Rapid Coffee Market Assessment in

Godere Woreda of Mejang Zone

Conducted by: Fufa Eticha [Coffee Livelihood Project Coordinator]

April 2016, Addis Ababa - Ethiopia

Table of Contents
Acronyms ..................................................................................................................................................... 3
Executive Summary ..................................................................................................................................... 3
1. Introduction..............................................................................................................................4
2. Objective ..................................................................................................................................4
3. Methodology .............................................................................................................................5
4. Limitations of the assessment ....................................................................................................5
5. Major Findings .........................................................................................................................6
5.1 Land used for Coffee ............................................................................................................................ 6
5.2 The Scenario of Selling Red Cherry and ‗jenfel‘ Coffee ..................................................................... 6
5.3 Wet and Dry Mills in Godere Woreda ................................................................................................. 9
5.4 Linkage of Cooperatives with Wet and Dry Mills ............................................................................. 10
5.5 Major Challenges of Existing Cooperatives ....................................................................................... 10
5.6 Gaps of Coffee Producing Farmers .................................................................................................... 11
5.7 Coffee Yield, Income and Factors of Production and Marketing ...................................................... 12
5.8 Elevation and Rainfall: As Determining Factors for Wet Mill Establishment ................................... 16
5.9 ECX Operation Vs. CCooperatives Marketing Coffee ...................................................................... 17
6. Recommendations................................................................................................................... 18
7. Annexes................................................................................................................................... 20
Annex 1: Income Diversification for Resilience ............................................................................................ 20
Annex 2: Profile of Existing Cooperatives..................................................................................................... 21
Annex 3: Support Required by Coffee Farmers and Cooperatives in Godere Woreda..……………………………. 22

List of Tables
1. Average land used for coffee cultivation in Godere Woreda .....................................................4
2. Merits and demerits of selling ‘jenfel’ vs. red-cherry coffee ......................................................4
3. Percentage of farmers engaged in other side activities ..............................................................5
4. Willingness of farmers and cooperatives to supply red-cherry .....................................................5
5. ‘Jenfel’ coffee production for farmers and cooperatives ...........................................................6
6. Cost of ‘jenfel’ coffee preparation.............................................................................................6
7. Revenue of ‘jenfel’ coffee supply per farmer and cooperative...................................................6
8. Profit projection from sale of ‘jenfel’ coffee ..............................................................................6
9. Percentage of farmers share income from sale of coffee to their spouses ...................................6

2
Acronyms

ECX------------Ethiopian Commodity Exchange

ETB-------------Ethiopian Birr
HH------------- House hold
MELCA------ Movement for Ecological Learning and Community Action
PA---------------Peasant Association
SNNPR--------Southern Nations, Nationalities and Peoples Region
TNS-------------TechnoServe Inc.
UG--------------Under Grade (in ECX Grading system)

Executive Summary
This rapid survey, aiming to assess the overview of coffee production and marketing, was
conducted in seven kebeles of Godere Woreda, targeting some randomly selected coffee producing
farmers. Targeted farmers of Godere woreda prefer to engage in producing ‘jenfel’ coffee than red-
cherry due to various factors such as price difference, lack of wet mills close to their villages and
others. Currently they sell only small amount of coffee cherry to cover immediate expenses
incurred.

They sell red-cherry and ‘jenfel’ coffee to either local commissioned traders or agents of
washing/hulling stations. This year sale price of cherry and ‘jenfel’ coffee across kebeles was 5
and 10 ETB/kg respectively. The average land size used for coffee cultivation in Godere Woreda is
2.8ha across targeted farmers. Even though it varies from farmer to farmer across kebeles, the
harvest size of ‘jenfel’ coffee per hectare of land ranges from 2.5 – 28 bags, whereas the average
yield is 10.45 bags of ‘jenfel’ coffee per hectare for Godere Woreda, whereas the average sale
prices of red-cherry in the neighboring Bench Maji and Kaffa zones were 9 and 10Br respectively.

According to the data from interviewed farmers, the income estimate from coffee per farmer varies
from 5400 to 55000 ETB. The average income for each farmer and income from direct sale of
yield from hectare of land will be 24,670 and 7,263 ETB respectively. (See Annex 4 for details).

There are abundant opportunities and constraints to coffee production in Godere woreda of Mejang
zone. The potential forest coverage in the area highly contributes to coffee production as a
principal-income generation opportunity, even though the increasing settlement and expansion of
farming is threatening forest. On the other hand, limited capacity of farmers and lack of sufficient
technical support are among the main constraints to coffee production.

Therefore, in order to exploit available opportunities and tackle foreseen constraints to coffee
production government and non-governmental organizations should focus to technically support
farmers. This could be through capacity building, technical support and continuous follow up to
increase productivity (volume and quality) and raise farmers‘ revenue from coffee.

3
1. Introduction
TechnoServe Ethiopia is an international non-profit organization that started working in Ethiopia
in 2009, to support the inclusive growth of agricultural market systems – mainly coffee, maize and
malt barely in Oromia and SNNP regions. TNS has recently expanded its operations to Gambella
Region, targeting Godere Woreda of Mejanger Zone.

Mejang Zone is one of three administrative zones in Gambella Regional State which is formed of
two woredas: Godere and Mengeshi. It is the smallest and less populous zone, which connects
Gambella with SNNP Region. Previously, it was known as Godere special woreda till the 2001
Ethiopian Census when the region was divided in to three zones which resulted in a number
of Godere kebeles split off to create Mengeshi forming Mejanger zone. Now days they are
adjacently independent woredas which are dominantly occupied by native Mejenger ethnic group
together with various incoming clans of Ethiopia.

Being composed from two vast woredas of Godere and Mengeshi, Mejang zone is characterized by
potential coffee, spices, honey, fruit and vegetable production. However, coffee is the leading
agricultural product and hence represents lion‘s share of farmers‘ source of income amounting
14,140 ETB from ‘jenfel’ coffee per household. This could be projected to 548,916 ETB for a coop
aggregating coffee from average of 30 members. To more deeply analyze and quantify smallholder
famers‘ opportunities in coffee, TNS requested a consultant to conduct a simple assessment of the
coffee market system in Godere woreda. The purpose of the study was to assess the situation of
their coffee production, marketing as well as factors contributing for both production and
marketing, particularly with a focus on determining the extent to which smallholder farmers could
benefit from coffee via their primary cooperatives.

Godere Woreda is one of woredas in Mejenger zone found in the Gambella Regional State. The
Woreda has 14 kebeles, of which 2 are considered as towns while the rest are peasant associations
(PAs). The biggest town in the Woreda is Meti which is serving as capital of the Mejenger Zone
and Godere Woreda, around 20 km west of Tepi Town. Godere has an average elevation ranging
between 500 and 2400 meters above sea level. About 40% of the area is covered with dense forest
called Godere forest, which covers about 120,000 hectares of land. Moreover, Godere, Achani and
Gilo are the major rivers in the Woreda and belong to the Baro-Akobo drainage system. The
temperature of the area is also moderate with the annual average temperature ranges between 14-
35oC.

2. Objective
The main objective of this simple study is to assess the status of coffee production, marketing and
value chain perspective of farmers (members of cooperatives) in Godere woreda of Mejeng Zone
in Gambella Regional State. Specifically it aims to:
 Assess coffee production trend of targeted farmers in Godere woreda,
 Conduct overview analysis of pricing and marketing structures,
 Identify opportunities and constraints to coffee production and marketing in the area,
 Assess gaps of existing cooperatives and supports needed by coffee farmers,
 Grasp into linkage status of coffee producing farmers/coops with other entities,

4
  Finally, compare factors affecting coffee production across those targeted kebeles of
Godere Woreda and provide recommendations.

3. Methodology
Data collection
The initial data used for this survey was collected from 14 – 17th of April 2016 in two ways:
individual interviews and group interviews. In four kebeles with existing cooperatives, at least
three randomly selected member farmers of each cooperative were interviewed separately. Each
cooperative leadership committees were interviewed as a focus group, in which about one-third of
the entire members of cooperatives participated. In the other three kebeles without any
cooperatives, three randomly selected farmers were individually interviewed.

In general, from kebeles with existing cooperatives 12 member farmers and 9 randomly selected
farmers from kebeles without any cooperatives were interviewed individually. The leadership
committees of four existing cooperatives were interviewed in group.

In addition, three private wet mills operating in Godere Woreda were also contacted to assess their
coffee purchasing trend and their interest to buy coffee from farmer cooperatives. Furthermore, in
order to verify some data, the consultant contacted woreda based government particularly
Cooperative Work Process and Coffee Marketing Desk in Agriculture and Rural Development
Office for information validation.

Later on, some crucial data focusing six hulling stations operating in Godere woreda was collected
by Metti sub office team to be used in this survey analysis.

Data Analysis
This survey data is analyzed in simple descriptive manner articulating more about trend and
determining factors of coffee production and marketing. The prevailing opportunities and
challenges with regard to individual farmers and existing cooperatives are also analyzed to identify
opportunities and recommendations.

4. Limitations of the assessment

This rapid assessment was conducted in Godere Woreda within short period of time. It took only
four days to collect the initial data from randomly selected farmers; which part of them are
members of existing cooperatives. In the meantime, existing cooperatives‘ leadership committees
were targeted as focus group even though the survey report came up with limitations summarized
below.
It is limited to focus only 21 farmers across seven rural kebeles, and four existing
cooperatives; which will be quite less representative of entire farmers in the woreda;
There was no sufficient time to interview additional number of farmers by the time due to
shortage of time and logistics;
The principal limitation of this rapid assessment is focusing only red-cherry and ‗jenfel‘
coffee along with wet & dry mills; while various coffee-market-actors such as commission
traders, agents of washing/hulling stations, legal traders, coffee quality aspects respective
ECX delivery centers were not properly focused only for time and logistics limitation;

5
 Finally, it is also limited to focus only red-cherry value chain and income generated from
sale of ‘jenfel’ coffee, where historical pricing and market value for coffee from Mejang
ought to be incorporated.

5. Major Findings
5.1 Land used for Coffee
In Ethiopia land is a state-owned, fixed asset. However, farmers privileged to use land registered
under their names are allowed to use it for agricultural and residential purposes only by paying
accrued lease fares of land.

In this survey, almost all respondents own land for coffee farming. However, the size of land
owned by target farmers vary from kebele to kebele and also among farmers; for which they all are
engaged in producing coffee as the main means of livelihood.

Table 1: Average land used for coffee cultivation in Godere Woreda

Average Land Size No of Percentage
farmers
As it’s depicted in the table, the average land size owned by
< 1ha 1 5% majority of targeted farmers across those seven kebeles is less
than 3hactares; whereas the second largest number of
1ha - 3ha 12 58% farmers own average land size of 3-4hactares. Only few
farmers own land size less than 1 hectare and more than 4
3ha - 4ha 6 28%
hectares.
>4ha 2 10%

Total 21 100%

5.2 The Scenario of Selling Red Cherry and ‘jenfel’ Coffee

This rapid survey found that the trend of selling red-cherry and ‘jenfel’ has multidimensional
implications that vary from village to village. Accordingly, even though implications may be
different in nature and more in number, they can be summarized into three categories as follows.
1. Price implication: with regard to price, almost all farmers prefer selling ‘jenfel’ to red-
cherry. This is because the market offers relative higher prices for ‘jenfel’ coffee. Red-
cherry coffee generally fetches lower prices in the market because the seller is less capable
to negotiate. This is for the reason that a farmer collected red-cherry coffee for sale has
very limited bargaining capacity because s/he can do nothing with it other than looking for
another buyer, whom could pay relatively higher price. Because red cherry coffee is
perishable unless pulped in wet mills the sooner possible. Thus, the buyer is the ―price-
maker‖ for red cherry. When selling ‘jenfel’ on the other hand, farmers are able to negotiate
prices with buyers, hence they can hold on to their ‗jenfel’ until the prices improve.
Therefore, selling ‗jenfel’ is preferred by farmers because it is less perishable and thus
gives them greater negotiation power.

6
 2. Status implication: most of the time, farmers market a small quantity of red-cherry coffee
to cover immediate and urgent expenses. The farmers collect a small amount of cherry to
sell to local-traders, as explained above. This implies that, if a household is engaged in
frequent sale of red-cherry it is considered as relatively poor and desperate, unable to wait
for the coffee to mature into ‘jenfel’. In contrast, better-off households are able to cover
immediate, incurred expenses and will never sell red-cherry, the household will, instead dry
coffee into ‘jenfel’ before marketing it. A household preparing ‘jenfel’ may hold on to it
until prices improve. However, such practices may negatively impacts coffee quality.
Because whenever ‘jenfel’ coffee is kept in farmers‘ houses after drying it may not be stored
in appropriate level of humidity required for dry coffee; that makes coffee lose its value.
Thus households with relatively lower status will engage in selling red-cherry; while better-
off households market ‘jenfel’.
3. Determine household harvest volume: unlike ‘jenfel’, it‘s difficult to estimate the overall
household coffee production of that harvest season if a household decides to sell all coffee
produced as red-cherry. This is mainly because red-cherry is sold frequently in very small
amounts and immediately after harvest. The red-cherry is typically marketed directly at
farm gate. Thus, because it‘s marketed in a fragmented way instead of altogether lump-sum
and also because farming households in the targeted area don‘t keep records, farmers have
difficulty recalling the revenue from coffee cherry over the course of season. On the other
hand, ‘jenfel’ is prepared after ripened cherries are harvested, brought to home and prepared
and is marketed in bulk and payment is received as one lump-sum. Hence, this enables a
household to easily calculate its annual revenue from coffee as well as volumes of coffee
produced. Therefore, even though the intention of farmers selling ‘jenfel’ isn‘t to determine
their annual revenue and harvest volume of coffee, they are favoring sale of ‘jenfel’ since it
enables them to know their revenue and harvest volume as well as for better spending.

In general, except four farmers selling both red-cherry (small amount) and ‘jenfel’, the remaining
17 of farmers interviewed, indicated that they market only jenfel’ coffee after drying it in their
compound. Unless some members of their household (usually children) sell only small amounts of
red cherry to local traders, the majority of farmers never collect red-cherry for marketing. Rather,
they work together with their family members to harvest or rarely hire laborers on basis of crop-
share1 contract and prepare ‘jenfel’.

Table 2: Merits and demerits of selling 'jenfel' vs. red cherry coffee
Coffee Type Merits Demerits

1
Crop-share system is the way in which someone hires coffee collector/laborer to share one third
of the amount collected to the laborer, having two-third for his/her own.

7
  Paid immediately after harvest,  Unable to estimate harvest size,

Red-cherry  Covers urgent expenses,  Perishable so unable to store/keep it at

home till price improves,
 Can bring fresh money,
 Unable to sell all at once (due to collecting
 Covers urgent expenses, labor shortage),

 Less effort of preparation,

 Can be marketed soon after collection.

 Brings cumulative income into households as one  Takes time to prepare,

lump sum,
 Difficult to dry during heavy rainy
 Income from sale covers larger expenditure, seasons,
‘Jenfel’
 Easy to estimate harvest size,  Quality may deteriorate (may lose nice
aroma) if stored for too long time.
 Better shelf-life (means it can be stored until prices
improve, if necessary)

Other Reasons behind ‘jenfel’ Sale Preference

Even though majority of the farmers in Godere Woreda prefer selling ‘jenfel’, not only due to the
favorable price of ‘jenfel’ but there are also other factors contributing to this decision.
i. Price difference: price margin is the most determining factor for farmers‘ preference to
market coffee as ‘jenfel’. It‘s simply because of relatively larger price of ‘jenfel’ when
compared to red cherry, in addition to providing cumulative revenue for better expenditure.
ii. Lack of a nearby wet mill: almost all farmers stated that if the wet mills were located a
nearby their coffee farms, they would sell at least some amount of their coffee to the wet
mills as red-cherry (E.g. Kabo & Gumere kebeles). All three existing wet mills in Godere
Woreda are located adjacent to Metti town, which is quite far from other potential coffee
producing kebeles in the woreda. But if farmers (as a cooperative) establish their own wet
mill in their village, almost half (43%) of interviewed farmers shown their willingness to
supply only red-cherry to their cooperative wet mill; while 24% of famers are willing to
supply half of their production and 10% of farmers are conditional. Farmers mentioned that
if they sell red-cherry to their wet mill, they can be paid fair price slightly larger than what
being paid by private wet mills and local traders. On the other hand, they can harvest only
ripened cherry coffee to supply their own wet mill, and thus it will pulp huge amount of
quality coffee, gain larger revenue which in turn benefits the farmers. (See Table 4).
iii. Alternative side activities: the study found that very few farmers rely solely upon
producing only coffee instead majority of them have other source of income from
alternative side (livelihood) activities other than producing coffee. This implies it‘s very
rare case for such farmers to face food shortage and tight time to cover their daily expenses.
Because they harvest food cereals for their HH consumption, obtain income from sale of
honey and spices, while some other also engage in vegetable production, etc.

8
 Table 3: Percentage of farmers engaged in other side activities
Farmers/Coops Spices Honey Vegetable Food Other** Total
Vs. Activities Production Production Production Cereal*
Individual 24% 9% 24% 24% 19% 100%
Farmers
As a cooperative 37% 13% 0% 37% 13% 100%
(*) Food cereal: Production is for farmers while Trade is for coops,
(**) Other represents trade of consumption items like sugar, oil, and ‘teff’.

This table shows that large numbers of targeted farmers are engaged in producing spices, food
cereals and vegetables; whereas all the existing cooperatives are also running businesses of food
cereal trade and spices production. Thus, these are among the alternative livelihoods for farmers in
addition to coffee; where they fetch part of their revenue. As a result of getting income from
different sources, farmers are not facing money shortage to cover their daily expenditure, hence
harvest, dry and prepare ‘jenfel’ coffee instead of selling red-cherry.

5.3 Wet and Dry Mills in Godere Woreda

There are three wet and six dry mills operating in Godere woreda. All are located a nearby the
woreda‘s major town, Metti. All the mills are owned by private individuals living in other larger
towns out of Metti. Respondents indicated that while only few farmers from neighboring adjacent
kebeles directly supply to washing stations, commissioned traders as well as wet mill agents
assigned to each village or some primary market centers in the woreda purchase cherry on behalf
of wet mills. The same procedure works also for ‘jenfel’ coffee and dry mills too.

Among the differences for dry-mills, beyond pulping ‘jenfel’ coffee purchased from farmer
households and commission traders of the woreda; they also provide mill rental services to others
such as legal traders and licensed cooperatives; and also unlike wet-mills they remain functional
for long seasons of the year. Accordingly, coops could pay the dry mill a fee for pulping ‗jenfel‘
and then market their coffee as they like. This will be an opportunity for cooperatives, especially
for those newly organized and interested to aggregate sun-dry coffee.

How do wet-mills buy coffee cherry?

These three wet mills purchase red-cherry coffee in two ways: the first one is collecting coffee
bought by commission traders offering them a small markup price up on the initial price, while the
second mechanism will be buying coffee through assigned wet mill agents. While there are few
primary markets in the woreda, most of the traders and agents buy coffee at center of the villages.

Accordingly, two of the three wet mills purchase red-cherry in both ways, while the remaining wet
mill only assigns agents to different coffee producing villages. In the first case they pay markup
price varying from 0.5 to 1 ETB per kilogram of coffee; whereas the agents are temporary
purchaser of the company, paid a salary. The average purchase price of red cherry was 5Br this
season across the wet mills, which is very far below the price of red cherry in other coffee grown
areas of Ethiopia. For instance, the purchase price of red cherry coffee in neighboring towns of
Mizan and Bonga was 9-10 Br per kg while it was between the range of 10-13 Br around Jimma.

9
 Red-cherry Coffee Value Chains

Farmer Farmers collect ripen red cherry and

Primary market center
Transport
Commission traders
take it to primary market (very few) or
A nearby farm wait for commissioned traders and wet
mill agents. Both commissioned trader
and wet mill agents will purchase red
cherry coffee from few primary market
centers as well as on directly from
nearby coffee farms. After that they will
Wet mill Agents aggregate the coffee and transport and
handover to washing stations.

Transport
Wet mills

The presence of only three (private) wet mills in Godere woreda enables them to be price makers,
when it comes to price of coffee cherry. Both agents of wet mills and commission traders are
guided by the price set by these operating wet mills.

5.4 Linkage of Cooperatives with Wet and Dry Mills

According to the three wet mills and six hulling stations currently working in Godere Woreda,
there are opportunities to benefit coops based on the volume and quality of cherry and ‘jenfel’
coffee. Cherry coffee quality will be assured when only ripe reddish fruit is supplied just after
collection to wet mills, while unlike red-cherry ‘jenfel’ coffee is quite difficult to judge its quality
easily. However, dry-mills and some farmers have their own mechanism to taste quality, where
attractive aroma, clean and similar bean sizes are representatives of better quality.

Willingness and Opportunities

All mills interviewed are highly interested to buy coffee from the cooperatives because they are
keen to purchase red-cherry/’jenfel’ coffee of better quality and at greater quantities too. This will
in turn make wet mills more time and cost effective since much amount of red-cherry coffee will
be collected by the cooperative and hence wet mill (agent) can easily collect from the coops for
transportation to the washing station. The same scenario works for dry mills too, where they can
access large volume of ’jenfel’ with better quality in one place.

All the three wet mills agreed to pay coops equivalent amount being paid to commission traders,
0.5 to 1Br per kilogram of red-cherry supplied. On the other hand even though all dry mills in
Godere woreda have no experience of buying ‘jenfel’ from primary coops, if coops start to
aggregate they are willing to pay a markup of 1Br/kg or more based on the quality of coffee
supplied.

10
This year, the average ‘jenfel’ price according to survey of hulling stations was 18Br, which is
surprisingly higher than the average farm gate price for farmers, 10Br. Even, according to TNS‘s
baseline survey of 2015/6, the market price for ‘jenfel’ in Godere was very cheap, 11Br/kg.

Therefore, buying bulk coffee collected from coop members at one place with better quality is an
opportunity for all mills to operate more effectively. At the same time, coop members will enjoy
the price margin to be paid by wet/dry mills for supply of large volume of coffee with better
quality2.

5.5 Major Challenges of Existing Cooperatives

There are only four existing cooperatives in Godere woreda. However, they have faced different
circumstances and have encountered various challenges. The only similarity among them is that all
members of each cooperative are considered to be highlanders, or non-natives. There are no formal
cooperatives organized that includes members from native Mejanger community, in lowland area
of the woreda.

Apart from this, the cooperatives‘ leadership teams have addressed a number of challenges they
have encountered which are summarized below.
 Lack of agricultural inputs (improved seed, herbicide and pesticide),
 Shortage of drying materials (bed-wire, plastic sheet, and jute bags)
 Poor access to market:
 Poor market access accompanied by lack of sustainable linkage to buyers of coffee as
well as other agricultural products,
 No access to finance and credit services:
 All coops lack access to reliable finance and credit facilities, hence forced to depend
highly on money collected from members in forms of share price and other.
 Lack of technical support:
 Very limited support in certifying cooperatives to engage in coffee trade, (E.g. Akashi
Kebele coop members agreed to collect quintals of ‘jenfel’ coffee per member to
transport but unable to start trade due to lack of blessings from the government)—coops
are not provided with appropriate get-pass receipts, consequently susceptible to higher
taxes at local customs stations, which is highly discouraging cooperatives.
 No support for cooperatives to obtain pass receipts necessary to transport food cereals
from central part of the country to Godere woreda, (all existing coops are engaged in
multi-business activities, beside running businesses in their village some transport food
cereals mainly ‘Teff’ from central Ethiopia, however they are not fully supported by
government to show progress by distributing cereals to Godere woreda).
 Limited follow-up and capacity building:
 Shortage of guidance, poor capacity building in financial management and cooperative
leadership, lack of continuous follow up and supervision.

2
Better quality of red cherry denotes the collection of only ripened coffee.

11
  Lack of a nearby wet mill in their vicinity, and etc.

5.6 Gaps of Coffee Producing Farmers

Farmers engaged in coffee production are predominantly producing in a traditional method. They
are not equipped with sufficient farm tools and not well assisted technically to boost production
volume and quality.

As a result, the gaps of coffee production are similar for individual farmers and cooperatives. In
general, the survey found that there are shortages of drying and farming materials, input supply,
access to credit financing, technical support and appropriate follow-up. Thus, they are seeking
support of both government and NGOs like TechnoServe to help them the following gaps are to
increase quality coffee production. (See Annex 3)
 Drying materials (bed-wire, net and plastic sheet),
 Input shortage (improved seed, jute bags, and
 Farming tools (for pruning, stumping and uprooting),
 Access to credit and finance,
 Technical support and follow-up (for quality production and coop formation),
 Certification and recognition of existing coops.

Optimism toward Progress: Willingness to supply red-cherry

Those three wet mills currently working in Godere woreda are located adjacent to Metti, the
woreda seat town, which is quite far from many other villages within Godere. Even if most of the
farmers across targeted kebeles are less reluctant to sell red cherry at lower price to such remote
wet mills, they mentioned absence of wet mills close in their vicinity as one of the factors driving
to fully engage in preparing ‘jenfel’ coffee.

Then they respond differently for the probing personal question of checking their willingness to
supply red cherry if they manage to establish their own wet mill, despite there would also be other
factors expected to determine supply of cherry and ‘jenfel’ coffee.

Table 4: Willingness of farmers and cooperatives to supply red-cherry

(If they manage to establish their own wet mill)
Amount of red-cherry farmers Farmers Cooperatives Remark (which
would supply to their wet mills kebeles lead)
Number Percentage Number Percentage

Fully 9 43% 2 50% Gumere

Half of yield 5 24% 1 25% M/Meti, Kabo and

Akashi

Some amount of yield less than 3 14% 1 25% Kabo and Akashi
half

Conditional 2 10% 0 0%

Never 2 10% 0 0%

12
 Total 21 100% 4 100%

As depicted in the table above, almost majority of the farmers and two cooperative leaderships are
willing to supply coffee they produce to their own wet mills, if they manage to establish their own.
These are residents of Gumere and M/Meti kebeles. On the other hand, the cooperative leaderships
of Kabo and Akashi kebeles were willing to supply some amount of yield and half of their coffee
harvest respectively to their own wet mill.

With regard to farmers, only two are not willing to supply red cherry even if they establish their
own wet mill. Similarly, two others are condition based to supply red cherry, meaning they will
observe the situation and decide soon.

5.7 Coffee Yield, Income and Factors of Production and Marketing

a. Coffee Yield of existing cooperatives
Coffee is the leading product and source of income for all farmers targeted during this survey.
However, it may not be for the cooperative. Even though all cooperatives‘ members produce
coffee, only two cooperatives are currently gaged in coffee trade. The remaining two instead were
dealing with various business activities as they all are formed as multi-purpose cooperatives.

200 Total Harvest in Bags

150 Total Income in 1000 ETB

100

50

0 Total Income in 1000 ETB

Akashi Total Harvest in Bags
Gumere Kabo
M/Meti

This graph shows the magnitude of ‘jenfel’ coffee harvest in bags and average income gained from sale per three farmers of those
targeted kebeles with existing cooperatives. As of three farmers targeted per each kebele, their stated harvest sum of ‘jenfel’ coffee
for Akashi, Gumere, Kabo and M/Meti will be 175, 61, 105 and 122 bags; and gained respective cumulative income in thousands of
159, 78, 60 and 105 respectively. A bag of ‘jenfel’ coffee measures 56kgs at an average. There might be high probability of
underestimation of figures during both individual and focus group interviews.

b. Coffee Collection Method

Farmers collect coffee in two methods. They either make their entire family members (only if they
have large family size) engage in coffee harvest or hire laborers and pay them using a crop-sharing
system. Those farmers having large productive family size will do the collection by themselves.
While those farmers with small family size, will hire laborers on basis of one-third crop-sharing

13
system. After all ripened coffee is harvested by the laborer it will be shared on one to third basis
where the owner takes two third and the laborer receives the remaining one third of the total yield.

c. Profit Margin Projection

Once this survey focuses on market opportunity for coffee producing farmers and cooperatives,
incorporating simple analysis of income and expenses associated with preparing ‘jenfel’ coffee
will be more importantly expressive for further targeting and intervention planning. Accordingly,
the following consecutive four tables are part of profit projection on the basis of preconceived
assumptions.

Table 5: ‘Jenfel’ Coffee production for farmer and cooperative

Production of farmers and Amount of Coffee Total production in KG Remark
coops produced Kg/ha
(B=A*Average ha per farmer)
(A)

Individual farmer (1) 585.20 1638.56

Cooperative (2=1*30) 17,556 49,156.8

Presumptions:
 Only direct costs and revenues of ‘jenfel’ coffee are considered in this projection; since
almost all target famers are willing but not selling cherry at this moment;
 Average land size is 2.8ha and average yield per hectare is 585kg, (Annex 4).
 Labor cost is not considered for farmers assuming they can collect and prepare ‘jenfel’
coffee by themselves,
 Coop member size is assumed to be 30, all members producing coffee,
 Drying bed is prepared from local materials at insignificant cost and purchased wires;

Table 6: Cost of 'jenfel' coffee preparation

S/No List of materials Unit Unit Cost per Cost per Cooperative Remark
Price
Farmer

No Total Cost No Total Cost

1 Bed wire Roll 35 6 210 0 0 No need of wire for coops

2 Jute bags Pcs 50 29 1,450 877 43,850 Farmers deliver to coops

and collect their bags

3 Transportation Trip 20 14 280 0 0 Dry mills collect from

coops, no transportation
cost

14
4 Plastic sheet Pcs 1500 1 1,500 6 9,000 Coops require more
plastic sheet

5 Other miscellaneous variable costs 500 7,500

Total Expenses 3,940 60,350

Source: Personal survey analysis

Table 7: Revenue of ‘jenfel’ coffee supply per farmer and cooperative

Source of Average Average sale Total Sales Sales Total Remark
supply Production price (Br) Commission Revenue (Br)
(kg)

Individual 1,638.56 10 16,385.60 0 16,385.60 No markup price for

farmer farmers

Cooperative 49,156.80 11 540,724.8 49,156.8 589,881.6

Table 8: Profit projection from sale of 'jenfel' coffee

Year 1 Year 2 Remark

Revenue Cost Profit Revenue Cost Profit

Farmer 16,385.6 3,940 14,140.6 16,385.6 780* 16,105.6

Cooperative 589,881.6 60,350 548,916.6 589,881.6 7,500* 582,381.6

(**) represent the variable cost of farmers and cooperatives, including transportation.
According to tables above, even though the production/harvest volume remains constant,
and thus coops deliver similar amount to hulling stations in consecutive years, both
farmers and cooperatives will collect substantial profit from sale of ‘jenfel’ coffee. On the
other hand they enjoy also the mark up price paid by hulling stations for aggregation and
supply of quality coffee.

Once partnerships are created with dry mills, coops can confidently negotiate for markup and
actual price increment, which will eventually increase their income from coffee, the leading source
of revenue for farmer households. Even though the income varies from farmer to farmer based on
harvest size and quality, an average net income gained from sale of ‘jenfel’ coffee per household is
14,140.6 ETB, while a yield from hectare of land will fetch 7,263 ETB at an average. This amount
of income is obtained amidst very low support provided and farmers produce in ordinary way of
production. Thus, if continuous follow up and support are provided to those household farmers
they can obviously improve their production method, increase harvest size and quality which will
raise their sale income.

d. Factors for Reduction in Production Volume and Quality

15
Like other agricultural products, coffee production is also susceptible to various factors. Among
common factors and threats mentioned for contributing to reduction in coffee productivity, the
following are some of them.

a. Direct Factors: Weaknesses

These factors are either directly linked with coffee producing farmers or respective local
government structures. They are believed to be solved only by less effort, may be through the
commitment of farmers themselves or local government expertise.
 Poor management of coffee:
 Insufficient care given to coffee trees,
 Weeding only once per year (as seen in Goshine kebele),
 Poor harvesting practice of picking ripe and unripe coffee together with leaves,
 Poor seedling species (the locally named ‘Bagaja’ type is highly dominant in the area but
less productive, and it takes several harvest seasons to produce again once it has produced),
 Lack of technical support while pruning, planting, harvesting, drying, and etc.
 Coffee trees getting older yielding less harvest.

b. Indirect Factors: Threats

Indirect factors are threats beyond the capacity of farmers engaged in coffee production or require
more effort and time to minimize impacts. There are factors threatening any agricultural products
and a number of threats were addressed during focus group discussion with cooperative
leaderships and individual interviews with farmers. Some of those foreseen threats are even
contributing to the reduction in coffee yield (production) and quality (marketing) by this time.
 Deforestation and weather change,
 Climate change (impact of global warming),
 Lack of sustainable market linkages, discouraging coffee producers,
 Uncontrolled chronic diseases and invasion of coffee shading weeds,
 Limited government outreach to control pests and diseases (coffee tree drying diseases 3)
 Diseases,
 Lack of sustainable provision of inputs and support pertinent to coffee production,
 Lack of finance and credit facilities,
 Very limited promotional support enabling farmers/coops engage in coffee marketing,
 Limited access to potential buyers and reliable value chain, etc.

Income from Coffee Sale and Sharing Trend

The income gained from sale of coffee is sometimes shared among the family members of some
farmers while some others never share it even with their spouses. The following table shows how
much those targeted farmers share the income from coffee sale to their spouses.

3
Some farmers mentioned that a disease drying coffee tree is caused only by poor treatment provided to the coffee
farm. This needs further research and assessment to verify.

16
 Table 9: Percentage of farmers share income from coffee to their spouses
Number and % of How much do farmers share income from sale of coffee with their spouses
farmers
Equally Partially A fraction of it Never share Total

No of farmers 2 13 6 0 21

Percentage 10% 61% 29% 0% 100%

The tables shows that majority of farmers share partial of the income from sale of coffee to their
family members, while few number of them experienced even sharing half. None of the farmers
interviewed indicated he would not share the income from sale of coffee.

5.8 Elevation and Rainfall: As Determining Factors for Wet Mill Establishment
Even though coffee is produced in various weather conditions of different elevations, it‘s highly
recommended not to establish wet mills in areas below 1400 meters above sea level. In order to get
coffee with better guaranteeing quality it‘s better to establish wet mills in areas having altitude
range of 1500 – 2200 meters above sea level; which implies the most favorable weather condition
for coffee agronomy. TNS Ethiopia has been operating according to such guidelines while
initiating the establishment of wet mills owned by cooperatives.

During this rapid survey, the consultant checked GPS coordinates of all the kebeles, particularly
those where the existing cooperatives are located. Accordingly, it was observed that only two
existing cooperatives at Gumere and Kabo kebele are located at an elevation above 1400m, while
the other two remaining cooperatives are located below 1400m and so not viable for a wet mill.

Finally, those three targeted kebeles where no formal cooperative is functioning are all located at
an elevation below 1400m. Thus, Gumere and Kabo kebele cooperatives are the only cooperatives
that should be considered for wet mill establishment.

With regard to weather condition, Godere experiences wet and humid type of weather with long
season rainfall for almost three consecutive quarters of the year. The area achieves rain between
the times from late January to September, where the heavy rain actually starts in May. The annual
rainfall ranges from 900mm to above 2200mm, while majority of Godere kebeles receive average
of 1500mm/annum.

5.9 ECX Operation vs. Cooperatives Marketing Coffee

ECX (The Ethiopian Commodity Exchange), since its establishment in 2008, is engaged in the
facilitation of grading, storage and trade of agricultural products, mainly cash crops. It has multiple
branches operating throughout the country, especially in corridors known for producing and
supplying cash crops.

Accordingly, at about 180km north east of Metti town there is Bonga ECX branch office in Kaffa
Zone of SNNP Region adjacent to Mejenger Zone of Gambella. This is the closest ECX delivery
center for both washed and sun-dried coffee from the surrounding zones of SSNP and Gambella

17
Regions. Generally, ECX provides three types of services to both private traders and
cooperatives/unions: overall grading, storage, and trading services. Even though private traders
enjoy all the three services it‘s not mandatory for primary cooperatives to get all types of services
provided by ECX. Coops could limit using two ECX services of grading and storage only.

Procedurally, primary cooperatives are expected to obtain approval for dispatch the coffee from
Woreda Agriculture & Rural Development Office before transporting coffee out of the woreda,
which will be given after humidity test is done using moisture measuring instrument. The coffee
will then be delivered to the Bong ECX branch for overall grading and quality inspection process
to be checked in the same manner as private traders‘ coffee. Accordingly, ECX will assign an
appropriate grade based on the result of overall inspection (cupping, bean quality, humidity test,
etc.).

After ECX, in regions like Oromia and SNNP, primary coops will transport coffee to unions for
secondary milling export. However, since there is no union in Gambella region and since the
region lacks a formal Cooperative Proclamation, alternative marketing routes would need to be
secured. Therefore, even though few existing potential coops and newly formed primary coops in
Godere Woreda could engage in coffee marketing, they have no formal union to whom they could
deliver their coffee for export. Instead they will rely on services delivered by ECX through paying
some service charges. ECX does overall grading, provides storage services till sale and trading
services on behalf of those coops. While getting such services, coops could be exposed to
inevitable fees set in ECX operation system such grading fee, deposit charges and sales
commission. Thus, any cooperative without membership to any union could engage in coffee
marketing through ECX. However, the only example of other cooperatives utilizing the trading
services from ECX is when cooperatives have under grade (UG) coffee, (i.e. below 5 th grade)
according to ECX ranking system; because none of the current coffee union is willing to market
UG coffee. Thus, it seems that ECX‘s marketing services are not attractive to unions.

On the other hand, even though there are other unions such as Benchi Maji Union, Kaffa Union
and Limu Union in neighboring zones of SNNP and Oromia Regions, it‘s difficult for primary
coops in Mejeng zone to apply for membership to those unions operating out of Gambella Region.
The only way these coops may collaboratively work with such neighboring unions could be
through forming their own union and then work with other unions in nearby areas, such as Benchi
Maji, Kaffa and Limu, for the export of their coffee. This could be only until the ideal union to be
formed in Mejang gets export license. In such cases, two unions in different regions can act on
behalf of each other if they have established a clear memorandum of understanding for export
services, i.e. until it‘s licensed for export Mejang Union can sign MoU with Benchi Maji Union
and get its coffee marketed by Benchi Maji Union. Finally, after securing export license Mejang
Union can do everything independently.

18
 6. Recommendations
In the process of coffee production, it‘s observed that there are shortages of various inputs.
Farming equipment used for pruning, stumping and uprooting are not sufficiently owned by
farmers; and this contributes significantly to reduced production volumes. Shortage of drying
materials such as bed-wire, net, plastic sheet and others are also highly contributing to low quality
of coffee. Therefore, the following section focus on sustainable ways to address these constraints.

TechnoServe should consider the following list of preliminary recommendations.

 From the very beginning, it‘s important to process organizing primary cooperatives and
union formation simultaneously since these two activities are inseparable. This helps to
take on spot corrective measures, encourage coops, and pave ways for each member coop
and collectively as a union toward enhancing their production, supply and marketing
capacities. In line with this, it is important to support the regional government to design its
own Cooperative Proclamation to facilitate and expedite the formation of primary coops
and unions;
 Some of the farmers with knowledge of market situation mentioned that organizing
cooperatives would enable them negotiate for their products and hence improve their
bargaining power when marketing coffee. They believe there is the opportunity to create
awareness to the community either to increase member size of existing coops or organize
farmers in to new cooperatives. TechnoServe has already started progressing in this area;
however there are lots to be done.
 Based on the criteria (TechnoServe‘s experience) of establishing wet mills for
cooperatives, it will be better to facilitate conditions at least for one model cooperative in
Godere woreda to establish its own wet mill; so that other emerging cooperatives will be
the successor in the process, however, all areas of Godere Woreda are not suitable locations
for wet mills due to low altitudes. Establishing wet mills in some suitable villages of
Godere kebeles, will minimize efforts of farmers looking for distant located wet mills; and
motivate other suitable villages to establish their own, depending also on potential of coffee
as well as willingness of farmers to supply red-cherry.
 As far as farmers (cooperatives members) are engaged in diverse livelihood activities, there
is an opportunity to help cooperatives improve their members‘ access to inputs and
promote marketing services for a number of their agricultural products such as spices
(turmeric), ‗bulla‘ and honey. This diversification of income will help ensure that they can
cover home expenditures during seasons when coffee prices/productions are low.
 Together with zonal or regional government, TNS should facilitate credit for both
individual farmers and cooperatives; by incentivizing either MFIs or local banks to the
area. This will improve even the saving culture of farmers as well enable MFIs and/or
banks collect more and lend more money in the area.
 Most of the coffee trees currently owned by targeted farmers are relatively old enough and
not flowering every year. Consequently they are deemed to replace by new seedlings even
though the supply never met their demand. Therefore, it‘s better to expand preparing

19
 seedlings of improved species (suitable for the weather and soil structure) to keep
providing them so that they can have more younger and productive improved coffee trees.
 Once coops established union and fully pledged to supply coffee, it‘s also possible for
cooperatives to receive milling services for their ‗jenfel‘ from private dry mills on a toll
basis. Until their newly established union qualifies for export, they can deal and sign
partnership MoUs with other neighboring unions, which are legally allowed to export on
behalf of them.
 This rapid survey could be a good starting point; however in order to come up with viable
coffee production/marketing business plan, it should be backed up with further assessments
on detail EXC approaches, Godere coffee quality/marketing trends, directives to certify
coffee, and cross regional unions-collaboration possibilities, etc.
 Finally, it will be important to mobilize local government to tackle the expanding
settlement followed by clearing of dense forests. That will put benchmarks to the
community especially coffee producing farmers to protect their natural environment; since
their wellbeing is highly linked with it.

20
 7. Annexes
Annex 1: Income Diversification for Resilience
Spices (turmeric)
The majority of farmers interviewed produce spices mainly turmeric in their garden on a separate
plot of land. Even though it was not estimated, farmers stated that a large amount of income is also
obtained from turmeric production. However the volume produced varies from farmer to farmer
and also one kebele to the other. Turmeric supplements household income for many farmers,
especially during seasons of lower coffee harvest or lower coffee prices.

‘Bulla’ a byproduct of ‘enset’

Mejeng zone has many potential opportunities for its residents to diversify their livelihoods
throughout the year. Agriculture is their main pillar for subsistence; they produce different cash
crops, spices, and food cereals. Among these ‗enset‘ a root-crop, stable food for people in Southern
Ethiopia is highly produced in some kebeles of Godere woreda such as Gumere, Kabo, and others.

‗Bulla‘, a byproduct of ‗enset‘ is believed to rich in starch and serving as a potential means of
income for farmers in Gumere kebele. ‗Bulla‘ is regularly harvested and transported to Addis
Ababa and other towns. An average sale price of ‗Bulla‘ at farmer level is 8Br/kg and the annual
production of each farmer varies from 800 to 1200kg. In Addis Ababa a kilogram of ‗Bulla‘ is sold
at an average of price 45Birr. Therefore, according to group interview data from Gumere kebele, a
farmer producing an average of 1000kg of ‗Bulla‘ would earn income of 8000Birr per year. This
implies that ‗Bulla‘ is a source of income and reinforcing their wellbeing even when coffee
production or prices are low. However for a coop, to transport ‗bulla‘ to Addis Ababa there should
be strong linkage with potential distributors, and transportation costs of 10,000 ETB per trip from
Metti to Addis Ababa will be incurred at an average.

Honey
The rapid study also observed that some of target farmers are highly engaged in producing honey
both for home consumption as well as source of income. Especially, the lives of farmers from
lowland area like Gelesha and Goshine kebeles are highly associated with beekeeping and honey
producing practices. Please refer to TechnoServe Ethiopia‘s Apiculture market system analysis,
2016 for more details.

21
Annex 2: Profile of Existing Cooperatives
S/ Kebele Name of Coop Year of Member Size Current GPS Coordinates of Coop Office Remark
No Formation M F T Capital Longitude Latitude Altitude
1 M/Meti Selam Ledget MPFC 2002* ** ** 40 160,000 07⁰18.153 36⁰18.561 1,326m
2 Kabo Kabo Edget Bandinet 2001* 32 3 35 53,000 07⁰17.093 35⁰18.721 1,432m
MPFC
3 Gumere Abiro Adeg MPFC 2004* 27 1 28 145,000 07⁰17.902 35⁰20.991 1,615m
4 Akashi Akashi MPFC 2006* 60 5 65 194,900 07⁰13.828 35⁰18.573 1,396m
(*) Represents Ethiopian Calendar
(**) Member size in male and female segregation could not be known during group interview due to absence of coop secretary.

Annex 3: Support Required by Coffee Farmers and Cooperatives in Godere Woreda

S/# Kebele From Government From NGOs
1 M/Meti  Drying materials: net, bed-wire and plastic sheet, jute bags,  Water pump for potential vegetable production,
 Certify and technically support coops,  Improved seedling provision,
 Improved coffee seedling  Leadership capacity building,
 Integrate with government to act on coops gaps
2 Gumere  Finance and market access,  Drying materials: plastic sheet and bed-wire,
 Production inputs: manual pulping machine,  Access to credits,
 Establish wet and dry mills  Establish wet-mill for coops
3 Kabo  Market and Finance access  Capacity building and technical support
 Certify and support coops.
4 Goshini  Drying materials: bed-wire,  Seedling and inputs provision,
 Saw for stumping,  Capacity building
 Quality improvement training
5 Semoy  Drying materials: bed-wire, jute bags,  Provide farm tools and seedling,
 Seedling distribution,  Access to credit and finances
 Technical support during pruning, stumping and harvesting
6 Gelesha  Input supply: suitable seedling type,  Credit access,
 Organize coops and facilitate access to finance and credit  Support in coop formation
7 Akashi  Drying materials like wire,  Access to credit and finance,
 Credit access,  Lobby with government to increase support to farmers,
 Providing coffee quality increasing packages  Provide guidance and capacity building trainings

22
Annex 4: Estimation of Average Harvest per Hectare of Land vs. Income from Selling ‘jenfel’ coffee
Kebele Target Land size This year Estimated Average bags of Estimate sale Remark
Farmer per (Coffee) in harvest in Sale ‘jenfel’ harvested Income per ha
kebele hectare number of bags Income per ha
M/Meti Farmer 1 1.5 42 40,000 28 19,488
Farmer 2 2 30 15,000 15 10,440
Farmer 3 3.5 50 50,000 14.3 9,942.86
Kabo Farmer 1 3 15 10,000 5 3,480
Farmer 2 5 60 20,000 12 8,352
Farmer 3 2 30 30,000 15 10,440
Akashi Farmer 1 3 55 50,000 18.3 12,760
Farmer 2 4.5 60 55,000 13.3 9,280
Farmer 3 3 60 54,000 20 13,920
Gelesha Farmer 1 3.5 9 5,400 2.6 1,789.71
Farmer 2 1.5 10 6,000 6.7 4,640
Farmer 3 0.5 0 0 0 0 No harvest this year
Goshine Farmer 1 2 12 7,000 6 4,176
Farmer 2 3.5 20 16,800 5.7 3,977.14
Farmer 3 3.5 20 11,200 5.7 3,977.14
Gumere Farmer 1 2 17 15,000 8.5 5,916
Farmer 2 4 30 48,000 7.5 5,220
Farmer 3 2.5 14 15,000 5.6 3,897.6
Semoyi Farmer 1 2 5 4,000 2.5 1,740
Farmer 2 4 36 21,000 9 6,264
Farmer 3 2.5 20 20,000 8 5,568
Average land, harvest 2.8 29.75 24,670 10.45 7,263.4
and income per famer
Note: A bag of un-pulped ‗jenfel‘ coffee measures 56kgs at an average.

23