Onfarm Validation of Agricultural Technologies for Supporting <i>Tef</i> Extension Package Formulation in Ethiopia

Yazachew Genet; Aklilu Nigussie; Tsion Fikre; Kebebew Assefa; Rehima Musema

doi:doi:10.11648/j.ijaas.20200606.12

| Peer-Reviewed

Onfarm Validation of Agricultural Technologies for Supporting Tef Extension Package Formulation in Ethiopia

Yazachew Genet, Aklilu Nigussie, Tsion Fikre, Kebebew Assefa, Rehima Musema

Published in International Journal of Applied Agricultural Sciences (Volume 6, Issue 6)

Received: 25 September 2020 Accepted: 15 October 2020 Published: 16 November 2020

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

Tef grain yield is low, at 1.75kgha^-1 in Ethiopia. Therefore, the objectives of this study were to compare biological superiority of the technology package; to conduct partial budget cost-benefit analysis of the technology and to improve the full package of recommendations. Three interventions packages on the tef production system which are: extension package, Agricultural transformation Agency of Ethiopia package and the research package (row and broadcast planting) application was laid out in a randomized complete block design with the replication (farmers/ locations as replication). The experimental plot size was 500m². The result indicates that research package on broadcast planting and raw planting systems were found to be superior in grain yield 1580kgha^-1 and 1550 kgha^-1, respectively. Similarly research row sowing and broadcasting recommendations were gave higher above ground biomass 10167kgha^-1 and 10000kgha^-1, respectively as compared to the ATA and Extension package practice. Thus, the result revealed that seed rate of 10-15 kgha^-1 both broad cast and row sowing gives better grain yield and shoot biomass providing the highest return with marginal rate of return, whereas ATA package was found to be the least economically viable treatment having minimum MRR. The partial budget analysis result showed that net returns of treatments extension package, research row planting package and research broadcasting package exceeded the net return of the control- ATA package by Ethiopian birr (EB) (0.32), 1.09 and 1.65, respectively (US$ 1=EB 27.49). The decrease in cost for treatment of extension package relative to the control-ATA package was EB 1.03; the added net benefit from this treatment was EB 0.75 per unit, giving a marginal rate of return of 137%. The decrease in cost of treatment research with row planting package relative to treatment of the control-ATA package was EB 71%, while the increase in net return was EB 32.6 per unit of production, giving a marginal rate of return on the increased expenditure of 218%. The relative decreasing cost of treatment research tef broadcast planting was EB 60.7% per unit of production as compared to the control-ATA package, while the increase in net return relative to treatment the control was EB 3.38 for a marginal rate of return of 17.95%. Given the high cost of capital, treatments of the control-ATA and the extension package cannot be recommended as they indicate negative benefit cost ration with (0.51) and (0.31) respectively while 1.09 and 1.65 for research row planting and broadcast planting, respectively yet; the broadcast planting of tef production indicated superior in returns of EB 0.65 for EB 1 invested in the production at small scale level. Considering the lack of appropriate tef row planting at the moment, broadcast planting with 10-15 seed rate should be used as tef production package in the country.

Published in	International Journal of Applied Agricultural Sciences (Volume 6, Issue 6)
DOI	10.11648/j.ijaas.20200606.12
Page(s)	172-178
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Tef, Partial Budget, Marginal Cost, Benefit Cost Ratio, Yield, Variable Cost

References

[1]	Abraha Arefaine, Daniel Adhanom, Negasi Tekeste. (2020) "Response of Teff (Eragrostis tef (Zucc) Trotter) to Seeding Rate and Methods of Sowing on Yield and Yield Attributes in a Subhumid Environment, Northern Ethiopia", International Journal of Agronomy, vol. 2020, Article ID 1516790, 7 pages, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/1516790.
[2]	Abraha Reda, Nigussie Dechassa, Kebebew Assefa. (2018). Evaluation of Seed Rates and Sowing Methods on Growth, Yield and Yield Attributes of Tef [Eragrostis tef (Zucc.) Trotter] in Ada District, East Shewa, Ethiopia. American-Eurasian J. Agric. & Environ. Sci., 18 (1): 34-49, 2018. DOI: 10.5829/idosi.aejaes.2018.34.49.
[3]	Abera, H. B. (2008). Adoption of improved tef and wheat production technologies in crop-livestock mixed systems in northern and western Shewa zones of Ethiopia (Doctoral dissertation, University of Pretoria.
[4]	Andersen, R. and Winge, T., 2012. The Access and Benefit-Sharing Agreement on Tef Genetic Resources. FNI Report, 6/2012.
[5]	Cafer, A., & Rikoon, S. (2017). Coerced agricultural modernization: a political ecology perspective of agricultural input packages in South Wollo, Ethiopia. Journal of Rural Social Sciences, 32 (1), 6.
[6]	CSA. 2015. Central Statistical Agency. The Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia, Central Statistical Agency (CSA), Agricultural Sample Survey 2014/15 (2007 E. C.), Volume I, Report on Area and Production of Major Crops (Private Peasant Holdings, Meher Season), Statistical Bulletin 278, May 2015, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
[7]	Ethiopian Nutrition Survey. 1959. A Report by the Inter-Departmental Committee on Nutrition for National Defense. September 1959.
[8]	Hailu, G., Weersink, A., Minten, B.; Determinants of the Productivity of Tef in Ethiopia (2017) European Journal of Development Research, 29 (4), pp. 866-892.
[9]	Heiniger, U.; Tef (Eragrostis tef (Zucc.) Trotter) - Gluten-free grain from Ethiopia [Tef (Eragrostis tef (ZUCC.) TROTTER)-glutenfreies Getreide aus äthiopien] (2016) Schweizerische Zeitschrift fur GanzheitsMedizin, 28 (5), pp. 281-292.
[10]	Kebebew Assefa, Sherif Aliye, Getachew Belay, Gizaw Metaferia, Hailu Tefera & Mark E. Sorrells (2011) Quncho: the first popular tef variety in Ethiopia, International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability, 9: 1, 25-34.
[11]	Seboka, B., & Deressa, A. (1999). Validating farmers' indigenous social networks for local seed supply in Central Rift Valley of Ethiopia. The Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension, 6 (4), 245-254.
[12]	Seyfu Ketema. 1997. Tef. Eragrostis tef (Zucc.) Trotter. Promoting the conservation and use of underutilized and neglected crops. 12. Institute of Plant Genetics and Crop Plant Research, Gatersleben/International Plant Genetic Resources Institute, Rome, Italy; Washington, D. C.
[13]	Spaenij-Dekking, L, Kooy-Winkelaar, Y, Koning, F. 2005. The Ethiopian cereal tef in celiac disease. New England Journal of Medicine 353: 1748-1749.
[14]	Worku, I., Dereje, M., Berhane, G., Minten, B. and Taffesse A. L., 2014. Tef and its Role in the Agricultural and Food Economy. (Unpublished).

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Yazachew Genet, Aklilu Nigussie, Tsion Fikre, Kebebew Assefa, Rehima Musema. (2020). Onfarm Validation of Agricultural Technologies for Supporting Tef Extension Package Formulation in Ethiopia. International Journal of Applied Agricultural Sciences, 6(6), 172-178. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijaas.20200606.12

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Yazachew Genet; Aklilu Nigussie; Tsion Fikre; Kebebew Assefa; Rehima Musema. Onfarm Validation of Agricultural Technologies for Supporting Tef Extension Package Formulation in Ethiopia. Int. J. Appl. Agric. Sci. 2020, 6(6), 172-178. doi: 10.11648/j.ijaas.20200606.12

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Yazachew Genet, Aklilu Nigussie, Tsion Fikre, Kebebew Assefa, Rehima Musema. Onfarm Validation of Agricultural Technologies for Supporting Tef Extension Package Formulation in Ethiopia. Int J Appl Agric Sci. 2020;6(6):172-178. doi: 10.11648/j.ijaas.20200606.12

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ijaas.20200606.12,
  author = {Yazachew Genet and Aklilu Nigussie and Tsion Fikre and Kebebew Assefa and Rehima Musema},
  title = {Onfarm Validation of Agricultural Technologies for Supporting Tef Extension Package Formulation in Ethiopia},
  journal = {International Journal of Applied Agricultural Sciences},
  volume = {6},
  number = {6},
  pages = {172-178},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ijaas.20200606.12},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijaas.20200606.12},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijaas.20200606.12},
  abstract = {Tef grain yield is low, at 1.75kgha-1 in Ethiopia. Therefore, the objectives of this study were to compare biological superiority of the technology package; to conduct partial budget cost-benefit analysis of the technology and to improve the full package of recommendations. Three interventions packages on the tef production system which are: extension package, Agricultural transformation Agency of Ethiopia package and the research package (row and broadcast planting) application was laid out in a randomized complete block design with the replication (farmers/ locations as replication). The experimental plot size was 500m2. The result indicates that research package on broadcast planting and raw planting systems were found to be superior in grain yield 1580kgha-1 and 1550 kgha-1, respectively. Similarly research row sowing and broadcasting recommendations were gave higher above ground biomass 10167kgha-1 and 10000kgha-1, respectively as compared to the ATA and Extension package practice. Thus, the result revealed that seed rate of 10-15 kgha-1 both broad cast and row sowing gives better grain yield and shoot biomass providing the highest return with marginal rate of return, whereas ATA package was found to be the least economically viable treatment having minimum MRR. The partial budget analysis result showed that net returns of treatments extension package, research row planting package and research broadcasting package exceeded the net return of the control- ATA package by Ethiopian birr (EB) (0.32), 1.09 and 1.65, respectively (US$ 1=EB 27.49). The decrease in cost for treatment of extension package relative to the control-ATA package was EB 1.03; the added net benefit from this treatment was EB 0.75 per unit, giving a marginal rate of return of 137%. The decrease in cost of treatment research with row planting package relative to treatment of the control-ATA package was EB 71%, while the increase in net return was EB 32.6 per unit of production, giving a marginal rate of return on the increased expenditure of 218%. The relative decreasing cost of treatment research tef broadcast planting was EB 60.7% per unit of production as compared to the control-ATA package, while the increase in net return relative to treatment the control was EB 3.38 for a marginal rate of return of 17.95%. Given the high cost of capital, treatments of the control-ATA and the extension package cannot be recommended as they indicate negative benefit cost ration with (0.51) and (0.31) respectively while 1.09 and 1.65 for research row planting and broadcast planting, respectively yet; the broadcast planting of tef production indicated superior in returns of EB 0.65 for EB 1 invested in the production at small scale level. Considering the lack of appropriate tef row planting at the moment, broadcast planting with 10-15 seed rate should be used as tef production package in the country.},
 year = {2020}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Onfarm Validation of Agricultural Technologies for Supporting Tef Extension Package Formulation in Ethiopia
AU  - Yazachew Genet
AU  - Aklilu Nigussie
AU  - Tsion Fikre
AU  - Kebebew Assefa
AU  - Rehima Musema
Y1  - 2020/11/16
PY  - 2020
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijaas.20200606.12
DO  - 10.11648/j.ijaas.20200606.12
T2  - International Journal of Applied Agricultural Sciences
JF  - International Journal of Applied Agricultural Sciences
JO  - International Journal of Applied Agricultural Sciences
SP  - 172
EP  - 178
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2469-7885
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijaas.20200606.12
AB  - Tef grain yield is low, at 1.75kgha-1 in Ethiopia. Therefore, the objectives of this study were to compare biological superiority of the technology package; to conduct partial budget cost-benefit analysis of the technology and to improve the full package of recommendations. Three interventions packages on the tef production system which are: extension package, Agricultural transformation Agency of Ethiopia package and the research package (row and broadcast planting) application was laid out in a randomized complete block design with the replication (farmers/ locations as replication). The experimental plot size was 500m2. The result indicates that research package on broadcast planting and raw planting systems were found to be superior in grain yield 1580kgha-1 and 1550 kgha-1, respectively. Similarly research row sowing and broadcasting recommendations were gave higher above ground biomass 10167kgha-1 and 10000kgha-1, respectively as compared to the ATA and Extension package practice. Thus, the result revealed that seed rate of 10-15 kgha-1 both broad cast and row sowing gives better grain yield and shoot biomass providing the highest return with marginal rate of return, whereas ATA package was found to be the least economically viable treatment having minimum MRR. The partial budget analysis result showed that net returns of treatments extension package, research row planting package and research broadcasting package exceeded the net return of the control- ATA package by Ethiopian birr (EB) (0.32), 1.09 and 1.65, respectively (US$ 1=EB 27.49). The decrease in cost for treatment of extension package relative to the control-ATA package was EB 1.03; the added net benefit from this treatment was EB 0.75 per unit, giving a marginal rate of return of 137%. The decrease in cost of treatment research with row planting package relative to treatment of the control-ATA package was EB 71%, while the increase in net return was EB 32.6 per unit of production, giving a marginal rate of return on the increased expenditure of 218%. The relative decreasing cost of treatment research tef broadcast planting was EB 60.7% per unit of production as compared to the control-ATA package, while the increase in net return relative to treatment the control was EB 3.38 for a marginal rate of return of 17.95%. Given the high cost of capital, treatments of the control-ATA and the extension package cannot be recommended as they indicate negative benefit cost ration with (0.51) and (0.31) respectively while 1.09 and 1.65 for research row planting and broadcast planting, respectively yet; the broadcast planting of tef production indicated superior in returns of EB 0.65 for EB 1 invested in the production at small scale level. Considering the lack of appropriate tef row planting at the moment, broadcast planting with 10-15 seed rate should be used as tef production package in the country.
VL  - 6
IS  - 6
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Yazachew Genet

Ethiopian Institutes of Agricultural Research, Debre-Zeit Agricultural Research Center, Debre Zeit, Ethiopia
Aklilu Nigussie

Ethiopian Institutes of Agricultural Research, Debre-Zeit Agricultural Research Center, Debre Zeit, Ethiopia
Tsion Fikre

Ethiopian Institutes of Agricultural Research, Debre-Zeit Agricultural Research Center, Debre Zeit, Ethiopia
Kebebew Assefa

Ethiopian Institutes of Agricultural Research, Debre-Zeit Agricultural Research Center, Debre Zeit, Ethiopia
Rehima Musema

Ethiopian Institutes of Agricultural Research, Agricultural Economics Research Directorate, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

Download PDF

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Yazachew Genet, Aklilu Nigussie, Tsion Fikre, Kebebew Assefa, Rehima Musema. (2020). Onfarm Validation of Agricultural Technologies for Supporting Tef Extension Package Formulation in Ethiopia. International Journal of Applied Agricultural Sciences, 6(6), 172-178. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijaas.20200606.12

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Yazachew Genet; Aklilu Nigussie; Tsion Fikre; Kebebew Assefa; Rehima Musema. Onfarm Validation of Agricultural Technologies for Supporting Tef Extension Package Formulation in Ethiopia. Int. J. Appl. Agric. Sci. 2020, 6(6), 172-178. doi: 10.11648/j.ijaas.20200606.12

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Yazachew Genet, Aklilu Nigussie, Tsion Fikre, Kebebew Assefa, Rehima Musema. Onfarm Validation of Agricultural Technologies for Supporting Tef Extension Package Formulation in Ethiopia. Int J Appl Agric Sci. 2020;6(6):172-178. doi: 10.11648/j.ijaas.20200606.12

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ijaas.20200606.12,
  author = {Yazachew Genet and Aklilu Nigussie and Tsion Fikre and Kebebew Assefa and Rehima Musema},
  title = {Onfarm Validation of Agricultural Technologies for Supporting Tef Extension Package Formulation in Ethiopia},
  journal = {International Journal of Applied Agricultural Sciences},
  volume = {6},
  number = {6},
  pages = {172-178},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ijaas.20200606.12},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijaas.20200606.12},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijaas.20200606.12},
  abstract = {Tef grain yield is low, at 1.75kgha-1 in Ethiopia. Therefore, the objectives of this study were to compare biological superiority of the technology package; to conduct partial budget cost-benefit analysis of the technology and to improve the full package of recommendations. Three interventions packages on the tef production system which are: extension package, Agricultural transformation Agency of Ethiopia package and the research package (row and broadcast planting) application was laid out in a randomized complete block design with the replication (farmers/ locations as replication). The experimental plot size was 500m2. The result indicates that research package on broadcast planting and raw planting systems were found to be superior in grain yield 1580kgha-1 and 1550 kgha-1, respectively. Similarly research row sowing and broadcasting recommendations were gave higher above ground biomass 10167kgha-1 and 10000kgha-1, respectively as compared to the ATA and Extension package practice. Thus, the result revealed that seed rate of 10-15 kgha-1 both broad cast and row sowing gives better grain yield and shoot biomass providing the highest return with marginal rate of return, whereas ATA package was found to be the least economically viable treatment having minimum MRR. The partial budget analysis result showed that net returns of treatments extension package, research row planting package and research broadcasting package exceeded the net return of the control- ATA package by Ethiopian birr (EB) (0.32), 1.09 and 1.65, respectively (US$ 1=EB 27.49). The decrease in cost for treatment of extension package relative to the control-ATA package was EB 1.03; the added net benefit from this treatment was EB 0.75 per unit, giving a marginal rate of return of 137%. The decrease in cost of treatment research with row planting package relative to treatment of the control-ATA package was EB 71%, while the increase in net return was EB 32.6 per unit of production, giving a marginal rate of return on the increased expenditure of 218%. The relative decreasing cost of treatment research tef broadcast planting was EB 60.7% per unit of production as compared to the control-ATA package, while the increase in net return relative to treatment the control was EB 3.38 for a marginal rate of return of 17.95%. Given the high cost of capital, treatments of the control-ATA and the extension package cannot be recommended as they indicate negative benefit cost ration with (0.51) and (0.31) respectively while 1.09 and 1.65 for research row planting and broadcast planting, respectively yet; the broadcast planting of tef production indicated superior in returns of EB 0.65 for EB 1 invested in the production at small scale level. Considering the lack of appropriate tef row planting at the moment, broadcast planting with 10-15 seed rate should be used as tef production package in the country.},
 year = {2020}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Onfarm Validation of Agricultural Technologies for Supporting Tef Extension Package Formulation in Ethiopia
AU  - Yazachew Genet
AU  - Aklilu Nigussie
AU  - Tsion Fikre
AU  - Kebebew Assefa
AU  - Rehima Musema
Y1  - 2020/11/16
PY  - 2020
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijaas.20200606.12
DO  - 10.11648/j.ijaas.20200606.12
T2  - International Journal of Applied Agricultural Sciences
JF  - International Journal of Applied Agricultural Sciences
JO  - International Journal of Applied Agricultural Sciences
SP  - 172
EP  - 178
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2469-7885
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijaas.20200606.12
AB  - Tef grain yield is low, at 1.75kgha-1 in Ethiopia. Therefore, the objectives of this study were to compare biological superiority of the technology package; to conduct partial budget cost-benefit analysis of the technology and to improve the full package of recommendations. Three interventions packages on the tef production system which are: extension package, Agricultural transformation Agency of Ethiopia package and the research package (row and broadcast planting) application was laid out in a randomized complete block design with the replication (farmers/ locations as replication). The experimental plot size was 500m2. The result indicates that research package on broadcast planting and raw planting systems were found to be superior in grain yield 1580kgha-1 and 1550 kgha-1, respectively. Similarly research row sowing and broadcasting recommendations were gave higher above ground biomass 10167kgha-1 and 10000kgha-1, respectively as compared to the ATA and Extension package practice. Thus, the result revealed that seed rate of 10-15 kgha-1 both broad cast and row sowing gives better grain yield and shoot biomass providing the highest return with marginal rate of return, whereas ATA package was found to be the least economically viable treatment having minimum MRR. The partial budget analysis result showed that net returns of treatments extension package, research row planting package and research broadcasting package exceeded the net return of the control- ATA package by Ethiopian birr (EB) (0.32), 1.09 and 1.65, respectively (US$ 1=EB 27.49). The decrease in cost for treatment of extension package relative to the control-ATA package was EB 1.03; the added net benefit from this treatment was EB 0.75 per unit, giving a marginal rate of return of 137%. The decrease in cost of treatment research with row planting package relative to treatment of the control-ATA package was EB 71%, while the increase in net return was EB 32.6 per unit of production, giving a marginal rate of return on the increased expenditure of 218%. The relative decreasing cost of treatment research tef broadcast planting was EB 60.7% per unit of production as compared to the control-ATA package, while the increase in net return relative to treatment the control was EB 3.38 for a marginal rate of return of 17.95%. Given the high cost of capital, treatments of the control-ATA and the extension package cannot be recommended as they indicate negative benefit cost ration with (0.51) and (0.31) respectively while 1.09 and 1.65 for research row planting and broadcast planting, respectively yet; the broadcast planting of tef production indicated superior in returns of EB 0.65 for EB 1 invested in the production at small scale level. Considering the lack of appropriate tef row planting at the moment, broadcast planting with 10-15 seed rate should be used as tef production package in the country.
VL  - 6
IS  - 6
ER  -

Copy | Download