unequal participation of smallholder farmers in coffee certification programs in central kenya

Unequal participation of smallholder farmers in coffee certification programs in Central Kenya

Kirumba, E.G., Mithoefer, D., Gassner, A., Pinard, F.

CAFNET PROJECT – ICRAF/CIRAD

29th MARCH 2011

Introduction Certification offers alternative governance (Raynolds

et al., 2007)

Potential for premiums, better prices, market visibility

8% of green coffee certified: fair trade, rainforest alliance, Utz certified e.t.c. (Giovannucci, 2010).

Concerns about exclusion of producers & imbalances of power (Swinnen and Maertens, 2007; Sexsmith & Potts, 2009)

In Kenya, coffee certification relatively new

1st certification schemes in 2005: Fair trade, CAFÉ, UTZ

Introduction cont’d…

Very little done on certification

Moderate price increases, better cooperative organization, markets access (Kamau et al., 2009, Pflaeger, 2009)

Gaps exist: What are the governance strategies? Do farmers self select or are pre-selected? What are the key determinants?

Materials and Methods

Materials and Methods cont’d ….

Tekangu cooperative society: 3200 farmers

Utz certification in 2008/2009 coffee season. Study done same period.

Certified farmers: 2176, Non-certified farmers: 1024

Sample size: 150 farmers. 75 per category

Simple random sampling

Finite population correction: <5%

Data collection: FGDs, informal interviews,

questionnaires & lit

Data analysis: descriptives, inferential statistics, multi dimensional scaling (MDS), regression analysis

Source: Field Survey (FGD)

RESULTS

Top down strategy Buyers interface between coop & international buyers

Write proposals for funding to donors

Select cooperative : based on quality, friendship, kinship

Convince coop officials: promise of high prices

Idea floated during AGM, <5% attendance, passed

Pre-selection: ‘A’ (good) and ‘B’ (poor) farmers selected

Promoter farmers identified & trained

Train fellow farmers

Suggested determinants of inclusionVariable Variable definition Expected

sign

Coffee income 1 = Yes, 0 = No +

Hired labour 1 = Yes, 0 = No +

Age of HHH Years +/-

Formal schooling No of years in school +

Family labour Number of HH adults +

Farming main occupation

1 = Yes, 0 = No +

Coffee production Annual cherry prod in Kgs

+

Trees on farm No of trees +

Inputs use Freq of chemicals & fertilizer use annually

+

Access to credit 1 = Yes, 0 = No +

Access to training 1 = Yes, 0 = No +

Access to extension 1 = Yes, 0 = No +

Farm size Total land size in acres +

Variable selection from suggested dets.

Comparisons between certified & non-certified farmers

 Variables Non-certified (N=75) Certified (N=75) Chi-

squareNo. % No. %

Access to credit

Yes 25 33.3 62 82.7 37.47***

No 50 66.7 13 17.3

Hired labour

Yes 39 52 66 88 23.14***

No 36 48 9 12

Extension

Yes 54 72 67 89.3 7.22***

No 21 28 8 10.7

Key: ns= not significant; * = significant at p<0.1; ** = significant at p<0.05; ***= significant at p<0.01

Variables Non-certified

(N=75) Certified (N=75)

Mean SD Mean SD T-statistic

Age 56.12 14.05 57.56 12.91 0.65 ns

Years in school 10.08 2.75 11.53 2.32 3.50***

Family labour 1.97 1.2 2.39 1.15 2.16**

Farm size 0.55 0.81 0.62 1.02 1.21 ns

Production (Kgs/yr)

246.84 399.57 943.15 966.65 5.77***

Trees on farm 22.67 25.23 34.47 35.74 2.34**

Inputs use 1.79 1.03 5.32 1.71 15.33***

Prices (Ksh./Kgs.) 29 33Key: ns= not significant; * = significant at p<0.1; ** = significant at p<0.05; ***= significant at p<0.01

Comparisons of certified vs. non-certified farmers

Key determinants of inclusion into certification

Variable β S.E. Wald df Sign. Exp(β)

Access to credit 1.22 0.59 4.24 1 0.04 3.38

Inputs 1.12 0.22 25.80 1 0.00 3.07

Trees on farm 0.03 0.01 9.46 1 0.00 1.03

Hired labour 0.36 0.67 0.29 1 0.59 1.44

Schooling 0.11 0.14 0.65 1 0.42 1.12

Family labour -0.28 0.29 0.93 1 0.34 0.75

Age 0.02 0.02 0.65 1 0.42 1.02

Extension 0.43 0.72 0.35 1 0.55 1.53

Farm size -0.72 0.40 3.26 1 0.07 0.49

Constant -6.53 2.27 8.24 1 0.00 0.00

Key: β (odds ratio); S.E: (standard error); Exp (β): (exponential beta); Wald: wald statistic; df: degree of freedom

Conclusions

Certification focuses on ‘good’ farmers with pre-enabling conditions

Pre-selection done to guarantee win-win situation

Interactive participation (acceptance, ownership, sustainability)

Training & information access for farmers – choices & self selection

Acknowlegement CAFNET project, IFRA & French Embassy for

funding

Supervision & guidance: Dagmar, Fabrice, Anja

Farmers, Tekangu cooperative officials, buyer representatives