Author
Listed:
- Nyangweso, P.M.
- Odhiambo, M.O.
- Odunga, P.O.
- Korir, M.K.
- Otieno, D.C.
Abstract
Vihiga, one of the poorest and densely populated districts in Kenya is perpetually food deficit. Poor welfare indicators and resource base continue to curtail efforts to circumvent food insecurity among households in the district. In their current financial status, what are their preferences when it comes to choosing inputs for food production? How do they allocate their scarce input expenditure among the various inputs required for food production? What are their major considerations when they are making such choices? Descriptive statistics were used to determine input preferences and cost distribution among the farm inputs. Cluster sampling was used with divisions forming the main clusters in the district. Using systematic random sampling, 50 households were selected from each cluster resulting in a sample of 300. Results show that labour cost pre-dominates farm input cost followed by fertilizers and seed maize. Out of the total labour cost, land preparation, weeding and shelling account for the largest chunk of labour cost the balance being accounted for by planting, harvesting, topdressing and transport activities. Similarly, inorganic fertilizers are the major contributor to soil amendment costs. Similarly, local seed variety is preferred due to its low acquisition costs, while hybrid H 614 is preferred to other hybrid seed due to its performance and other desirable properties like low postharvest losses during handling. Farmers’ input preference and a deeper understanding of contributors to input cost is critical for proper planning of farmers production. Especially when production is rain fed.
Suggested Citation
Nyangweso, P.M. & Odhiambo, M.O. & Odunga, P.O. & Korir, M.K. & Otieno, D.C., 2011.
"PR - Disentangling Farmers’ Preferences And Cost Allocation Among Inputs For Food Security In Vihiga District, Kenya (p189-196),"
18th Congress, Methven, New Zealand, 2011
345587, International Farm Management Association.
Handle:
RePEc:ags:ifma11:345587
DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.345587
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:ifma11:345587. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ifmaaea.html .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.