IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/40796.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Analysis of efficiency in sugarcane production: the case of men and women headed households in SONY sugar out -grower zone, Rongo and Trans-Mara districts, Kenya

Author

Listed:
  • Nyanjong', Oyugi Johana
  • Lagat, Job

Abstract

About one quarter of cane producers in SONY Outgrower Zone are women headed households. However, a number of studies have suggested that women in rural areas are more disadvantaged in terms of accessing education, land, credit, and extension services. If this is the case, women cane farmers would be expected to be less efficient compared to men farmers. Before this can be concluded, there was need to establish whether differences in economic efficiency between men and women headed households exist in cane growing. The objectives of the research were; to characterize men and women headed cane growing households, to evaluate the relationship between institutional factors and gender, and to determine the differences in economic efficiency between men and women managed sugarcane farms. A multi stage sampling procedure was employed to select 205 active sugarcane farmers. A dual parametric stochastic decomposition technique was employed to disaggregate the components of economic efficiency. FRONTIER 4.1 program was used to derive maximum likelihood estimates and farm level technical efficiencies. A two limit Tobit model was then used to determine the influence of selected socio-economic and institutional variables on farm level technical, allocative and economic efficiency. Results showed that men headed households had a mean technical efficiency of 67.6%, a mean allocative efficiency of 82.48% and a mean economic efficiency of 58.0%. Women headed households had a mean technical efficiency of 72.0%, a mean allocative efficiency of 83.15% and a mean economic efficiency of 62.5%. Land under sugarcane cultivation was the single most important contributor to farmers’ efficiency. Women managed farms were on average more technically, allocative and economically efficient than men managed farms. Membership to outgrower associations in addition to encouraging increase in human capital will be important in enhancing farmers’ efficiency.

Suggested Citation

  • Nyanjong', Oyugi Johana & Lagat, Job, 2012. "Analysis of efficiency in sugarcane production: the case of men and women headed households in SONY sugar out -grower zone, Rongo and Trans-Mara districts, Kenya," MPRA Paper 40796, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:40796
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/40796/1/MPRA_paper_40796.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Abdulai, Awudu & Huffman, Wallace, 2000. "Structural Adjustment and Economic Efficiency of Rice Farmers in Northern Ghana," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 48(3), pages 503-520, April.
    2. Wang, Jirong & Cramer, Gail L. & Wailes, Eric J., 1996. "Production efficiency of Chinese agriculture: evidence from rural household survey data," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 15(1), pages 17-28, September.
    3. Msuya, Elibariki & Ashimogo, Gasper, 2005. "Estimation of Technical Efficiency in Tanzanian Sugarcane Production: A Case Study of Mtibwa Sugar Estate Outgrowers Scheme," MPRA Paper 3747, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Alvarez, Antonio & Arias, Carlos, 2004. "Technical efficiency and farm size: a conditional analysis," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 30(3), pages 241-250, May.
    5. Stefan Osborne & Michael A. Trueblood, 2006. "An examination of economic efficiency of Russian crop production in the reform period," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 34(1), pages 25-38, January.
    6. Udry, Christopher & Hoddinott, John & Alderman, Harold & Haddad, Lawrence, 1995. "Gender differentials in farm productivity: implications for household efficiency and agricultural policy," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(5), pages 407-423, October.
    7. Stephen Devadoss & Jurgen Kropf, 1996. "Impacts of trade liberalizations under the Uruguay Round on the world sugar market," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 15(2), pages 83-96, November.
    8. H. Öztş Ayhan, 2001. "Statistics by Gender: Measures to Reduce Gender Bias in Agricultural Surveys," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 69(3), pages 447-460, December.
    9. Devadoss, Stephen & Kropf, Jurgen, 1996. "Impacts of trade liberalizations under the Uruguay round on the world sugar market," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 15(2), pages 83-96, November.
    10. Jirong Wang & Gail L. Cramer & Eric J. Wailes, 1996. "Production efficiency of Chinese agriculture: evidence from rural household survey data," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 15(1), pages 17-28, September.
    11. Binam, Joachim Nyemeck & Tonye, Jean & wandji, Njankoua & Nyambi, Gwendoline & Akoa, Mireille, 2004. "Factors affecting the technical efficiency among smallholder farmers in the slash and burn agriculture zone of Cameroon," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(5), pages 531-545, October.
    12. Battese, G E & Coelli, T J, 1995. "A Model for Technical Inefficiency Effects in a Stochastic Frontier Production Function for Panel Data," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 325-332.
    13. Abdulai, Awudu & Eberlin, Richard, 2001. "Technical efficiency during economic reform in Nicaragua: evidence from farm household survey data," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 113-125, June.
    14. repec:aer:wpaper:163 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. North, Douglass C, 1994. "Economic Performance through Time," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(3), pages 359-368, June.
    16. repec:aer:wpaper:154 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Okoth, Ouko Kevin, 2018. "Technical Efficiency Of Sugarcane Monoculture And Sugarcane- Soybean Intergration Among Smallholder Farmers In Awendo Sub-County, Kenya," Research Theses 276446, Collaborative Masters Program in Agricultural and Applied Economics.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Boris Bravo-Ureta & Daniel Solís & Víctor Moreira López & José Maripani & Abdourahmane Thiam & Teodoro Rivas, 2007. "Technical efficiency in farming: a meta-regression analysis," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 27(1), pages 57-72, February.
    2. Ashok K. Mishra & Saleem Shaik & Aditya R. Khanal & Subir Bairagi, 2018. "Contract farming and technical efficiency: Evidence from low†value and high†value crops in Nepal," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 34(2), pages 426-440, March.
    3. Pascual, Unai, 2005. "Land use intensification potential in slash-and-burn farming through improvements in technical efficiency," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(4), pages 497-511, March.
    4. Chen, Zhuo & Huffman, Wallace E. & Rozelle, Scott, 2009. "Farm technology and technical efficiency: Evidence from four regions in China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 153-161, June.
    5. Amarender Reddy, A. & Bantilan, Ma Cynthia S., 2012. "Competitiveness and technical efficiency: Determinants in the groundnut oil sector of India," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 255-263.
    6. Bac Ho & Teruaki Nanseki & Yosuke Chomei, 2019. "Profit efficiency of tea farmers: case study of safe and conventional farms in Northern Vietnam," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 1695-1713, August.
    7. repec:aer:wpaper:172 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Wollni, Meike & Brümmer, Bernhard, 2012. "Productive efficiency of specialty and conventional coffee farmers in Costa Rica: Accounting for technological heterogeneity and self-selection," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 67-76.
    9. Zhihai Yang & Amin W. Mugera & Ning Yin & Yumeng Wang, 2018. "Soil conservation practices and production efficiency of smallholder farms in Central China," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 20(4), pages 1517-1533, August.
    10. Bozoglu, Mehmet & Ceyhan, Vedat, 2007. "Measuring the technical efficiency and exploring the inefficiency determinants of vegetable farms in Samsun province, Turkey," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 94(3), pages 649-656, June.
    11. Nguyen, Huy, 2014. "Crop diversification, economic performance and household’s behaviours Evidence from Vietnam," MPRA Paper 59168, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 05 Oct 2014.
    12. Asante, Bright O. & Temoso, Omphile & Addai, Kwabena N. & Villano, Renato A., 2019. "Evaluating productivity gaps in maize production across different agroecological zones in Ghana," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    13. Junying Lin & Songqing Jin & Hongdong Guo, 2023. "Do outsourcing services provided by agricultural cooperatives affect technical efficiency? Insights from tobacco farmers in China," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 94(3), pages 781-804, September.
    14. Guilherme Berse Rodrigues Lambais & Marcelo Marques De Magalhães & José Maria Ferreira Jardim Da Silveira, 2014. "Land Reform And Technical Efficiency: Panel Data Evidence From Northeastern Brazil," Anais do XL Encontro Nacional de Economia [Proceedings of the 40th Brazilian Economics Meeting] 200, ANPEC - Associação Nacional dos Centros de Pós-Graduação em Economia [Brazilian Association of Graduate Programs in Economics].
    15. Balint, B. & Sauer, J., 2007. "Distorted Prices and Producer Efficiency – Romanian Maize," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 42, March.
    16. Monchuk, Daniel C. & Chen, Zhuo & Bonaparte, Yosef, 2010. "Explaining production inefficiency in China's agriculture using data envelopment analysis and semi-parametric bootstrapping," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 346-354, June.
    17. Ruggiero Sardaro & Daniela Panio & Paweł Chmieliński & Piermichele La Sala, 2024. "Efficiency of the Integrated Production Systems: Evidence from the Winegrowing Firms in Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(11), pages 1-16, June.
    18. Fatima, Hina & Shaheen, Sania & Almas, Lal & Vestal, Mallory & Haroon, Sehrish, 2018. "Production Efficiency Analysis between Transplanting and Direct Seeded Rice Producers in Punjab, Pakistan," 2018 Annual Meeting, February 2-6, 2018, Jacksonville, Florida 267162, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    19. Sauer, Johannes & Balint, Borbala, 2006. "Romanian Maize - Distorted Prices and Producer Efficiency," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21410, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    20. Nguyen To-The & Tuan Nguyen-Anh, 2021. "Impact of government intervention to maize efficiency at farmer’s level across time: a robust evidence in Northern Vietnam," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 2038-2061, February.
    21. Rahman, Sanzidur, 2003. "Profit efficiency among Bangladeshi rice farmers," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(5-6), pages 487-503.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    efficiency; Kenya; sugarcane productivity; stochastic frontier functions;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O13 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Agriculture; Natural Resources; Environment; Other Primary Products
    • O12 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Microeconomic Analyses of Economic Development

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:pra:mprapa:40796. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.