Determinants of smallholder’s farmers’ adoption of improved coffee varieties in southwest Ethiopia

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-7878627/v1

Download PDF

Research Article

Determinants of smallholder’s farmers’ adoption of improved coffee varieties in southwest Ethiopia

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7878627/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

You are reading this latest preprint version

Coffee is an important cash crop produced by many Ethiopian farmers and has a significant influence on the households and country's economy and employment opportunities. The objective of this study was to identify improved coffee variety distributed in the study area and factors determining smallholder farmers’ adoption of improved coffee varieties. It was conducted at Shishoende, Gimbo, Yeki and Debub-Bench districts of southwest Ethiopia region. Coffee is produced in the study area by majority allocating large area of land in home garden and semi-forest. Households in the study area produce a mean coffee bean yield of 189.63kg and mean income of 53,772.49 ETB in 2016 E.C. Improved coffee varieties are adopted by majorities 63.5% of the sample households that distributed by research center, district agricultural office, universities, NGOS and private investor. Varieties disseminated in the area includes 74110, 74112, Gesha, K-one, Catimore, 7451, Robusta and F-59. Farmers in the study area evaluate varieties they demand based on yield advantage, Fast growth, wider canopy, early maturity of cherry, cherry quality and consumer demand, disease and pest resistance and have indicated their perception differences between varieties. Distance from market, coffee production experience and extension agent contact positively and age of household head negatively affect farmers adoption of improved coffee varieties. Local government, research centers, should work on accessing disease resistant, more productive improved coffee varieties for farmer in the area. It need much researches for highlands with higher elevation and lowlands with very low elevation.

Adopter

Binary Logistic regression

improved varieties

Technology

Coffee is grown in over 70 countries and contributes a significant percentage of their export earning; however, 45 coffee-producing countries account for more than 97 percent of global output [1]. Agriculture is extremely important to Ethiopia's economy; however, the coffee sub-sector of agricultural production has a significant influence on the country's economy. Globally, Ethiopia is the fifth largest coffee producer in the world and largest producer of coffee in sub-Saharan Africa. The coffee agribusiness sector also has huge opportunities for income generation, poverty alleviation, and employment in Ethiopia. Moreover, it is the driving force of the economy, ecology, and socio-cultural life of people; and about 5.2 million households have participated in coffee production activities; and over 25 million people (25% of the Ethiopian population) are engaged in coffee production, distribution, trading, processing, exporting, and other support and downstream activities [2]. Approximately one-quarter of Ethiopia's population is dependent on coffee cultivation, processing, and marketing, either directly or indirectly [1].

Arabica coffee is the most important source of foreign currency earnings and accounts for up to 35 percent of export earnings and 4–5% of total GDP for Ethiopia [3]. Even coffee is known for being an exportable item and a cash crop for farmers, but its consumption by producers and within the country is not insignificant. In the culture of Ethiopia, the socio-cultural value of coffee is not less than its economic contribution. Coffee production were an ancient practice in Ethiopia; however, the current production and productivity level was not grown equally in the history of coffee cultivation. The lands allocated for coffee cultivation are increasing from time to time, and the productivity of coffee are also increasing. In Ethiopia, 764,863.16 ha of land was set aside for coffee cultivation, yielding 494,574.36 tons with an average productivity of 0.64 tons ha-1 in the 2018/19 and in 2020/21, 856,591.99 ha of land had been allocated for coffee production, and 584,789.569 tons of yield were received with an average productivity of 0.683 tons ha-1 in the Meher Season [1,3].

Hence, more than 95% of the total volume of coffee produced in Ethiopia is contributed by the smallholders, whose average holding size is less than one hectare, with low average productivity ranging from 200 to 250 kg /ha [4]. The productivity of coffee in Ethiopia are at its lower level still now, and the average green coffee bean yield per hectare is 0.683 tons ha-1 per year, which is by far lower than the world average and the average of Brazil, 0.8 tons and 1.3 tons ha − 1, respectively [3]. This might be attributed to different physical, biological, and manmade factors; one of which is the lack of high yielding varieties, diseases, insect pest, poor access to market information, lack of physical infrastructure, lack of improved coffee variety, and poor extension services [5]. In addition, poor management practices, low soil fertility and poor pricing, lack of improved coffee management practice, lower knowledge, and climate change and variability also negatively affect the productivity of coffee [3].

Coffee production in Ethiopia is predominantly characterized by a traditional farm management system, limited use of improved coffee technology, like improved coffee varieties, fertilizers, and pesticides, coupled with a manual coffee cultivation system and drying method, which resulted in low coffee yield in Ethiopia compared to other countries [3]. In improving coffee production and productivity in the country, technological adoption is needed. Many research centers and institutes have tested and released many coffee production technologies which improve the production system in the country and productivity within the country, however the adoption level of farmers varied and depended on different factors. Technological progress happens when new and higher-performing improved technologies, including improved varieties, are used by farmers. In ensuring technology-induced coffee productivity growth, coffee research centers have developed several improved coffee varieties and related production technologies [6].

The improved coffee varieties released by research offer new opportunities for farmers because of their unique characteristics of high cup quality, higher yield, and huge tolerance to coffee disease than the traditional cultivars. Improved varieties of coffee yield 1.2 to 2.6 tons/ha at research stations and 0.7 to 2.1 tons/ha at farmers' fields, despite the potential, the national coffee yield remains below 0.7 tons per hectare over the last decade [6]. An increase in the number of newly released varieties, increased the adoption of farmers, and resulted in yield increases that may not wholly be attributed to varietal improvement; their steady increase in the past four decades provide further evidence that there is potential for further improvement in productivity [7]. Using improved coffee varieties alone cannot ensure an increase in productivity; it should be accompanied by good agronomic management practices. These improved practices complement the improved varieties to produce optimum sustainable yields with suitable agro-ecology, planting hole size, spacing, weed management, fertilizer application, shade tree plantation, and other management practices.

Adoption of improved coffee varieties by smallholder farmers is determined by the accessibility and availability of improved varieties of farmers' interest in the area, adaptability and productivities of varieties in the area, disease resistance, and others. Different studies by many scholars indicate that various socio-economic, demographic, institutional, and other factors affect farmers’ adoption of improved coffee varieties [2,7,8,22]. Farmers have many preference trait to compare between varieties that affect the adoption of improved coffee varieties, include yield, disease resistance, early maturity, faster growth, demand for product, and others [9,22].

Southwest Ethiopia is the origin of coffee Arabica, and the area are known for its coffee biodiversity, and coffee still exists as a shrub in the forest. The Southwest region of Ethiopia is contributing a significant amount of coffee next to Oromiya and SNNPR to the national market and are known with its brand organic coffee types, which fetch a premium price, and playing a remarkable role in the world market [3]. Like other parts of the country, coffee production in the area are not much supported with coffee production technologies. The southwest part of Ethiopia has suitable altitude, optimum temperature, sufficient labor, fertile and sufficient land for coffee plantation, and to get the potential product output from it. It can sustainably produce and supply fine specialty coffee to the national and international markets. The organic nature and availability of the forest make it easy for coffee production and national and international demand for the product, increasing interest of the private sector with high investment potential, availability of improved varieties in the research center, and high support by both regional and federal governments for earning foreign currency are the best opportunities to produce coffee in the area.

However, even though southwest Ethiopia is birth birthplace of coffee Arabica, much studies have not been conducted in the study area, that indicates the types of improved coffee varieties distributed in the area, adoption level of improved coffee varieties by farmers, and factor determining households’ adoption of improved coffee varieties. Coffee plantation at the smallholder farmers' level looks like lower technology adoption and application of recommended technology were lower. Also there is insufficiencies of information indicating farmers perception about improved coffee varieties distributed in the area. So, it is necessary to assess the type of improved coffee varieties distributed in the area, the adoption level of smallholder farmers of improved coffee varieties, and the factors determining households’ adoption of improved coffee varieties in the area. The objective of this study was to identify improved coffee variety distributed in the study area and factor determining smallholder farmers’ adoption of improved coffee varieties.

2.1. Description of the study area

This study was conducted in Gimbo, Shishinda, Yeki, and Debub bench districts of the southwest Ethiopia region (Fig. 1). Shishoende is located at a distance of 56 km from Bonga, 556 km away from Addis Ababa. Geographically, it lies at 70 20’ N and 35086’ E. The altitude ranged from 1350 to 2200 meters above sea level. Wareta and Agaro kebele were selected for this study from 31 kebeles of Shishoende districts, and their altitude was 1780m above sea level. The annual rainfall of the district ranged from 1400 to 2000 mm, and rainfall shortage occurred on the months between December and March. Mixed farming systems with coffee and Enset-based farming systems are practiced in the district, and Enset, coffee, maize, and Teff are mainly cultivated in the area. The annual mean temperature of the district ranged from 18°C to 22°C.

Gimbo district lies within 07° 00’- 7° 25’ N Latitude and 35° 55’- 36° 37’ E Longitude. Michiti and Kuti kebeles were selected for this study, and their altitude is 1840m above sea level. The topography of the district is characterized by plain land and sloping and rugged areas. The mean annual rainfall ranged from 1710 mm to 1892 mm. The mean temperature ranged from 18.1°C to 19.4°C. Enset, coffee, maize, rice and tea were the major crop grown and cultivated by farmers in the district. Yeki district were one of the selected district from the Sheka zone for this study, and geographically it lies at 7° 14’ 60.00” N latitude and 35° 24’ 59.99” E longitude. It is situated at an altitude of 1200 meters above sea level, representing a lowland altitude and characterized by hot, humid conditions with an average annual rainfall of 1559 mm and a mean maximum and minimum temperature of 30.23 ºC and 16.09 ºC, respectively. Fide and Erimichi were the selected kebeles for this study from 22 kebeles of the district. The main economic activities of the people in this area are producing crops and fruits such as maize, wheat, coffee, banana, enset, ginger, avocado, mango, papaya, sugarcane, tomatoes, khat, potato, turmeric, and cabbage.

Debub bench district were one of the districts in Bench-Sheko zone selected for this study, located 589 km south west of Addis Ababa, and its altitude is between 1300m and 2250m above sea level. The district have 29 kebeles with 2 urban and 27 rural kebeles. Keberta and Qite were the selected kebeles for this study. Due to a high altitudinal range, the area is characterized by diverse agroclimatic distribution and vegetation cover. This district is divided into two agro-ecological zones, namely Dega and Weynadaga, which account for about 82% and 18% of the total area, respectively. The annual rainfall distribution in the Woreda varies between 900mm to 1600mm. The minimum temperature in the Woreda ranges from 11 to 28 ºC. The Woreda is bounded on the south by Meinitshasha, on the west by Guraferda, on the north by Sheko, on the north east by semen bench, on the east by she bench, and on the south east by menit Goldiya Woreda. The major crop cultivated by farmers include maize, coffee, banana, orange, onion, and common bean.

2.2. Sampling Techniques and Sample Size Determination

Multiple-stage sampling was employed to select representative sample districts, kebeles, and households. Two sample districts, Shishoende and Gimbo districts from Kaffa zone, Yeki district from sheka zone, and Debub bench district from Bench Sheko district selected purposely by their coffee production potential. Two sample kebeles were also selected from each district: Wareta and Agaro from Shishinda, Michiti and Kuti from Gimbo, Fide and Erimchi from Yeki, and Keberta and Qite kebeles from Debub Bench district selected purposely by their coffee production potential for this study. The sample household for this study was selected by a simple random sampling method from a list of households in each selected kebele.

The size of the sample household for this study were determined by using the formula which was developed by Yamane [10]: by taking the precision level at 94% and error level at 6%.

n = \(\:\frac{N}{1+N{\left(e\right)}^{2}}\) =252

The total sample households for this study were 252, selected from sample kebeles proportional to households in that kebele.

Table 1
Sample number of households from selected Kebeles.
District	Kebele	Number of household selected	Percent
Shishoende	Wareta	32	12.7
Shishoende	Agaro	32	12.7
Gimbo	Michiti	34	13.5
Gimbo	Kuti	29	11.5
Debub Bench	Qite	31	12.3
Debub Bench	Keberta	30	11.9
Yeki	Erimich	32	12.7
Yeki	Fide	32	12.7

2.3. Data Sources and Methods of Collection

Primary and secondary sources of data were used to acquire relevant information for this study. Primary data were collected through focus group discussions, key informant interviews, and individual household survey interview. Semi-structured and structured questionnaires were used to gather the primary data from randomly selected farmers (Appendix I). The socio-economic characteristics of households, institutional factors, participation in coffee production and their production system, size of coffee plantation, yield and income from coffee, improved coffee varieties distributed, farmers’ perception about varieties, and other necessary information were collected from households using structured and semi-structured questionnaires. Secondary data collected from published and unpublished material, annual reports of some government offices, and other necessary information’s were collected.

2.4. Method of data analysis

In order to realize the objectives of the study, two analytical tools were employed, namely, descriptive and econometric models.

Descriptive statistics

The sample respondents’ demographic and socio-economic conditions, participation on coffee production, type of improved coffee varieties, farmers’ perception on improved coffee varieties, and adoption of improved coffee varieties were analyzed using descriptive statistics like mean, standard deviations, frequency, and percentage by using SPSS and STATA packages.

Econometric Model

Determinants of Improved coffee variety adoption

To estimate factors determining the adoption of improved coffee varieties by coffee producers were analyzed using by binary logistic model. The dependent variable was whether the household adopted improved coffee varieties or not. The dependent variable is binary as 1 when the household is an adopter and 0 when not an adopter.

The model is specified mathematically by:

Pi = E(Y = 1/xi ) = 1/1 + e-z = ez/1 + ez

Where Pi represents the probability of adoption of improved coffee varieties, Yi = 1, and exp (Zi) is the odds ratio e to the power Zi.

Pi = 1/1 + e-Z

Where, Zi = β0 + βiXi.

The probability of a respondent adopting improved coffee varieties in the above equation and not adopting is given by the equation below.

Pi = 1-pi/xi = 1/1 + eZi

If Pi is the probability of an adopter, then the non-adopter is (1 − Pi). So, 1 − Pi = 1/1 + eZi and

Pi/1-pi = = eZi=

Pi/1-Pi is an odds ratio that favors adopters as a result. That is the probability that a particular farmer participates in the adoption of improved coffee varieties and does not participate in the adoption.

Then, taking the log to both sides.

Y = ln (Pi/1-Pi ) = Zi = β0 + β1X1 + β2X2 + β3X3... + βiXi + Ui

The above equation was the binary logistic model, which was regressed.

Table 2
Hypothesized variables and their expected effects
Variable	Type	Measurement	Expected effect
Dependent variable
Adoption Improved coffee varieties	Dummy	1 if adopter of Improved coffee varieties, 0 otherwise
Independent variable
Sex of HH	Dummy	1 if male and 0 if female	+
Age of HH	Continuous	household head age in years	+/-
Educational status	Continuous	household head educational status in years	+
Family size	Continuous	Number of family member	+
Land size	Continuous	Area of land holding in hectare	+
Livestock size	Continuous	Total livestock owning in TLU	-
Distance from market	Continuous	Distance of market from households home in kilometer	+
Distance from FTC	Continuous	Distance of home from FTC in kilometer	-
Coffee production experience	Continuous	Years of coffee production participation	+
Logarithm of total income	Continuous	Percent of annual income	+
Frequency of extension agent contact	Dummy	1 = household contacted extension 0 = no contact	+
Coffee union membership	Dummy	1 = member of coffee union 0 = not member	+

3.1. Socio-economic characteristics of the sample household

The majorities, 96.03% of the sample households, were male-headed, and only 3.97% were female-headed. The marital status of the sample households indicate that 0.8% were single, the majority 96% were married, 2.4% were divorced, and 0.8% were widowed (Table 3). Coffee union membership has an effect on the adoption of improved coffee varieties and is significant at 1% significance level with a chi-square value of 47.68. Coffee union members are more adopters of improved coffee varieties than non-members of the coffee union, that members have more access to get improved coffee varieties than non-members.

Table 3
Dummy socioeconomic characteristics of sample households
Variables	Variables	Total sample (252)	Adopter (160)	Non-adopter (92)	Chi-square
sex	Male	242	156	86	2.479
sex	Female	10	4	6	2.479
Marital status	Single	2	2	0	2.375
	Married	242	152	90	2.375
	Divorced	6	4	2	2.375
	Widowed	2	2	0	2.375
Coffee union	Member	104	92	12	47.68***
Coffee union	Non-member	148	68	80	47.68***
Source: own survey 2024

The mean age of the sample household head was 46.33 years and had an average educational status of 5.03 years of schooling. The minimum and maximum family size of sample households was 1 and 13, respectively, with an average of 6 family members and the mean difference of adopter and non-adopter was not statistically significant. The mean land size of the sample household was 1.63 hectares, with adopters of improved coffee varieties having 2.05ha holdings and non-adopters having 0.89ha. The finding indicates that land holding of farmer is an important factor for the adoption of improved coffee varieties; farmers with larger size of land holding are adopter of improved coffee varieties compared with farmers with small size of land landholdings and similar with findings of [11]. There is a significant variation in livestock size between adopters of improved coffee varieties and non-adopters, the finding shows adopter have large livestock size compared to non-adopters similar to findings in northwestern Ethiopia [12]. Farmers accumulate their asset from coffee production on livestock that alternative non-seasonal agriculture in the area.

Table 4
Continuous socio-economic characteristics of sample household
Continuous variable	Total sample (252)		Adopter (160)		Non-adopter (92)		Sign.
Continuous variable	Mean	Sta. dev	Mean	Sta. dev	Mean	Sta. dev	Sign.
Age of household head	46.33	10.44	46.14	10.81	46.65	9.80	0.707
Educational Status HH	5.03	3.65	5.35	3.74	4.48	3.44	0.68
Family Size	6	2	6	2	6	2	0.517
Total Land size	1.63	1.47	2.05	1.52	0.89	1.01	0.000 ***
Livestock owning size (TLU)	2.12	1.7	2.49	1.72	1.48	1.46	0.000 ***
Distance from market	2.39	1.81	2.83	2.00	1.63	1.05	0.000 ***
Distance from farmer training center	1.88	0.833	1.94	0.83	1.77	0.83	0.127
Total annual income	118,908.29	93,715.84	144,493.12	104,329.62	74,412.93	45,320.18	0.000 ***
Experience of coffee production	11.76	8.38	15.12	6.05	5.91	8.69	0.000 ***
Frequency of extension contact	3.65	2.52	4.64	2.23	1.92	2.01	0.000 ***
Source: own survey 2024

Distance from the market is another important factor for the adoption of improved coffee varieties, and is significant at 1%. Farmers close to the market are less adopters of improved coffee varieties than farmers far from the market. Even market distance lowers farmer access to resource and technologies, but in study area plenty of land for coffee production was accessible too far from market. Farmers’ total annual income has significant effect on the adoption of improved coffee varieties at 1% significance level. Farmers who generate higher income are more adopters of improved coffee varieties than farmers who generate lower income and similar to findings at Jimma zone [11]. As coffee production was capital intensive for its better management, farmers that earn higher income are more producer of coffee and adopter of improved coffee varieties. The sample farmers have a mean of 11.76 years’ experience in coffee production, which was almost similar to findings at Jimma, said that 62.1% of sample households have been growing coffee for more than 20 years [13]. Farmers' experience in coffee production has an effect on the adoption of improved coffee varieties; more experienced farmers are more adopters of improved coffee varieties than less experienced farmers due to better know about varieties that better adopt in the area, productive, and disease resistant. Farmers contact the extension agent in the study area for improved variety needs, get advice on disease management, coffee management, compost utilization, seed and seedling production, and stumping. The frequency of extension agent contact affects the adoption of improved coffee varieties at 1% significance level. Farmers who frequently contact extension agents are adopters of improved coffee varieties than those who do not frequently contact and similar to findings in northwestern Ethiopia [12].

3.2. Coffee production

Coffee are one of the most commonly produced crop types in the southwest Ethiopia region, about 78.6% sample households produce coffee, which was less than the finding in SNNPR, Ethiopia 98.1% of households produce coffee [14]. The main reason for non-participation of coffee producer were land shortage, capital and labor shortage, agro-ecological factor, and coffee disease occurrence. Coffee at the smallholder farmers' level in the southwest Ethiopia region produced in home garden and semi-forest. Out of the sample coffee producer households, 17.17% produce coffee only on their home garden, while 46.46% produce semi-forest coffee, and 36.37% produce coffee both in their home garden and semi-forest. The mean total land occupied by coffee ranges from 0.13 to 9ha with a mean of 0.828ha per household, which was less than the finding of [6], which found that the sample households produce coffee on 1.67ha of land. The size of garden coffee ranges from 0.01 to 1.5ha with a mean of 0.148ha, while the size of semi forest coffee ranges from 0.13 to 9ha with a mean of 0.68 ha per household. There is a variation of the mean area of coffee plantation per households between the sample districts, and it is statistically significant at 1% significance level. Households at Debub-Bench have higher total coffee plantation size than others districts (Table 5). The variation of coffee plantation size between sample districts was due to variation of availability of lands, expansion of other agricultural practices that compute land, and expansion of settlements.

Table 5
Mean land size garden and semi-forest coffee of sample districts
Type of coffee	Total sample	Shishoende	Gimbo	Debub-bench	Yeki	Sig
Garden coffee	0.148	0.187^ab	0.215^a	0.122^ab	0.066^b	0.000
Semi forest coffee	0.68	0.45^b	0.55^b	1.297^a	0.449^b	0.000
Total	0.828	0.64^b	0.76^b	1.42^a	0.51^b	0.000
Source: own survey 2024

Households in the study area produce a total mean coffee bean product of 189.63 kg or 568.89 kg of black dry cherry or 1137.78 kg of red cherry in 2016 E.C. Out of the total coffee bean product, 37.17 kg of clean coffee bean were gained from garden coffee and 152.46 kg of clean coffee bean were from semi-forest coffee. However they generate a mean income of 53,772.49 ETB in the 2023/2024 production year, which was more than what was found in the Jimma zone; they generated a mean income of 36,218.47ETB from coffee production [11].

3.3. Adoption of improved Coffee Varieties

The finding from the focus group discussion, key informant interview, and individual household survey interview indicates that many improved coffee varieties were distributed in the study area. Out of the sample households, about 63.5% have adopted improved coffee varieties; however, 36.5% used only local landrace (Fig. 2). It was more than finding at Jimma zone, said 53.56% of coffee producer adopted improved coffee varieties [11]. The results of this study disagree with the findings of at southern Ethiopia, which found that 67.2% was dependent on local varieties and only a small percent of coffee producers use improved coffee varieties [15]. It is also more than finding in north-western Ethiopia, only 29.82% were adopters of improved coffee varieties [16]. Adoption of improved coffee varieties in the study area was more than the finding of [6], which found that the intensity of improved coffee adoption was 56%. However, the finding was less than adoption level at Mbinga and Mbozi Districts of Tanzania, found that 68.12% was adopter of improved coffee varieties [22]. There is a variation of improved coffee variety adoption between districts, 71.88% of Shishoende district, 66.67% of Gimbo district, 68.85% of Debub-bench district, and 46.87% of sample households at Yeki district were adopted improved coffee variety. There is a higher improved coffee variety adoption at the Shishoende district and a lower adoption at the Yeki district compared to each other. The variation of adoption level between districts were due to improved coffee varieties accessibility difference, coffee varieties variation due to agro-ecological difference, and farmers’ awareness level and varieties preference variation.

Source and accessibility of improved coffee varieties

There are multiple sources of improved coffee varieties for coffee producer farmers in the southwest Ethiopia region. The major source for 70.88% of the sample coffee producer was the agricultural office at the district and Kebele level (Table 6). The finding was similar to findings in western Ethiopia, the agricultural office is the main source of improved coffee varieties for producers [17]. The agricultural office collects coffee seed from selected disease-free coffee plants of farmers and distributes it to seedling producers. The secondary improved coffee varieties source for 17.26% of coffee producer was private investors that supply a significant percentage of improved seed or seedlings. The other source of improved varieties was the research center for 2.97% of coffee producer and the neighbor farmer for 8.9% of coffee producers.

Table 6
Source of improved coffee varieties
Source of improved coffee varieties	Frequency (N)	Percent (%)
Agricultural office	119	70.88
Research center	5	2.97
Private investor	29	17.26
Neighbor farmer	15	8.9

The main challenging issues related to adoption of improved coffee varieties was the availability and accessibility of the varieties of farmers interested in the area. The sample households was interviewed on the availability of improved coffee varieties of their interest, 63.5% said it is available in the area, and 36.5% said that they do not have the type of improved coffee varieties they interested in their area. Also they have asked about the accessibility of the amount of improved varieties they want, about 61.5% said they got the type of improved coffee varieties in the required amount and time, while 38.5% didn’t get the required amount on time.

3.4. Type of improved coffee varieties

The results of the survey indicate that 74110, 74112, Gesha, K-one, Catimore (J-19&J-21), 7451, Rubosta, and F-59 were dominantly distributed in the area, which is similar to findings of Zinabiu et al. (2017). However, we found 7440, 660, 75227 &74140 on the focus group discussion and key informant interview, but we haven’t found on the individual sample household survey. The most dominantly distributed variety were 74110, it found at 47.23% sample coffee producer plantation, which was similar to findings in southern, southwestern, and western Ethiopia; it was the most popularized variety in the area [11,14,17]. It is majorly adopted by households at the Shishoende and Gimbo districts and some of the Yeki districts due to it is highland coffee variety (Table 7). Gesha coffee varieties are the second dominant coffee variety in the area, it found at 29.64% of coffee producers' plantation. It is majorly utilized by households at Debub-bench and yeki districts and a small percentage in the Gimbo district, and is majorly utilized in the lowland areas of the study area. K-one was the third dominantly utilized improved coffee variety and was utilized by 11.05% of improved coffee variety user and was only utilized by households at the Debub-bench district supplied by Bebeka coffee state private investors. Catimore (j-19 &j-21) are also lowland varieties adopted by 5.5% adopter households in Debub-bench districts and majorly supplied by Bebeka coffee state investor. Another highland coffee variety, 74112, were utilized by 5.5% mainly found at the Gimbo district and supplied from the agricultural office (Table 7). Robusta variety is rarely found in the study area due to higher distribution and utilization of the Arabica variety in the study area. Robusta variety found only at 1.52% of improved varieties adopter plantations and is mainly distributed in the Debub-bench district. A very rarely distributed lowland variety in the study area was F-59 and 7454, adopted only by 0.5% of improved coffee variety adopters at the Yeki district supplied by the Teppi agricultural research center. The results of this study indicate that diversified improved coffee Arabica varieties are distributed in the study area, and it agrees with finding of [18], said that coffee Arabica from the southwestern part of Ethiopia have high genetic variability as revealed by several phenotypic and molecular studies.

Table 7
Frequency of improved coffee varieties users
Improved Coffee varieties	Shishoende (N)	Gimbo (N)	Debub-bench (N)	Yeki (N)	Total sample
Improved Coffee varieties	Shishoende (N)	Gimbo (N)	Debub-bench (N)	Yeki (N)	N	%
74110	46	33		15	94	47.23
Gesha		7	35	17	59	29.64
JBI-tepi (K-one)			22		22	11.05
74112		11			11	5.5
Catimore (j-19 &j-21)			11		11	5.5
Robusta			3		3	1.52
7454				1	1	0.5
F-59				1	1	0.5

3.5. Farmer’s perception of improved coffee varieties

Improved coffee variety have its own strength and weaknesses, coffee producer farmers have different perceptions of the coffee varieties they produce. The sample households have compared and evaluated coffee varieties on their plantation with local landrace and other varieties. They ranked from very poor to very good based on comparison criteria of yield advantage, fast growth, wider canopy, early maturity of cherry, bean quality and consumer demand, disease, and pest resistance [22], as indicated in (Table 8). The majority, 56.7% of the sample households, said 74110 variety was good interims of yield, which was similar with findings of [9], said that farmer prefer high yielding varieties and improvement in productivity per hectare of a coffee variety increases the farmer’s preference for this variety. About 66% said good interims of fast growth, 46.3% said good interims of wider canopy cover, 51.5% said good interims of early maturity of cherry, 49.5% said good interims of bean quality, and consumer demand. It is one of the most widely distributed and demanded varieties in many parts of Ethiopia [14]. However, the only weakness of 74110 in the study area interims of farmers’ perception, was disease and pest resistance; the majority, 52.6% said poor interims of disease and pest resistance (Table 8).

Table 8
Farmers Perception on improved crop varieties
Coffee variety	Comparison criteria	Very good (%)	Good (%)	Medium (%)	Poor (%)	Very poor (%)
74110	Yield advantage	11.3	56.7	27.8	3	1
	Fast growth	11.3	66	17.5	4	1
	Wider canopy	4.1	46.3	43.2	6.1	0
	Early maturity of cherry	18.5	51.5	28.8	1.1	0
	Bean quality and Consumer demand	3.2	49.5	39.1	8.2	0
	Disease and pest resistance	3.1	13.4	26.8	52.6	4.1
74112	Yield advantage	63.6	27.3	0	0	9.1
	Fast growth	27.3	45.4	18.2	0	9.1
	Wider canopy	36.4	54.5	9.1	0	0
	Early maturity of cherry	36.4	54.5	0	9.1	0
	Cherry quality and Consumer demand	27.3	45.4	18.2	9.1	0
	Disease and pest resistance	0	18.2	36.4	18.2	27.3
K-One	Yield advantage	39.2	47.8	13	0	0
	Fast growth	39.2	52.2	8.6	0	0
	Wider canopy	21.7	69.6	8.6	0	0
	Early maturity of cherry	21.7	78.3	0	0	0
	Cherry quality and Consumer demand	21.7	69.6	8.6	0	0
	Disease and pest resistance	0	0	13	69.6	17.4
Gesha	Yield advantage	35	44.4	20.6	0	0
	Fast growth	23.8	61.9	14.3	0	0
	Wider canopy	25.4	58.7	15.9	0	0
	Early maturity of cherry	12.7	69.8	17.5	0	0
	Cherry quality and Consumer demand	20.6	52.4	22.2	4.8	0
	Disease and pest resistance	6.3	3.2	19	52.4	0
Catimore	Yield advantage	27.3	54.5	18.2	0	0
	Fast growth	45.4	36.4	18.2	0	0
	Wider canopy	27.3	36.4	36.4	0	0
	Early maturity of cherry	18.2	54.5	27.3	0	0
	Cherry quality and Consumer demand	0	54.5	36.4	9.1	0
	Disease and pest resistance	0	0	18.2	54.5	27.3
F-59	Yield advantage	0	0	100	0	0
	Fast growth	100	0	0	0	0
	Wider canopy	100	0	0	0	0
	Early maturity of cherry	100	0	0	0	0
	Cherry quality and Consumer demand	0	100	0	0	0
	Disease and pest resistance	0	0	0	100	0
7454	Yield advantage	100	0	0	0	0
	Fast growth	100	0	0	0	0
	Wider canopy	0	100	0	0	0
	Early maturity of cherry	0	0	100	0	0
	Cherry quality and Consumer demand	100	0	0	0	0
	Disease and pest resistance	0	100	0	0	0
Source: Own survey 2024

Even 74112 was available on limited farmers' plantations, the majority of producer said it was good interims of yield, fast growth, wider canopy, early maturity of cherry and bean quality, and consumer demand, but medium in terms of disease and pest resistance (Table 8). K-one was one of the adopted improved coffee varieties in Debub-bench, and the majority of producers perceived that it was good in terms of yield, fast growth, wider canopy, early maturity of cherry and bean quality, and consumer demand, but poor in terms of disease and pest resistance. Farmers prefer disease-tolerant and coffee varieties that withstand environmental stressors and give stable yield [9]. Gesha coffee variety are second dominantly distributed variety and is also perceived as a good variety interims of yield, fast growth, wider canopy, early maturity of cherry and bean quality, and consumer demand; however it is poor in terms of disease and pest resistance (Table 8).

Catimore variety are perceived as good by the majority of adopters in terms of yield, fast growth and wider canopy, and bean quality and consumer demand. Catimore is good in early maturity of cherry; farmers prefer early maturing coffee varieties over those coffee varieties that take longer to start giving a normal yield [9]. However, poor interims to disease and pest resistance. The majority of adopter said that coffee plantation of improved varieties do not exist for long ages and the plant dies at higher higher-yielding stage.

3.4. Determinants of improved coffee varieties adoption

Binary logistics regression models were employed here to estimate those factors determining households' decision on the adoption of improved coffee varieties. The dependent variable is adoption of improved coffee varieties (if household was an adopter = 1, otherwise = 0). The estimates of the binary logistic regression fits the data well, and the likelihood ratio chi-square test statistic was statistically significant at 1% probability level, indicating that the coefficients of the model are jointly significant. The results of the binary logistic model indicate that out of twelve explanatory variables, four variables significantly affect the adoption of improved coffee varieties. Distance from market, coffee production experience, and frequency of extension agent contact positively affect improved coffee varieties adoption, and age of household head negatively affects. The pseudo R2 of the logit regression indicate that those explanatory variables explained 42.16% of the variation adoption of improved coffee varieties in the study area (Table 9).

Table 9
Binary logistic regression result
Variables	Odds Ratio	Coef .	St.Err.	Sig.
Constant	-0.0012	-6.673	5.43	0.219
Sex of HH	-0.644	-0.440	0.908	0.628
Age of HH	-0.951**	-0.050	0.022	0.024
Educational status	-0.954	-0.046	0.060	0.438
Family size	-0.907	-0.097	0.104	0.351
Land size	-0.750	-0.287	0.278	0.302
Livestock owning (TLU)	1.101	0.097	0.156	0.534
Distance from market	1.442***	0.366	0.123	0.003
Distance from FTC	1.047	0.046	0.254	0.856
Coffee production experience	1.152***	0.142	0.031	0.000
Lagarithm of total income	4.354	1.471	1.117	0.188
Frequency of extension agent contact	1.423**	0.353	0.152	0.021
Coffee union membership	1.589	0.463	0.499	0.353
No. of observation = 252	Prob > chi2 = 0.0000		Log likelihood = -95.665
LR chi2(12) = 139.44	Pseudo R² = 0.4216		Log likelihood = -95.665

***, **, and * are significant at 1%, 5%, and 10% significance levels, respectively.

Age of household head (AGE)

Age of household head has a negative and significant relationship with the likelihood of adoption of improved coffee varieties at 5% significance level. The odds-ratio disfavor adopting improved coffee varieties other factors kept constant, an increase of household head age by one year decreases the likelihood of adoption of improved coffee varieties by a factor of 0.951 (Table 9). The finding indicates that younger household heads are more adopters than older household heads. It might be due to younger farmers having access to information, knowledge, and better awareness makes them adopt improved coffee varieties. The finding agrees with findings at Jimma zone, said that younger farmers are more likely to adopt improved coffee variety compared to older farmers due to risk risk-averting behavior of older farmers, which makes them to be reluctant to adopt new ideas and new technologies [13]. It is also in line with [19], there is a significant negative relationship of age with the probability of adopting improved maize varieties, which is consistent with the postulate that older farmers are stuck in their old ways and averse to innovating. It disagrees with [7], said that elder household head are more adopters of improved coffee varieties than younger household heads.

Distance from the market

The distance of the coffee plantation from the market has a significant and positive effect on household adoption of improved coffee varieties by 1% significance level. This indicates that farmers who have coffee plantation far from the market are more likely to adopt improved coffee varieties than those close to the market. Other factors being equal, an increase of the distance from market to coffee plantation increase by one kilometer increases the adoption of improved coffee varieties by a factor of 1.442 odds-ratio (Table 9). It might be due to availability large size of large-sized land far from the market, which is suitable for coffee plantation, making the farmer adopt improved coffee varieties. It disagrees with findings at Jimma and southern, there is a negative relation of distance from market and adoption of improved coffee varieties due to many farmers' seedling sources being market-based, as the farmers become far from the market, their access to inputs will be decreased, low access to technology and related information, and higher transportation cost [7,8,13]. Proximity to market increases farmers’ production for sale rather than for consumption [20].

Coffee production experience

The year of experience of coffee production has a positive and significant relationship with the likelihood of adoption of improved coffee varieties at 1% significance level. The odds-ratio favors adopting improved coffee varieties; other factors kept constant, an increase of one year in household on coffee production by one year increases the likelihood of adoption of improved coffee varieties by a factor of 1.152. The finding indicates that more experienced coffee farmers were more adopters of improved coffee varieties than less experienced coffee farmers. When farmers have more experience on coffee production, they have the capacity to select more productive and disease resistant varieties for the area. Coffee farm experience affects the decision of adopting modern agricultural technology positively [21].

Extension agent contact (EXTCONT)

The extension agent contact had positively and significantly influenced the likelihood of adoption of improved coffee varieties at 5% significance level. This result indicates that households that frequently contact extension agents are more likely to adopt improved coffee varieties than those that have no contact with extension agents. The odds ratio in favor of using improved coffee varieties increased by a factor of 1.423, when households have extension agent contact, that other variables were held constant (Table 9). Farmers who frequently access and use their advisory services have a higher likelihood of adopting improved technology than farmers who do not contact extension agents [2]. This agrees with findings in Jimma zone and northwestern Ethiopia, which states that the number of extension contacts increases farmers will able to update with the current and recent technology [8,12,21].

Coffee are produced in the southwest Ethiopia regions by the majority of households by allocating a large area of land. Farmers' coffee union membership, land holding size, livestock owning size, experience on coffee production, extension agent contact, distance from market, and total annual income have a significant relationship with households' adoption of improved coffee varieties. A significant percentage of households in the study area have adopted improved coffee varieties. The dominantly distributed and adopted improved coffee varieties include 74110, 74112, Gesha, K-one, Catimore, 7451, Robusta, and F-59. The agricultural office and private investor were the major suppliers of improved coffee varieties to producers in the study area. Adopters of improved coffee varieties perceive that 74110, 74112, Gesha, K-one, and Catimore varieties were good in terms of yield, fast growth, wider canopy, early maturity of cherry, bean quality, and consumer demand, but poor in terms of disease and pest resistance. Distance from market, coffee production experience, and frequency of extension agent contact positively affect improved coffee varieties adoption, and age of household head negatively affects household adoption.

Recommendation

The Southwest Ethiopia region was one potential area for coffee production, so it is important to use available opportunities on coffee production by using available technologies, especially improved coffee varieties available on research centers and private investors like Bebeka coffee state. It is also important for farmers to use the comparative advantage of improved coffee varieties yield, fast growth, wider canopy size, early maturity, bean quality, and consumer demand. Researchers at Bonga agricultural research center and Teppi agricultural research center should focus on improving of improved coffee varieties with lower disease and pest resistance majorly drawback for adopters. Researchers also find the prevention mechanism of coffee disease before its occurrence and control its transmission in larger area plantations. Accessibility of adaptive improved varieties for farmers is important, especially for lowland varieties for lowland areas should be focused on by research centers and district agricultural offices. Frequent extension agent contact with farmers is needed to get advice on coffee management and improved varieties supplied by the agricultural office.

This study was conducted by collecting data through individual household survey interview from sample smallholder farmers. Farmers have a limitation of recording their past years yield, income, actions and memorizing it was lower so they have a limitation of giving accurate information, they are giving by approximation.

ETB- Ethiopian Birr

FTC- Farmers Training Center

KM- Kilo Meter

TLU-Tropical Livestock Unit

Acknowledgement

We would like to thank Southwest Ethiopia Agricultural Research Institute; Bonga Agricultural Research Center for its logistic and facilitating all procedure of data collection, data analysis and until the final paper write-up. We have special thanks to Food System Resilient Program (FSRP) for registering and supporting this activity under agricultural Economics director.

Authors’ contribution

AA was conceptualized and designed this research work, who also conducted data collection, data entry, analysis and prepared the manuscript. TB contributed to the research by collecting field data, data entry, checking and commenting on manuscript. Both authors reviewed and approved the final version of the manuscript.

Funding

The authors did not receive any funding for this research

Clinical Trial: Not applicable

Data Availability

Data used for this study were available on researchers hand on form of SPSS data which collected from 252 farming households who used improved crop varieties and not. Data were also available in hard copy questionnaire collected from farm households.

Consent for publication

Informed consent was obtained from the respondents before data collection and written informed consent for publication was obtained from legal guardians involved in the study

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Ethics approval for this study was guaranteed by Bonga Agricultural Research center and all participants were informed about the objectives of the study and provided written informed consent prior to participation

Competing interest

We declare that this work was original research conducted by author which was registered on activities directory of Southwest Ethiopia agricultural Research institute. This manuscript has not been submitted elsewhere and not under consideration by any other journal. We declare there is no conflict of interest.

Bealu Girma. 2021. Review on Coffee Production and Quality in Ethiopia. Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries. 2021Vol. 10(6), pp. 208-213. doi: 10.11648/j.aff.20211006.11.
Teshome kassahun. Adoption of garden coffee production technology package by smallholder farmers in Ethiopia. Afr. J. Food Agric. Nutr. Dev. 2021; 21(5): 17989-18004 https://doi.org/10.18697/ajfand.100.19990
Ewentu Motebayenore. Review on Coffee Production Constraints and Opportunities in Ethiopia. J Hortic. 2022, 9:82.
Shamil Alo and Merga Jibat. Review on coffee (Coffeaarabica) sector challenges in ethiopia and strategies to mitigate them. Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research (EIAR). 2021, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
Gebermedin F and Tolera G. Opportunities and constraints of coffee production in West Hararghe, Ethiopia. J Agri Econom Rural Dev.2015; 2(4):54–55.
Samuel Diro and Endeshaw Habte. The Impact of Improved Coffee Technology Adoption and Determinants of Coffee Productivity:A Quantile Regression Approach. Ethiop. J. Agric. Sci. 2022, 32(3), pp 55-80.
Musba Kedir. Analysis of adoption of improved coffee technologies in major coffee growing areas of Southern Ethiopia. www.iiste.org, Food Science and Quality Management; 2018, ISSN 2224-6088 Vol.78, 2018.
Megdelawit Temesgen. Adoption of coffee technologies and their impact on annual yield in Jimma zone south western Ethiopia, Msc thesis Addis Ababa University, 2022.
Abrha Megos, Stale Navrud. Not my cup of coffee: Farmers’ preferences for coffee variety traits – Lessons for crop breeding in the age of climate change. Bio-based and Applied Economics, 2020, 9(3): pp 263-282, ISSN 2280-6180; DOI: 10.13128/bae-7758.
Yamane, T. Statistics: An Introductory Analysis, 2nd Ed, 1967. New York: Harper and Row. 886p.
Samuel Diro and Beza Erko. Impacts of Adoption of Improved Coffee Varieties on Farmers’ Coffee Yield and Income in Jimma Zone. Agri Res& Tech: Open Access J. 2019; 21(4): 556169. DOI: 10.19080/ARTOAJ.2019.21.556169.
Welay Tesfay. What Factors Determine the Rate and Level of Improve Coffee Variety Adoption Under Smallholder Farmers in North Western Ethiopia? Journal of Poverty, Investment and Development vol.59, 2021. www.iiste.org ISSN 2422-846X.
Meskerem Million, Mezigeb Liken, Tamiru Chalchisa. Adoption status and factor determining coffee technology adoption in Jimma zone, southwest Ethiopia. Pelita Perkebunan, 2020, vol 36(1) pp 68-83, ISSN: 0215-0212.
Tesfaye Tadesse, Bizuayehu Tesfaye & Girma Abera. Coffee production constraints and opportunities at major growing districts of southern Ethiopia, Cogent Food & Agriculture (2020) 6:1, 1741982, DOI: 10.1080/23311932.2020.1741982
Tegegn H, Senbetie T, Abrham S, Tagese A and B Sisay. Socio-economic determinants of small h0lder farmers coffee production in wolaita zone Ethiopia. Afr. J. Food Agric. Nutr. Dev. 2024; 24(6): 26798-26818; https://doi.org/10.18697/ajfand.131.24465.
Welay Tesfay. Impact of Improved Coffee Variety Adoption on Coffee Productivity of Smallholder Farmers in North Western Ethiopia Jrnl Eco & sust devnt vol 14(7), 2023; ISSN 2222-1700.
Misganaw Anteneh, Addisu Bezabih, Efrem Asfaw. Adoption and impact of coffee production technologies in case of western Ethiopia. Journal of biology, agriculture and healthcare vol 5(23), 2015; ISSN 2224-3208; www.iiste.org .
Desalegn Alemayehu. 2017. Review on Genetic Diversity of Coffee (Coffea Arabica .L) in Ethiopia. IJFH, 2018; vol 3(2) pp 18-27.http://dx.doi.org/10.20431/2454-9487.0302003.
Bukola. O. Factors influencing adoption of improved maize seed varieties among smallholder farmers in Kaduna State, Nigeria. JAERD, 2021; Vol.13(2), pp. 107-114, DOI: 10.5897/JAERD2019.1032.
Samuel Diro, Agajie Tesfaye, Beza Erko and Tamirat Girma. The Role of Improved Coffee Variety Use on the Adoption of Key Agricultural Technologies in the Coffee-Based Farming System of Ethiopia. East African Scholars J Econ Bus Manag, 2021;4(1), 7-18.
Megdelawit Temesgen and Sisay Debeb. Adoption of coffee technologies: A multivariate probit model. International Journal of Theoretical and Applied Mathematics, 2024; Vol 10 (1), pp. 6-13, https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijtam.20241001.12
Leonard Kiwelu, Philip Damas, Zena Mpenda. Factors Influencing Adoption of Improved Coffee Varieties Among Smallholder Farmers in Mbinga and Mbozi Districts of Tanzania. International Journal of Agricultural Economics. Vol. 6, No. 1, 2021, pp. 21-32. doi: 10.11648/j.ijae.20210601.13

No competing interests reported.

quationnare.docx

Download PDF

Reviews received at journal
07 Jan, 2026
Reviewers agreed at journal
05 Jan, 2026
Reviewers agreed at journal
31 Dec, 2025
Reviewers agreed at journal
30 Dec, 2025
Reviews received at journal
21 Nov, 2025
Reviewers agreed at journal
20 Nov, 2025
Reviewers agreed at journal
19 Nov, 2025
Reviewers invited by journal
19 Nov, 2025
Editor invited by journal
19 Nov, 2025
Editor assigned by journal
05 Nov, 2025
Submission checks completed at journal
05 Nov, 2025
First submitted to journal
05 Nov, 2025

You are reading this latest preprint version

Determinants of smallholder’s farmers’ adoption of improved coffee varieties in southwest Ethiopia

Status:

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

1. Introduction

2. Methodology

2.1. Description of the study area

2.2. Sampling Techniques and Sample Size Determination

2.3. Data Sources and Methods of Collection

2.4. Method of data analysis

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Socio-economic characteristics of the sample household

3.2. Coffee production

3.3. Adoption of improved Coffee Varieties

3.4. Type of improved coffee varieties

3.5. Farmer’s perception of improved coffee varieties

3.4. Determinants of improved coffee varieties adoption

Conclusion

Recommendation

Limitation of Study

Abbreviations

Declarations

References

Additional Declarations

Supplementary Files

Status:

Version 1