International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) and Ethiopian Development Research Institute (EDRI) Seminar series. May 27, 2013. ATA Presentation

1. ETHIOPIAN DEVELOPMENT
RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Perceptions on the impact of improved teff
technologies by exposed farmers
IFPRI-ESSP
May 27th, 2013
Presentation ATA
1

2. 2
Overview presentation
1. Background (row planting vs transplanting vs
broadcasting)
2. Perceptions of yields on the experimental plots by
adopters of the improved technologies
3. Perceptions on yield differences
4. Perceived advantages and disadvantages of the different
technologies
5. Planning next year

3. 3
1. Background
- Selected randomly 10 AGP woredas in the Oromia
region (major teff production region)
- In each woreda, 4 FTCs selected; in total 40 FTCs
selected; 970 farmers interviewed
- Farmers were part of pilot rollout to test the effects of
improved technologies (broadcasting vs row planting
vs transplanting)

4. 4
1. Background
- There are 838 farmers (“compliers”) that participated
in the teff experiment
• 462 row planting (55%)
• 76 transplanting (9%)
• 166 normal broadcasting (20%)
• 134 reduced broadcasting (16%)
- As these farmers are very much aware of the new
technologies, we call them the ‘exposed’ farmers and
further analysis refers to their answers

5. 5
2. Perceptions of teff yields on experimental
plot (for adopters of new technologies)
% Row planting Transplanting
Do not know 5 4
Higher 89 78
The same 1 1
Lower 5 17
Total 100 100

6. 6
2. Perceptions on straw yields on experimental
plot (for adopters of new technologies)
% Row planting Transplanting
Do not know 5 4
Higher 60 53
The same 4 6
Lower 31 37
Total 100 100

7. 7
2. Perceptions on labor use on experimental
plot (for adopters of new technologies)
% Row planting Transplanting
Do not know 5 4
Higher 51 53
The same 43 42
Lower 1 1
Total 100 100

8. 8
2. Perceptions on teff yields on experimental
plot (farmers’ declarations)
Teff production
of experimental
plot (kg/ha)
Broad-
casting
Row planting Transplanting
Mean 1336 1490 1882
Relative increase
(in %)
12 41
Median 1171 1311 1317
Relative increase
(in %)
12 11
Number of
observations
284 72 420

9. 9
2. Perceptions on straw yields on
experimental plot (farmers’ declarations)
Straw production of
experimental plot
(bails/ha)
Broad-
casting
Row
planting
Transplanting
Mean 49 48 68
Relative increase
(in %)
-2 39
Median 34 34 50
Relative increase
(in %)
0 47
Number of
observations
299 76 457

10. 10
3. Perceptions on teff yields for different
technologies (for ‘exposed’ farmers)
Quintals/ha
(mean)
Quintals/ha
(median)
Traditional broadcasting 10 8
Broadcasting with
reduced seed rate
15 12
Row planting 18 16
Transplanting 21 20

11. 11
3. Perceptions on straw yields for different
technologies (for ‘exposed’ farmers)
Bails/ha
(mean)
Bails/ha
(median)
Traditional broadcasting 26 20
Broadcasting with
reduced seed rate
25 20
Row planting 26 22
Transplanting 24 20

12. 12
3. Perceptions on labor need changes
compared to traditional broadcasting
% A lot
higher
A bit
higher
The
same
A bit
lower
A lot
lower
Total
Broadcasting
with reduced
seed rate
1 21 53 14 11 100
Row planting 50 49 0 1 0 100
Transplanting 93 7 0 0 0 100

13. 13
4. Major three advantages of improved
technologies (for adopters next year)
% Broadcasting
reduced
seed
Row
planting
Trans-
planting
Higher teff yield 90 98 94
Lower seed rates 51 74 61
Higher straw yield 50 31 26
Less wastage of
fertilizer
20 32
Good branching out 24 19 31
Less labor needed 18

14. 14
4. Major 3 disadvantages of improved
technologies (for non-adopters next year)
% Broad-
casting
reduced
seed
Row
planting
Trans-
planting
Too much additional labor 91 91
Difficulty of doing the
technology
8 35 50
Sensitivity of seedlings to
shortage of rainfall
6 12 37
It does not give higher yield 44 12 7
Much harder to control weeds 16 9
Lack of
skill/awareness/knowledge
28 6

15. 15
5. Planning next year
(by all ‘exposed’ farmers)
% of farmers
Traditional broadcasting 73
Broadcasting with
reduced seed rate
61
Row planting 77
Transplanting 15

16. 16
5. Planning next year
(by all ‘exposed’ farmers)
Would you do row planting next year if… % of farmers
… inputs such as teff seeds and fertilizer were NOT
given for free?
79
… inputs such as teff seeds and fertilizer were given at
a discounted rate?
83
… inputs such as teff seeds and fertilizer were given for
free
87
… were NOT given for free but you had access to a row
planter
79

17. 17
5. Planning next year
(by all ‘exposed’ farmers)
% of area
Traditional broadcasting 56
Broadcasting with
reduced seed rate
28
Row planting 14
Transplanting 2
Total 100

18. 18
Conclusion
• Based on teff yield declarations of participating farmers,
row planting and transplanting have teff yields that are on
average respectively 12% and 41% higher
• Based on straw yield declarations of participating farmers,
row planting does not lead to higher straw yields while
transplanting have yields that are 39% higher
• However, perceptions on the potential of these
technologies are much higher; exposed farmers estimate
that teff yields would double because of these new
technologies; no major differences in straw yields though

19. 19
Conclusion
• Given this positive results, a high level of adoption of the
reduced seed technology is expected next year (except for
transplanting). Of the “exposed” farmers, 77% of the
farmers will adopt row planting next year; 15% will adopt
transplanting
• However, farmers are only willing to adopt the new
technologies on small areas (seemingly because of the
labor requirement of the new technologies)