| Literature DB >> 33842704 |
Rexford Akrong1, Stephen G Mbogoh1, Patrick Irungu1.
Abstract
Market participation is critical to smallholder agricultural production because it stimulates increased productivity and enhances poverty alleviation. Accessibility to high value markets and participation by small-scale mango farmers in these markets in Southern Ghana are low and have received little attention on both policy and academic fronts. This study analyzed the factors that drive smallholder farmers in Ghana to participate in high value mango markets in Southern Ghana. A multistage random sampling technique was used to select 224 mango-producing households. A triple hurdle model was used in the study to capture a 3-step decision-making process. The results from the estimation of the triple hurdle model showed that participation in high value markets was influenced by education, household income, farming experience, ownership of a motorized transport (tricycle) and a radio, trust, distance to road, certification and access to credit. The level of participation in the export markets was determined by household size, household income, farming experience, distance to tarmacked roads and price. The study recommends intensive education and training to capacitate smallholder farmers to enable them to understand and meet the requirements of high value markets. Also, the farmers should be given access to credit and transaction-costs-reducing assets to enhance their participation in high value markets. Finally, certification should be duly encouraged among smallholder mango farmers to ease their access to and participation in high value mango markets.Entities:
Keywords: High value markets; Level of participation; Mango; Market participation
Year: 2021 PMID: 33842704 PMCID: PMC8020427 DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e06543
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Heliyon ISSN: 2405-8440
Variables that influence access to and the level of participation in high value mango markets by small-scale farmers in Southern Ghana and the Expected Signs for Coefficients.
| Variable code | Factors | Measurement | Expected sign | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hurdle 1 | Hurdle 2 | Hurdle 3 | |||
| Education | Education of respondent in years | Continuous | + | + | + |
| Hhsize | Number of household members | Continuous | +/- | +/- | +/- |
| Income | Average monthly income of household in GHS | Continuous | +/- | + | + |
| Experience | Number of years of farming mango | Continuous | + | + | + |
| Credit | Access to credit | Dummy: 1 = yes 0 = no | + | ||
| OwnTrans | Ownership of means of transporting mangoes | Dummy: 1 = yes 0 = no | + | + | + |
| Distance | Distance to the nearest tarred road in km | Continuous | +/- | +/- | +/- |
| Treedensity | Total number of trees per acre | Continuous | - | - | - |
| Cert | Certification | Dummy: 1 = yes 0 = no | + | ||
| Radio | Ownership of a working radio | Dummy: 1 = yes 0 = no | + | + | + |
| Trust | Trust level | Dummy: 1 = yes 0 = otherwise | + | + | + |
| Price | Price offered at channels | Continuous | + | ||
| Region | Location of farmer | Dummy: 1 = Eastern 0 = Greater Accra | - | - | - |
Selected household and farm characteristics comparing participants and non-participants of high-value mango markets.
| Variables | Description of variables | High-value participants n = 122 | Non-participants n = 102 | t-test | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean (A) | Standard deviation | Mean (B) | Standard deviation | Difference (A-B) | t-value | ||
| Head education | Education level of household head (years of schooling) | 9.20 | 0.41 | 8.39 | 0.52 | 0.81 | -1.24 |
| Household size | Total family size (number) | 4.96 | 0.19 | 5.48 | 0.24 | -0.52 | 1.75 ∗ |
| Household income | Total annual income of household (GH¢) | 14221.38 | 1315.81 | 8637.33 | 977.53 | 5548.05 | -3.30 ∗∗∗ |
| Credit access | Access to agricultural credit (1 = yes, 0 = no) | 0.59 | .04 | 0.08 | .03 | 0.51 | -9.36 ∗∗∗ |
| Farming experience | Number of years of producing mango (years) | 8.56 | 0.35 | 10 | 0.55 | -1.44 | 2.28∗∗ |
| Tree density | Number of trees per acre of mango | 38.85 | 0.91 | 39.10 | 1.16 | -0.25 | 0.18 |
| Price | Current price of mango (GH¢) | 2.06 | 0.063 | 1.07 | 0.0265 | 0.99 | -13.64∗∗∗ |
| Tricycle | Ownership of a tricycle (1 = yes, 0 = no) | 0.25 | 0.04 | 0.05 | 0.02 | 0.20 | -4.18∗∗∗ |
| Trust level | Trust level between a farmer and a buyer (1 = high, 0 = low) | 0.78 | 0.04 | 0.43 | 0.05 | 0.35 | -5.68∗∗∗ |
| Distance to road | Distance to nearest tarmac road (Km) | 9.91 | 0.90 | 9.61 | 1.19 | 0.3 | -0.21 |
| Certification | Whether a farmer has Globa lGAP certification (1 = yes, 0 = no) | 0.78 | 0.04 | 0.16 | 0.04 | 0.62 | -11.75 ∗∗∗ |
| Radio | Whether a farmer has a working radio (1 = yes, 0 = no) | 0.84 | 0.03 | 0.89 | 0.03 | -0.05 | 1.21 |
| Region | Location of a farmer (1 = Eastern Region 0 = Greater Accra Region) | 0.90 | 0.03 | 0.74 | 0.04 | 0.16 | -3.34∗∗∗ |
Note: ∗, ∗∗ and ∗∗∗ indicate 10%, 5% and 1% significance levels respectively.
Maximum likelihood estimates of factors that influence access to and the level of participation in high-value mango markets.
| Variable | Hurdle 1 | Marginal effects | Hurdle 2 | Marginal effects | Hurdle 3 | Marginal effects |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Years of schooling | -0.010 | -0.002 | 0.160∗∗ | 0.0316 | 0.0213 | 0.005 |
| (0.024) | (0.071) | (0.040) | ||||
| Household size | 0.007 | 0.002 | 0.101 | 0.020 | -0.063∗ | -0.015 |
| (0.050) | (0.080) | (0.035) | ||||
| Household income | 0.374∗∗ | 0.083 | 0.174 | 0.035 | 0.339∗∗∗ | 0.079 |
| (0.150) | (0.224) | (0.096) | ||||
| Farming experience | -0.074∗∗∗ | -0.016 | 0.0172 | 0.003 | 0.054∗∗∗ | 0.012 |
| (0.027) | (0.047) | (0.019) | ||||
| Tree density | -0.0007 | -0.0001 | -0.011 | -0.002 | -0.0003 | -0.00008 |
| (0.010) | (0.015) | (0.009) | ||||
| Tricycle (Yes) | 0.890∗∗ | 0.199 | -0.070 | -0.014 | 0.196 | 0.046 |
| (0.380) | (0.347) | (0.174) | ||||
| Trust level (High) | 0.324 | 0.072 | 1.601∗∗∗ | 0.317 | 0.127 | 0.030 |
| (0.249) | (0.611) | (0.274) | ||||
| Distance to road | 0.032∗∗∗ | 0.007 | -0.003 | -0.0006 | 0.024∗∗ | 0.006 |
| (0.011) | (0.023) | (0.012) | ||||
| Certification | 1.968∗∗∗ | 0.439 | ||||
| (0.277) | ||||||
| Radio | -0.242 | -0.054 | 0.746∗∗ | 0.148 | 0.039 | 0.009 |
| (0.351) | (0.372) | (0.207) | ||||
| Credit access | 1.689∗∗∗ | 0.336 | ||||
| (0.487) | ||||||
| Price | -0.571∗∗ | -0.132 | ||||
| (0.276) | ||||||
| Region | -0.562∗ | -0.125 | -3.133∗∗∗ | -0.621 | -0.665∗∗ | -0.154 |
| (0.320) | (0.839) | (0.299) | ||||
| Constant | -3.338∗∗ | -4.118∗ | -1.297 | |||
| (1.342) | (2.489) | (1.196) | ||||
| Rho_12 | 0.193 | |||||
| (0.431) | ||||||
| Rho_13 | -0.081 | |||||
| (0.354) | ||||||
| Rho_23 | 0.908∗∗ | |||||
| (0.421) | ||||||
| LR | 223.37∗∗∗ | |||||
| Log likelihood | -169.621 | |||||
| Observations | 224 | 122 | 50 |
Note: ∗, ∗∗ and ∗∗∗ indicate 10%, 5% and 1% significance levels respectively. Standard errors in parentheses.