and the Ethiopian Agricultural Research Organization (EARO). DCG,
Miljøhuset, Oslo.
18. Kodio, A. 2006. Atelier de Formation des Membres du GCoZA Mali à l’Approche Epargne
Crédit Musow ka Jigiya Ton (MJT) au Mali. Atelier organisé par CARE Mali et le GCoZA Mali du
1er au 5 août 2005 au Centre Gabriel Cissé de Ségou au Mali. DCG, Miljøhuset, Oslo.
19. Belal, A. A. and Hussein, F. S. 2006. Awareness Raising Workshop on the Implementation of
the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification. Workshop organized by DCG Sudan for the
Parliamentarians and other Stakeholders. December 28th and 29th 2005 in the Green Hall of Sudan’s
Parliament, Omdurman, Sudan. DCG, Miljøhuset, Oslo.
20. Dembelé, T., Berthé, A. et Yattara, M. 2006. Atelier de formation en matière du Guide
Programme Communal d’Action Environnementale (PCAE) et des techniques Gestion Intégrée de
Nutriments Végétaux (GINV). Atelier Organisé par GCOZA Mali et le Consortium Synergie –
AMAPROS ACD pour les membres de GCOZA et des trois communes (Saloba, Souley et Sana).
Du 20 au 22 juin 2005 à la Maison du Partenariat à Bamako, Mali. DCG, Miljøhuset, Oslo.
20B. Yattara, M. 2006. PCAE ani GINV baarakqfqqrqw dùnniyaw dqmqnan lajqkalan kùnùkow
sqnsqnnen. Lajqkalan sigilen sen kan GCOZA Mali ani xùgùndqmqjqkulu AMAPROS ACD fq, ka
xqsin GCOZA tùndenw ni Saloba, Suleyi ani Sana komini saba kùnùmùgùw ma. K’a ta san 2005
zuwqnkalo tile 20 ma, ka se a tile 22 ma Mali la, xùgùndqmqjqkuluw ka soba la Bamakù. DCG,
Miljøhuset, Oslo.
21. Touré, B. 2006. Atelier de Renforcement des Capacités des Organisations de GCoZA Mali sur
les Mécanismes de Financement des Projets et Programmes pour la Mise en Oeuvre de la Convention
des Nations Unies sur la Lutte contre la Désertification (CCD). Atelier Organisé par la Coordination
des Associations et ONG Féminines du Mali (CAFO) et GCoZA Mali pour les membres de GCoZA
Mali. Du 11 au 13 septembre 2006 au Mémorial Modibo Keita à Bamako, Mali. DCG, Miljøhuset,
Oslo.
90
Drylands Coordination Group Addresses in Norway:

Secretariat of the Drylands Coordination Group
Grensen 9b, 0159 Oslo, Norway
Tel: +47 23 10 94 90, Fax: + 47 23 10 94 94
E-mail: dcg@drylands-group.org
ADRA Norge
Postboks 124, 3529 Røyse, Norway
Tel.: +47 32 16 16 90, Fax: +47 32 16 16 71
E-mail: 102555.2157@compuserve.com
CARE Norge
Universitetsgt. 12, 0164 Oslo, Norway
Tel: +47 22 20 39 30, Fax: +47 22 20 39 36
E-mail: care.norge@online.no
Development Fund
Grensen 9b, 0159 Oslo, Norway
Tel: +47 23 10 96 00, Fax: +47 23 10 96 01
E-mail: u-fondet@u-fondet.no
Norwegian Church Aid

Postboks 7100, St. Olavs plass, 0130 Oslo, Norway
Tel: + 47 22 09 27 00, Fax: + 47 22 09 27 20
E-mail: nca-oslo@sn.no
Norwegian People’s Aid

P.O. Box 8844 Youngstorget, 0028 Oslo, Norway
Tel: + 47 22 03 77 00, Fax: + 47 22 17 70 82
E-mail: norsk.folkehjelp@npaid.no
Noragric, Department for International Environment and Development Studies

University of Life Sciences, P.O. Box 5003, 1432 Ås, Norway
Tel: +47 64 94 99 50, Fax: +47 64 94 07 60
E-mail: noragric@noragric.umb.no
91

Report 46 Horticulture PDF

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Report 46 Horticulture PDF

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Constraints and Opportunities of Horticulture Production and

Marketing in Eastern Ethiopia

By Bezabih Emana and Hadera Gebremedhin

DCG Report No. 46

Bezabih Emana and Hadera Gebremedhin

DCG Report No. 46

Photo credits: T.A. Benjaminsen, Gry Synnevåg and Bezabih Emana

Cover design: Spekter Reklamebyrå as, Ås.

ACRONYMS ............................................................................................................................................................ VII

7. HORTICULTURE MARKETING IN EASTERN ETHIOPIA ................................................................... 38

AIQCI Agricultural Input Quality Control and Inspection

The authors appreciate their contributions and thank them all.

Input supply system:

Production constraints and opportunities:

1.3 ORGANIZATION OF THE REPORT

1.4 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

2.1 DATA COLLECTION

2.1.1 Producers’ survey

Table 1: Distribution of sample horticulture producers included in the survey

2.1.2 Consumers’ survey

Table 2: Number of consumers included in the survey by sex

Sex of the respondent

2.1.3 Focus group discussion

2.1.4 Secondary data

2.2 DATA ANALYSIS

3. SOME CHARACTERISTICS OF THE RESPONDENTS

3.1.1 Demographic features

Table 3: Average household size and dependency ratio

Table 4: Marital status of the household heads by woreda

Table 5: Level of education of the household heads by woreda

Table 6: Average No. of children in school per sample household

3.1.3 Means of livelihood

Table 7: Major means of income generation of the horticulture producers

3.2.1 Demographic features

Table 8: Consumers' household size and family labor availability

Table 9: Level of education of the household head (consumers)

3.2.2 Means of livelihood of the consumers

Figure 1: Composition of consumers by income source (%)

Source: Own survey (September 2006)

4.1 FARMING SYSTEM IN THE AREA

Figure 2: Typical cropping pattern in eastern Hararghe, eastern Ethiopia

Vegetables 2nd cycle

Crops Sequence of vegetable production with irrigation (3 cycles)/year

Carrot/cabbage 3rd cycle 3rd cycle

Source: Own survey (September, 2006)

4.2 TYPES OF HORTICULTURE PRODUCED IN THE AREA

Table 12: Proportion of households producing vegetables (2005/06 production year)

Table 13: Number of fruit trees per household

4.3 INPUT USE FOR HORTICULTURE PRODUCTION

4.3.1 Land allocated for horticulture production

Smallholder farming is characterized by fragmented farmland. Due to land scarcity, land

Table 15: Types of crops produced by using irrigation

Figure 3: Proportion of households having cropland and irrigable land

% of household having cropland % of household having irrigable land

Source: Own survey (September 2006)

Table 16: Source of water for irrigation

Table 17: Proportion of households with different methods of irrigation

Table 18: Sources of labor for horticulture production

Table 19: Labor use for selected vegetable crop production

4.3.4 Fertilizer and manure

Table 20: Number of respondents applying animal manure to vegetables

Table 21: Use of chemical fertilizer for selected vegetable crops

Figure 4: Types of seeds used by farmers to produce horticultural crops (N=128)