This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS
AFRICAN CENTRE FOR FERTILIZER DEVELOPMENT
A FERTILIZER STRATEGY FOR ZIMBABWE
FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS ROME 1999
The designations employed and the presentation of material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical photocopying or otherwise, with the prior permission of the copyright owner. Applications for such permission, with a statement of the purpose and extent of the reproduction, should be addressed to the Director, Information Division, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Viale delle Terme di Caracalla, 00100 Rome, Italy.
However. with current production of about 190 000 t meeting two-thirds of total demand. annual agricultural output growth at 1. mostly because of more intensive fertilizer use by smallholders. Out of 19 million ha of arable land. Zimbabwe is undergoing a process of market reform and structural adjustment. Zimbabwe used an amount of . an important foreign exchange earner.2 million t in 2020. Zimbabwe’ major crops enjoy a strong comparative advantage and export prospects s appear good. projected to be 842 000 t by 2020. this study examines the cumulative effect of relevant factors on future fertilizer use in Zimbabwe. Irrigated crop production accounts for almost half of the total value of all crops marketed and its area could double.7 million ha are under cultivation (60 percent of it under rainfed maize). Large-scale commercial farmers purchase about 350 000 t of fertilizer a year. Tobacco is the country’ major export crop. and accounts for more than 40 percent of total exports. A specific objective is to provide an estimate of the fertilizer needed to support agricultural crop production for 2020. However. so doubling the area under the crop by 2020. There is ample margin for improving land use efficiency in the large-scale farming sector and for achieving greater land productivity among smallholders. cotton. The smallholder sector produces the bulk of cotton.5 million t by 2020. about 2. oligopolies are the norm for most commodities. crop production value in the smallholder sector increased twice as fast as that in the commercial sector. but smallholder production is negligible. The demand for maize will increase to about 4.2 million t in 1995 to 4.6 percent per year. Agriculture employs one-third of the total workforce. Total fertilizer demand is projected to grow at 3 percent per year. 62 percent of households are poor or very poor and several macro-economic indicators are negative. Sugar cane production should grow from 3. The crop area in s the smallholder sector should increase by 2. However.8 percent for the period 2007-2020. Wheat is mainly a large-scale commercial farming operation. In Zimbabwe.4 percent has been below the population growth rate (3 percent).8 million ha into maize production. Projections indicate annual income increases of 1. Projections are for cotton production to fall 64 percent to 56 000 t in 2020. The agriculture sector is dual in structure with both commercial farming and subsistence oriented smallholder activities.A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe iii Summary With a view to developing a fertilizer strategy. Between 1983 and 1993. smallholder farmers about 100 000 t. smallholder yields are significantly lower. wheat. thereby contributing over 21 percent to GDP in the short to medium term. Despite deregulation. provides 60 percent of all raw materials for the manufacturing industry. with the smallholder sector bringing another 2. Projections for the agriculture sector indicate gross output growth of 5 percent per year.1 percent for the period 1995-2007 (with a 20 percent increase in per caput caloric food intake by the end of 2007) and 3. The major crops are maize. tobacco and sugar cane.
1 2 Figures throughout the report relate to P and K. and introduce a different approach in servicing farmers. A continued effort is required to collect data from farmers on fertilizer use per crop. . cotton. infrastructure. More participatory programmes involving farmers' unions and producers' associations would enhance the sustainability of research programmes. fertilizer costs and produce prices at the farm gate as well as farm household income establishes fertilizer profitability and the farmers’ ability to pay for fertilisers. Research and support services need the capacity to support the smallholder sector effectively and efficiently. Increased smallholder production and fertilizer use will depend on high producer prices and affordable fertilizer. Credit facilities for rural traders and farmers are insignificant. it may be difficult to increase smallholder fertilizer consumption. Achieving the latter requires improvements in access. Zimbabwe produces about 150 000 t of phosphate rock concentrate and has an annual production capacity of 200 000 t of single superphosphate and 60 000 t of triple superphosphate. financing. not to P2O5 and K2O. tobacco. Almost 70 percent of smallholders use fertilizers. Domestic ammonium nitrate s production of 250 000 t meets over 90 percent of the country's total requirements. Domestic production of nitrogenous fertilizer may become unfeasible when energy cost increase. Maize. The coefficients of elasticity for the five main crops show that the own-price elasticity of the demand for fertilizer applied on these crops are high for both farming sectors. smallholder access to markets and inputs. This information. There is an important need to monitor the improvement of the efficiency in fertilizer use. though many purchase less than one bag per year. and measures to increase land use efficiency and productivity. training. particularly on measures that aim to improve the productivity of the capital invested in fertilizer by farmers. P. marketing.iv fertilizer equivalent to 186 000 t of N. and research and extension services. The process of production commercialization requires smallholders to attain and maintain substantially higher levels of crop productivity through the adoption of new technologies and management practices. s Among the key parameters for future economic success are an open economy. A policy that promotes increased crop production should improve smallholder incomes. and sugar cane. Smallholders will adopt production intensification when risks and constraints are reduced. They should focus more on a farm management approach and on disseminating IPNS. This process calls for balanced and efficient fertilizer use. cash income accounts for nearly 53 percent of total income. K1 and S nutrients (1995). wheat. Analysis of production projections and expanded land use for the five major crops2 in 2020 show an overall nutrient requirement of 403 000 t nutrients (N 256 000 t of P 86 000 t and 61 000 t of K) to support future crop yields. Income is the key to farmers’ ability to adopt more effective and sustainable production technologies. The commercialization of public services and the use of revolving funds should partially compensate for the lack of public financing. The total annual production capacity of Zimbabwe’ fertilizer granulation plants is 300 000 t. with crops contributing nearly 73 percent of total cash income in rural households. The cross-price elasticity for the demand for fertilizers with respect to the cotton and maize prices in the smallholder sector is highly inelastic. Without policy measures that ensure adequate farm income. Farmers indicate that their cash position is the most important factor affecting the amount they apply. In the smallholder sector. Zimbabwe’ fertilizer industry is undergoing restructuring.
A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe v Contents page 1 INTRODUCTION THE MACRO-ECONOMIC SETTING AND AGRICULTURE POLICY The macro-economy Agriculture policy 1 2 3 3 4 3 NATURAL REGIONS AND AGRO-ECOLOGICAL ZONES Climate Land suitability Nutrient balance 7 7 7 11 4 THE AGRICULTURE SECTOR Role in the economy Agricultural production Maize Wheat Cotton Tobacco Sugar cane Irrigated agriculture Marketing Trends Comparative advantage and export prospects 13 13 14 14 16 16 17 17 17 18 19 19 5 FERTILIZER DEMAND Fertilizer consumption by crop Maize Wheat Cotton Tobacco Sugar cane Profitability Procurement 23 23 24 24 24 27 27 25 31 6 7 FERTILIZER SUPPLY THE SMALLHOLDER FARMING SECTOR Smallholder income Smallholder fertilizer consumption Constraints and developments Fertilizer use Access Infrastructure and logistics Developments 33 35 35 36 38 38 38 39 39 .
9 10. 2. 13. physiography and soils Cultivated land. 14. t nutrients Maize fertilizer requirements by region and sector. t nutrients Cotton fertilizer requirements by region and sector. and potential for expansion Land suitability for rainfed maize production Crop yield (t/ha) and area change (%) per annum by farming sector Demand and supply utilization account.vi 8 INSTITUTIONAL ASPECTS Regulations Research and extension Farmers’ organizations 41 41 41 44 9 CONCLUSIONS 45 49 55 96 BIBLIOGRAPHY Annex 1 Fertilizer Adoption and Use MAP OF THE NATURAL REGIONS OF ZIMBABWE List of tables 1. 7. t nutrients Proportion of fertilizer value in household cash income 8 9 10 15 20 21 21 24 24 26 27 28 29 35 . 5. 1994/96. 2007 and 2020 Indicators of comparative advantage for Zimbabwe International price projections for agricultural export commodities (constant real prices) Crop fertilizer requirements. 1995. t nutrients Wheat fertilizer requirements by region and sector. Agro-ecological zones: climate. 4. 6. 12. t nutrients Tobacco fertilizer requirements by region and sector. t nutrients Sugar cane fertilizer requirements by region and sector. 11. 8. 3.
A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe vii GLOSSARY ACFD AEZ AFC AGRITEX ASIP CFC DRC DRSS FN GMB IPNS LSC MOA NEPC NGO NR SH SISP SSP TCA TFC ZAPF ZIMACE - African Centre for Fertilizer Development Agro-Ecological Zones Agricultural Finance Corporation Agricultural Technical and Extension Services Agricultural Sector Investment Programme Crop Fertilizer Consumption Domestic Resource Cost Department of Research and Specialist Services Fertilizer Nutrient Application Grains Marketing Board Integrated Plant Nutrition Systems Large-scale Commercial Sector Ministry of Agriculture National Economic Planning Commission Non-governmental Organization Natural Region Smallholder Sector Smallholder Irrigation Support Programme Single Superphosphate Total Crop Area Total Fertilizer Consumption Zimbabwe Agricultural Policy Framework Zimbabwe Agricultural Commodity Exchange .
Chapter 4 analyses the present and projected production of major crops in terms of the large-scale commercial and smallholder farming sectors. yield and fertilizer use to 2020. In Zimbabwe. may adopt and expand fertilizer use. Furthermore. The food demand projections made use population and income growth projections from the National Economic Planning Commission for the periods 1995-2007 and 2007-2020 and FAO estimates for the income elasticity of the demand for food. Converting rainfed cropland to irrigated land or multiple cropping can increase yields. Sensitivity analysis of this assumption for maize yields shows that there is sufficient scope for arable land expansion. Thus. crop prices and agricultural policies can accelerate or retard changes in acreage. There will probably also be economic and environmental incentives to improve the efficiency of fertilizer use. The demand for food augmented by the demand for industrial raw material. the cumulative effect that these forces may have on fertilizer use in Zimbabwe. Chapter 2 provides an overview of recent developments in the Zimbabwe’ economy and s their impact on the agriculture sector. A specific objective of this study is to provide an estimate of the amount of fertilizer needed to support the projections of agricultural commodity production for 2020. Adequate land is available in Natural Regions II and III that receives at least 500 mm of rainfall at 70 percent probability to achieve production projections without exceeding imposed yield growth limits. Though cropland and yields largely determine crop supply. The overall goal of this study is to examine. as can the improved use and management of agricultural inputs. Chapter 5 examines present and projected yields and fertilizer demand. investment in research may influence yield growth. and losses provide the estimated final demand for agricultural commodities. particularly smallholders. overall . especially for internationally traded commodities. Yield projections were constrained by imposing a yield growth limit that did not exceed historically observed yield growth. Chapter 3 breaks down the territory into agro-ecological zones and assesses land suitability and nutrient status. The estimates indicate that 90 percent of the increase in cereal demand will be due to population growth and the remainder primarily to income growth. For Zimbabwe. It also examines the conditions in which farmers. Higher yields will increase the demand for agricultural inputs. Greater opportunities for agricultural trade may also lead to changes in crop production. This study projects the major crop area. cropland expansion is feasible. In the longer run. On the supply side. future commodity imports and exports have been constrained by imposing limits whereby imports and exports will not exceed historic levels. increases in future crop production will result from both higher yields and expansion in land use. Analysis of land suitability for crop production in 18 agro-ecological zones in the five Natural Regions of Zimbabwe and the irrigated areas provided the basis to assess the feasibility for cropped area expansion and yield projections. population growth and rising per caput incomes will require more intensive crop production. seed. The final demand and the commodity trade balance provide commodity production projections for 2020.A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe 1 Chapter 1 Introduction Fertilizer use derives from the demand for agricultural commodities. with a view to developing a fertilizer strategy. future cropping patterns will reflect changes in diets as income increases. feed.
Finally. Chapter 7 examines in s detail the factors affecting this sector’ crop production and fertilizer use. Given the importance of smallholder farming to the development of Zimbabwe’ agriculture and economy. Chapter 8 presents a s review of institutional aspects pertinent to enhancing fertilizer use and agricultural production. Chapter 9 presents the overall conclusions and makes recommendations concerning the development of a fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe. while Chapter 6 considers fertilizer supply. .2 Introduction and by crop.
It has also adopted measures to reduce money supply growth and liquidity. and GDP per caput fell from 1991 to 1995 in real terms. the introduction of these economic reforms in 1991/92 coincided with the onset of the most severe drought of the century. In Zimbabwe. the economy has been adjusting to deregulation and market liberalization. these measures weighed heavily on budget expenditure and ran counter to the market liberalization process.5 percent in 1998. The exchange rate declined from US$1 = Z$9. Public expenditure accounted for 35 percent of GDP in 1997. before picking up again in 1997. Though per caput income. and producer prices for most agricultural crops have increased in real terms during the 1990s. manufacturing (19 percent). such as credit costs. The Government adopted assistance measures. The reform programme has established a more favourable context for economic growth.4 million by 2020.5 percent in 1996/97. Since 1991. . With inflation at an estimated 31. 62 percent of households are defined as poor (unable to buy a basket of basic food and non-food needs) or very poor (unable to buy even the basket of food needs). Inflation is detrimental to various aspects of agricultural activities. However.31 in 1995 to US$1 = Z$36 at the end of 1998. The main economic activities are public and private services (with 62 percent of GDP). the Government increased the price of several basic services and products.8 percent for the period 2007-2020. such as electricity and fuel. the NEPC projects annual income increases of 1. Though abandoned gradually. The rural areas contain the highest concentrations of poverty. still above the figure of 5 percent set for fiscal year 1994/95. has averaged Z$2 000 for the past decade. such as in the fertilizer industry.5 million in 1995 to 21. the trade balance and balance of payments have worsened. and inventory costs for manufacturers/dealers. input prices. in constant 1990 prices. The budget deficit dropped from 9. agriculture (15 percent) and mining (4 percent). However.6 percent.1 percent for the period 1995-2007 and 3.4 percent of GDP in 1995/96 to 6. including distributions of seeds and fertilizers to smallholders at subsidized prices. The latest phase of this wide ranging reform process targets average annual GDP and per caput consumption growth rates of 6 and 3-4 percent respectively.A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe 3 Chapter 2 The macro-economic setting and agriculture policy THE MACRO-ECONOMY The National Economic Planning Commission (NEPC) expects Zimbabwe’ population to s increase from 11. For 1997/98. these measures could slow growth. Though this devaluation has favoured exports. the target was 7.
• to expand irrigation facilities with emphasis on high value crops. Based on the assumption of good agricultural seasons with a possibility of at least one drought season every four years. and • to encourage private sector investment in the rural areas. which subjects the agriculture sector to the principles of financial and economic viability. • to provide financial support to smallholders. the objectives pertinent to fertilizer use are: • to support pricing and marketing policies which promote diversification into new varieties of crops and breeds of livestock. 1995-2020 (ZAPF). The ZAPF recognizes that incomes generated in the smallholder sector and related rural-based industry are important for eradicating poverty. This entails developing and managing resources through the provision of appropriate technical. projections indicate the gross output of the sector growing at an annual average rate of 5 percent. highlighting the need: • to ensure that adequate credit facilities are available for input supply. a cost effective expansion of infrastructure to cover all rural areas. and • to make inputs readily accessible and affordable to the smallholder farmers in order to increase utilization of improved inputs. to complement government efforts. Thus. malnutrition and underemployment. . • to expand and diversify exports of agricultural products by making the sector more price competitive and export oriented. This level of output will enable export earnings to increase the current growth rate of 7 percent per year. In this way the agriculture sector can optimize productivity and contribute to the equitable and sustainable social and economic development of Zimbabwe. the sector will contribute over 21 percent to GDP in the short to medium term as the economy undergoes structural transformation. a long-term increase in agricultural output which exceeds population growth. More specifically.4 The macro-economic setting and agriculture policy AGRICULTURE POLICY The basic policy aim is to promote and sustain a viable agriculture sector. The sector will remain one of the largest employers of labour. One precise target is the doubling of grain yields in the smallholder sector. Its main aims are: • • • • commercialization of smallholder agriculture. and the reversal of environmental degradation through the adoption of sustainable farming systems. In 1996. hunger. The ZAPF also stresses the importance of access to credit facilities. • to promote mechanization in the smallholder farming sector. the government launched the Zimbabwe Agricultural Policy Framework. • to encourage private sector participation in the distribution of inputs to the smallholder farmers. • to ensure environmental impact assessment of all water development projects. another is to increase its irrigated area from 10 000 to 50 000 ha. A stable macro-economic environment and public sector-financed supporting infrastructure are to facilitate private sector investment and so achieve growth in agricultural output. administrative and advisory services. • to establish secure tenure in the smallholder farming areas particularly in the communal and resettlement areas.
Specific objectives on fertilizer supply highlight the fertilizer industry’ need: s • to revamp plants in order to increase production. the main objective of the Agricultural Sector Investment Programme (ASIP) is to enable the achievement of the policy goals in the effective utilization of national resources. cut costs and be competitive with imports. the private sector and other stakeholders need to invest in agricultural infrastructure. In order to achieve the planned increase in agricultural production. • investment in input supply.A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe 5 The smallholder sector lies at the heart of future agricultural developments and input supply is a basic determinant of future prospects. • to break the monopolistic structure and facilitate other decentralized players. and • investment in programmes that support and strengthen agricultural research and extension services. government. and • to diversify fertilizer formulation in order to meet the needs of a diverse market. • the upgrading the level of agricultural education and the training facilities to cater for specialized aspects of agriculture. • to expand and service the smallholder sector more effectively. . marketing and distribution facilities. Indeed. The ASIP targets are: • smallholder irrigation development.
6 The macro-economic setting and agriculture policy .
II and III reach this value. Thus. In NRs I. Zimbabwe divides into five natural regions (NRs): Natural region Annual rainfall (mm) I > 1 000 II 750-1 000 III 650-800 IV 450-650 V < 650 Table 1 further subdivides these natural regions into 18 agro-ecological zones (AEZs) by including information on soils and detailed information on the probability of rainfall exceeding 500 mm (see map 1of the natural regions of Zimbabwe. approximately 8. page 96).4 million ha) and in the smallholder sector of NR III (2.5 million ha). the land suitability for maize can serve as an overall indication of land suitability for rainfed cropping. Most of this suitable land is in the large-scale commercial farming sector of NR II (2. Temperatures closely relate to altitude with the mean annual temperature ranging from 25° in the Zambezi Valley to below 15° in the Eastern Highlands. expansion of cropped land should be feasible in NRs I. Mean temperatures are C C highest in summer just before the onset of the rains (October-November). All arable land is assumed suitable for rainfed maize production if there is a probability of 70 percent or more that rainfall is at least 500 mm in the period October-April. NRs IV and V contain 60 percent of all arable land (11.A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe 7 Chapter 3 Natural regions and agro-ecological zones CLIMATE Based on rainfall.4 million ha). minus land for infrastructure and land unsuitable for cultivation (Table 2). while most areas of NRs IV and V are below this value. Thus. Table 1 shows that all areas of NRs I. This study considers as arable land all designated agricultural land. II and III even at the present level of crop production technology. This definition gives a figure for arable land of 19 million ha. Approximately 2. except in the Eastern Highlands where the highest temperatures are in mid-summer. respectively. Although areas considered unsuitable for maize (NRs IV and V) could increase growing drought resistant crops. .7 million ha are under cultivation.5 million ha are suitable for rainfed maize production (Table 3). As nearly 60 percent of all cultivated land is currently under rainfed maize. in NRs IV and V the figures are 12 and 9 percent. LAND SUITABILITY The figures in this section do not take into account fallow land and land used for pasture or any form of livestock production. II and III 16-19 percent of the arable land is under cultivation. they will be of limited significance in terms of total national crop production.
8 Natural regions and agro-economic zones .
A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe 9 .
10 Natural regions and agro-economic zones .
phosphorus and sulphur. cultivated land in Africa has lost an average of 660 kg N/ha. This contrasts with average net positive nutrient balances for temperate zones of about 2 000 kg N/ha. sunflower. The large-scale commercial sector practises better soil fertility management and applies relatively large amounts of fertilizers.2 percent in virgin soils. and III consist mainly of crop production and livestock enterprises.0-1. continuous nutrient mining with little or no mineral or organic fertilizer application and the disappearance of shifting cultivation with its long periods of fallow has exacerbated soil fertility decline. Zimbabwe is no exception to the nutrient depletion trend. Although conservation tillage and other improved farming practices can help restore the organic matter content and topsoil structure. sorghum. or may harvest so little that crop produce removal hardly affects nutrient levels. The soils are characterized by low cation exchange capacity and high acidity. rapoko. Commercial farmers usually try to maintain or improve nutrient levels through the application of fertilizer and may incorporate some of the crop residues into the soil. The major crops in these two regions are maize.5 percent compared to 1.3-0.A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe 11 Activities in NRs I. millet. NUTRIENT BALANCE Virgin soils in Zimbabwe are infertile with low levels of nitrogen. and cotton. Traditional farmers may apply manure or small amounts of fertilizer. Available soil N on cultivated land is usually < 30 ppm (45 kg/ha). though under natural vegetation most have a good topsoil structure and surface cover of growing vegetation and litter. 700 kg P/ha and 1 000 kg K/ha for the same period. NRs IV and V are home to more than two-thirds of the country's population. 75 kg P/ha and 450 kg K/ha. Most soils cropped in this sector have low organic matter content with ranges of 0. II. groundnuts. Conventional tillage practices (mould-board or disk plough) lead to soil structure deterioration. Over the past 30 years. loss of nutrients and erosion. soil loss through erosion is basically an irreversible process. . In the smallholder sector.
12 Natural regions and agro-economic zones .
industrial crops (14. A substantial amount of the horticultural crops sold by the commercial sector comes from smallholder outgrower schemes. and the agriculture industry employs about a third of the total workforce.2 to 31.5 percent). About 70 percent of the population live in rural areas. The agricultural economy is dual in structure with both commercial farming and subsistence oriented smallholder activities. of which 33. with the remainder reserved for national parks.2 percent per year for agriculture. The agriculture sector accounts for 15 percent of GDP and plays a major role in the economy of Zimbabwe. With the record drought of 1991/92. provided they have suitable land and ready access to other resources.5 million ha. agricultural output grew at about 1.8 percent). it increased about ninefold in value between 1983 and 1993. The economy grew by an average of 3. The commercial sector is highly diversified with tobacco (46.2 million ha. with tobacco contributing about 30 percent of total exports.7 percent per year from 1980 to 1990.1 million ha. From 1980 to 1994.7 percent). vegetable and garden crops (4. namely maize (45. This highlights the need for diversification into high value crops by the smallholders. resettlement and small-scale commercial farmers all form the group of smallholder farmers. Three crops contributed about 72 percent to the value of smallholder crop production in the period 1982-1993. cotton (18. before recovering in 1993 and in 1994. respectively.4 million ha and state farms 0. By virtue of their low productivity.2 percent of crop production value in 1993). an indication of the dependence of the general economy on developments in the agriculture sector. Between 1983 and 1993.2 percent.8 percent). There are 4 835 large-scale commercial farmers planting 475 000 ha of crops and 1. .3 million ha are for agricultural purposes.7 percent). resettlement farmers 3. and in 1997 commercial farms occupied about 12 million ha.8 percent) and groundnuts (7. agricultural output fell by 5 and 18 percent in 1991 and 1992. The country is continuing its land redistribution programme.A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe 13 Chapter 4 The agriculture sector ROLE IN THE ECONOMY Zimbabwe has a total land area of over 39. crop production value in the smallholder sector increased twice as fast as that in the commercial sector. seed crops (4 percent) and fruits (1.6 million ha.4 percent). communal farmers 16 million ha.4 percent per year.2 million smallholders planting some 2. compared to 2. cereals (28. Agriculture is the single largest earner of foreign exchange (more than 40 percent of total exports). The rest of the economy contracted by 5 percent in 1993 and grew by over 8 percent in 1994. An estimated 60 percent of all raw materials for the manufacturing industry come from agriculture. Although the value of horticultural crops is small in relative terms. below the annual population growth rate of about 3 percent for the same period. and its contribution to total agricultural output increased from 18. wildlife and urban settlements. small-scale commercial farmers 1. the communal.
even in good years. but fell to about 32 percent in the 1991/92 drought. either smallholder production or imports will have to increase. beans. Zimbabwe produced about 1. this study considers the large-scale commercial and the smallholder farming sectors separately. However. s The contribution of the smallholder sector to maize production increased from about 40 percent in 1980 to 71. With the expected population increase. gross capital formation for agriculture and forestry averaged 9.0 percent per year as farmers move into more lucrative crops.5 million ha into maize production in the smallholder sector by 2020. Though NR IV has the largest area under maize.5 million t by 2020. there has been a marked reduction in real terms. most of this investment has been in the commercial sector and the situation in the smallholder sector remains unsatisfactory. the area under maize in the large-scale commercial farming sector is expected to contract by an average of 1. tea and coffee. public sector investment in agriculture has been lower than necessary to meet the needs of developing a largely agricultural based economy. sugar cane. its yields are lower than those in NRs II and III. followed by cotton.0 percent per year. soybeans.7 million t of maize in 1995. the yield per hectare should increase by at least 1. The increase in smallholder maize production is mainly due to substantial increases in cropped area although yield has also increased. The net decrease by 2020 in this sector’ total maize production should be negligible. Therefore. there has been considerable investment in horticulture. with NRs II and III accounting for about 84 percent of total maize production.14 The agriculture sector From 1981 to 1990. Changes in crop yields and areas cultivated between 1995 and 2020 by farming sector and natural region are presented in Table 4. sorghum. On the other hand. An expected expansion in area of up to 4. The smallholder sector figures are a mean value of the small-scale commercial sector (with title deeds to the land) and the communal and resettlement farming sectors (these two holding no title deeds to the land). Given the static production level of the large-scale commercial sector. Approximately two-thirds of the production growth will originate from area expansion. maize ranks first ahead of groundnuts. To provide a fair appreciation of production trends. yields are less than one-third of those in the commercial sector. . The deteriorating budgetary allocations have constrained the work of technical departments servicing the agriculture sector. AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION Zimbabwean agriculture is highly diversified. Although the allocation of government recurrent expenditure has increased marginally in nominal terms. Since 1991.2 percent per year should bring another 2.8 percent of annual national capital formation. In terms of crop area for domestic consumption.4 percent in 1988. Maize is the main staple for the majority of Zimbabweans. mainly because of improved management and fertilizer use efficiency. the remainder from higher yields. Maize Between 1995 and 2020. wheat. tobacco curing barns and related facilities. The major cash crop is tobacco. sunflowers and barley. with a balanced distribution between staple and cash crops for export. However. the demand for maize will also increase to about 4. All five NRs cultivate this crop.
A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe 15 .
Increased yields through improved crop management practices and some expansion in land area can raise production. the smallholder sector might increase the average national yield by at least 1. cotton production in Zimbabwe has fallen as farmers have reduced the area planted to the crop. 500 mm is considered the minimum to raise a short duration maize crop. total wheat production should increase to about 842 000 t by 2020. farmers are switching to more attractive crops. due to the high capital costs of irrigation infrastructure. The probability to receive this minimum rainfall varies between over 90% in region I to 70% in region III. Wheat Wheat is mainly a large-scale commercial farming operation.3 percent. The current production level of about 190 000 t satisfies two-thirds of total demand. After delinting. Regions IV and V consequently do not qualify for maize production expansion at current level of production technology. The average yield in the smallholder sector is currently 26 percent lower than that of the large-scale commercial sector. The projected expansion of irrigated maize in the sector requires a corresponding expansion in targeted irrigation development.92 t/ha in 2020. with the lowest for both sectors being in NR I. a prerequisite for economic fertilizer use.16 The agriculture sector The rainfall probability for a minimum precipitation of 500 mm per year was calculated.3 percent per year. The cotton industry employs more than half a million people.72 t/ha in 1995 to 0. With the expected increases in land area under maize (in the smallholder sector) and yields (in both sectors). III and IV produce 92 percent of this drought tolerant crop. the total area under wheat in the smallholder sector will remain small without an accelerated development of irrigated facilities. Cotton Zimbabwe cultivates cotton for its lint. Production projections were allocated over agro-ecological regions I. II and III where rainfall probability exceeds 500 mm. With a projected annual yield growth of 2. Cotton is Zimbabwe’ second largest s agricultural foreign exchange earner. Since 1991. 12 million t in the large-scale commercial sector and 2 million t in the smallholder sector. Imports of wheat amount to Z$700 million annually. Irrigated maize in the smallholder sector currently constitutes approximately 0. the oil pressed from the seed is a valuable by-product.0 percent per year from 0. The smallholder sector accounts for only about 6 percent of all irrigated land. In four of the last 16 years Zimbabwe has exported a maize surplus.8 percent in both sectors. With an area expansion of 3. the large-scale commercial farmers could potentially produce 18 million t and the smallholders 5 million t. the area available for wheat production in the large-scale commercial sector should increase from 35 000 to 78 000 ha.1 percent of the total area under maize and 0. Yield levels vary across the NRs.3 percent of total maize production. Even with an envisaged annual growth rate of 5. The high labour requirements and the increased labour bill in relation to the returns per . NR II has the highest production potential. mainly because of economies of scale in the use of inputs and in management. the country may export about 400 000 t of maize by 2020. The probabilities decrease to below 50% in regions IV and V. The smallholder sector produces the bulk of this crop. Assuming present yields and all suitable land under maize cultivation. However. NRs II. leaving a 23 percent shortfall requiring imports of 248 000 t. If assisted by strengthened research and support institutions.
A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe
hectare will precipitate a further decline in area, estimated at 7 and 5 percent per year in the large-scale and smallholder sectors, respectively. On the other hand, improved management and availability of better varieties on the market should enable annual yield growth of 0.5 percent in the large-scale commercial sector and 1.9 percent in the smallholder sector. The net outcome should be a 64 percent fall in production from 159 000 t in 1995 to 56 000 t in 2020. Tobacco NR II produces over 95 percent of the tobacco crop. As 99 percent of the tobacco produced goes for export, the availability of suitable markets is a key motivating factor in production. In 1995, 176 000 ha were under this crop. Tobacco production is both labour and capital intensive. As the labour bill increases, the large-scale commercial sector will probably reduce the area planted to this crop. However, the area in the smallholder sector should increase by 2.6 percent per year, so doubling the current land under the crop by 2020. The growth in total land area under tobacco in this sector will be due mainly to an increase in the number of farmers producing the crop. The tobacco industry is self-sustaining and well supported by its own research and service institutions. Well-established training institutions ensure continuous capacity building for both large-scale commercial and smallholder farmers. With continuous improvement in management techniques and varietal development, tobacco yields in the smallholder sector should grow at 0.1 percent per year. Sugar cane NR V accounts for 99.8 percent of total sugar cane production. The majority of producers are large-scale commercial farmers who depend on irrigation for production. Smallholder production is negligible. Domestic sugar cane production has grown about 5 percent per year in recent years, partly due to the price controls applied in the recent past. Production should grow from 3.2 million t in 1995 to 4.3 million t in 2020. Irrigated agriculture The following table presents a breakdown of the area under irrigation in Zimbabwe in 1998. Sector Smallholder schemes Large-scale commercial Agricultural and Rural Development Authority Total ha 10 000 130 000 15 000 155 000
The greatest potential in irrigation development may well lie in the large-scale commercial areas located in the rich river systems and catchment areas. By contrast, most soils in the smallholder sector have limited irrigation potential. Irrigated crop production in Zimbabwe now accounts for almost half of the total value of all crops marketed. In the 1995/96 season, crops grown under full or supplementary irrigation contributed over 70 percent to the total production of the large-scale farming sector. The production of a number of important crops is reliant on irrigation. These crops include sugar cane, wheat, tobacco, cotton, soybeans, groundnuts and, more recently, horticultural crops. Smallholder irrigators produce a variety of crops, ranging from field crops such as maize, cotton, beans and wheat, to higher value crops (green maize, tomatoes, rape, okra, paprika, onions, squashes and baby corn). Double cropping brings the total annual irrigated area to some 17 000 ha for the smallholder sector.
The agriculture sector
A more efficient use of water in existing schemes and the development of present or new resources could double the area under irrigation. Assuming a maximum area under irrigation of 300 000 ha and double cropping of maize with a total annual yield of 15 t/ha, irrigated maize production could rise to 4.5 million t. This is nearly 20 percent of the maize production theoretically achievable using all suitable land in the country for rainfed cropping. Though irrigation development may initially target providing water for food production in the smallholder sector, the need to generate income to improve living standards will see smallholders also irrigating high value field crops such as tobacco. Therefore, the area under irrigated tobacco should expand by up to about 29 percent per year. The Smallholder Irrigation Support Programme (SISP) envisages the further expansion of irrigation, with increased income from irrigated crops improving the living standards of farmers in otherwise dry areas. MARKETING The reform programme has led to the deregulation of the agriculture markets. However, because of the traditional features of the Zimbabwean economy and the limited size of each commodity market, there are not enough buyers to ensure strong competition. For most commodities, barring staple crops, oligopolies are the norm. Maize marketing was deregulated during 1993-95. The Grains Marketing Board (GMB) is the only public marketing board left with marketing prerogatives, as a residual buyer of maize. The GMB controls exports and imports of maize. In good years, Zimbabwe is usually selfsufficient in maize, but it imports some quantities in drought years. Farmers can sell maize directly to the GMB or to private traders or local millers. Since deregulation, producer prices have tended to improve in nominal value but have been falling in real terms. In 1997/98, the GMB established a floor price to producers of Z$2 400/t and bought 1.6 million t (including quantities for the strategic grains reserve) on the market. Given the retail price set by the Government, the GMB could not sell above its cost price; GMB losses were Z$183 million for the 1996/97 marketing season. In view of the price situation, private buyers had to withdraw from the market. Nonetheless, there are enough buyers to ensure competition. Though deregulated in 1994, the wheat market has seen demand continue to outstrip local production. Zimbabwe blends local varieties of wheat with imported ones. Import (and export) operations require permits. An advisory council provides marketing recommendations, and has been instrumental in establishing new product specifications. Cotton production has traditionally been integrated with the processing industry, which supplies inputs to farmers and crop pre-financing. With the privatization process sine 1994 and the entry of new buyers, this practice might change. Prices have strengthened recently. With the smallholder sector accounting for more than 50 percent of cotton production, marketing developments should generate widespread benefits. Because of the predominance of cotton/soybean oil, local market prices for sunflower are low. However, volumes of sunflower are too small for export. Substantial trading in grains and oilseeds takes place at the Zimbabwe Agricultural Commodity Exchange (ZIMACE). Local enterprises process the bulk of the oilseeds. Zimbabwe is almost self-sufficient in soybeans and several buyers are active in the market. The same holds for groundnuts. An oilseeds advisory council, comprising manufacturers, dealers and producers, makes recommendations to government. Though producer prices at the ZIMACE generally reflect market values, it is not
A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe
readily accessible to smallholder farmers. Input suppliers and traders now recognize the potential of the smallholder sector and are developing ways to improve matters. All tobacco is sold at local auctions on the free market; it is then processed internally before export. The market has experienced price fluctuations recently, reflecting world trade trends. The Tobacco Industry Marketing Board monitors exports in order to ensure orderly trade patterns. It also regulates quality aspects, but does not interfere in the market. The sugar market is almost totally export oriented. Exports have fluctuated in recent years. For all other crops, the domestic and export markets are totally free and under no special regulatory mechanisms. TRENDS The rate of population growth, the changing distribution of incomes, changes in consumer tastes and the international competitiveness of local industries that depend on agricultural raw materials will determine the demand for food and agricultural raw materials. Though Zimbabwe's population growth should slow to about 2.1 percent over the next 20 years, urban population growth could remain closer to the current rate of about 4.5 percent. This continued population shift could change consumption patterns with greater emphasis on convenience foods. The urban population enjoys higher incomes. Thus, the demand for goods with a higher income elasticity of demand such as meat, dairy, oilseed and horticultural products should rise much faster than the demand for food grain products, particularly the staple grains. While remaining the preferred staple food, the aggregate demand for maize is expected to lag behind the rate of population growth. The current per caput consumption of maize of about 118 kg per person should rise to 149 kg by 2020. This is because of the low-income elasticity of demand for maize and maize-based products (0.1) and the need to raise the current low levels of caloric intake. Food demand projections envisage an increase in the per caput caloric daily food intake of 20 percent by the end of 2007. Increasing numbers of smaller mills are now carrying out hammer and small-scale milling operations obtaining extraction rates of about 98 percent as against 75 percent in the large-scale industrial mills. This efficiency gain should lead to an overall slow growth in the consumption of maize-based products in the next 20 years. Per caput consumption of wheat should rise from the current 26 to 48 kg by 2020. Given that Zimbabwe can grow wheat as a winter crop, there is scope for import substitution if producers can produce at below import parity level. Prospects for exports to neighbouring countries are also promising. Prospects for increased production of red sorghum and barley are also good because of breweries’steadily growing demand for them. Sugar consumption should continue to grow before levelling off at 26 kg per caput by 2020. Textile firms have made significant investments in recent years and the steady increase in demand for cotton lint should continue. Final demand projections for agricultural commodities in 2007 and 2020 are presented in Table 5. The projections are based on population and income projections of the National Economic Planning Commission. The supply utilization account provides an indication for the required future agricultural production. COMPARATIVE ADVANTAGE AND EXPORT PROSPECTS Domestic resource cost (DRC) is a standard way of measuring national profitability in the context of import substitution or export gain. This is the ratio of domestic factor costs to value
20 The agriculture sector .
and fruits. dairy products. 1995. In addition. Table 7 provides World Bank international price projections for commodities that are important to Zimbabwe. However. .53 0. then the lower is the domestic cost of earning or saving a unit of foreign exchange.06 DRC = Domestic Resource Cost Source: W. Masters.43 0. coffee.63 1. The lower the DRC.42 2. Exports of vegetables. and sugar. TABLE 6 Indicators of comparative advantage for Zimbabwe Crop Maize Farming Type Smallholder Low Intensity Smallholder High Intensity Large Commercial Farms Cotton Wheat Groundnuts Smallholder High Intensity Large Commercial Farms Large Commercial Farms Smallholder Low Intensity Smallholder High Intensity Large Commercial Farms Sorghum Millet Soybeans Sunflower Smallholder Low Intensity Smallholder Low Intensity Large Commercial Farms Smallholder Low Intensity DRC 0.20 0. With the exception of millet. the most important being tobacco. fruits and flowers have increased rapidly over the past ten years. meat. Zimbabwe’ new orchards should be well placed to take advantage of the s expanding world orange market. cotton. exports rose sharply in 1998. and sunflower. animal feeds and teas are important foreign exchange earners. Zimbabwe has made important long-term investments in orchards. sorghum. Exports of citrus fruits have shown strong growth despite a price fall in 1998/99. Zimbabwe's low production costs and reputation for high quality could further enhance its competitiveness.72 0. maize (in good years). Zimbabwe exports a wide range of agricultural products.63 0. prices should improve in real terms for beef. and this trend should continue.A.52 0. vegetables.89 0.52 0. This implies that all these crops enjoy a strong comparative advantage under the different farming systems. The projections for tobacco are not promising. at least until a review of EU arrangements. barley. all Zimbabwe’ major crops enjoy DRCs s around or below 0. and transport infrastructure in recent years.48 1. Zimbabwe has made inroads into the EU and other European markets for cut flowers. cotton and sugar. In addition.A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe 21 added.67 (Table 6). Government and Agriculture in Zimbabwe. both measured at national opportunity cost. packinghouses. and the greater is the comparative advantage that activity or crop enjoys under that farming system. the fact that domestic inflationary price increases less than offset the depreciation of its currency should favour Zimbabwean agricultural exports. With the devaluation of the Zimbabwean dollar.65 0.
2 2010 2 347.1 18.9 243.2 251.6 21.0 147.9 102.2 21.9 455.0 144.2 229.4 2005 2 614.71 177.9 105.0 157.2 194.39 166.22 The agriculture sector TABLE 7 International price projections for agricultural export commodities (constant real prices) Commodity Tobacco Cotton Sugar Beef Maize Oranges Soybeans Soy meal Wheat Unit US$/t c/kg c/kg c/kg US$/t US$/t US$/t US$/t US$/t 1998 3 034. November 1998 .33 170.7 203.4 98.5 161.2 121.4 398.1 126.5 Source: World Bank Commodity Price Outlook.5 430.5 138.
the proportion of each type of fertilizer applied to a crop was determined. The five major fertilizer-consuming crops are estimated to account for 256 000 t fertilizer nutrients (Table 8). K. it is important to relate total fertilizer consumed in the country to its distribution and use within the agricultural system. mainly because of more intensive fertilizer use by smallholder farmers. Fertilizer projections were based on the main type of fertilizer used on each crop.A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe 23 Chapter 5 Fertilizer demand In developing a fertilizer strategy. Calculations of total amounts of N. FN = fertilizer nutrient application rate (N. TCA = total crop area. P. smallholder farmers about 100 000 t. Total fertilizer demand is projected to grow at 3 percent per year. P or K contained in the fertilizer application took into account the percentage of nutrient in each type of fertilizer.e. Large-scale commercial farmers purchase about 350 000 t of fertilizer a year. By world standards. and S nutrients in 1995. Zimbabwe used an amount of fertilizer equivalent to 186 000 t of N. an average of 1994/95 – 1996/97) fertilizer application rate for each crop in each NR using current area and average yields. with large-scale commercial farmers applying about six times more fertilizer per hectare than do smallholders. the average fertilizer application rates in the large-scale commercial sector are already high. The projections indicate an overall requirement of 255 800 t of N. i. FERTILIZER CONSUMPTION BY CROP To estimate average fertilizer application in kilograms per hectare for each crop in each sector. TFC = total fertilizer consumption. The total amount of N. sugar cane and soybeans account for 80 percent of total fertilizer consumption in the large-scale commercial sector. Maize. the following formula was used: ((CFC percent x TFC)/TCA) x 1 000 where CFC percent = crop fertilizer consumption. P or K required by each crop in each NR was then estimated using the formula: ((P/Y) x FN)/1 000 where P = projected volume of production in 2020. Y = projected yield in 2020. cotton. 86 000 t of P and 61 000 t of K for all crops by 2020. tobacco. After estimating the average current (base year 1995. P and K) required to support projected yields. percent fertilizer consumed by a crop. wheat. . the area and the yield.
Wheat is mainly grown under irrigated conditions. the bulk of it in NR II (Table 9). Rather. 15 124 and 14 148 t of N. Cotton On cotton the most commonly used fertilizers are compound L and ammonium nitrate.24 Fertilizer demand TABLE 8 Crop fertilizer requirements. where there is reliable irrigation infrastructure. fertilizer use efficiency should be the main focus in soil fertility management. Maize consumes the bulk of fertilizer in Zimbabwe accounting for 33 percent of the fertilizer applied in the large-scale commercial sector and 90 percent of that applied in the smallholder farming sectors. the proportion of compound D to ammonium nitrate is approximately 1:1. Overall.0 percent per year in the smallholder sector. Compound Z contains also Zn and is recommended every fourth season. respectively. fertilizer projections concerned this sector. P and K. Wheat The most popular fertilizers for wheat are compound D and ammonium nitrate. wheat will require 31 458. horticulture. Farmers in the large-scale commercial sector already apply optimum rates and should concentrate on improving fertilizer use efficiency. 6 796 and 6 357 t of N.5 and 1.945 t fertilizer) N maize wheat cotton tobacco sugar total other* Total 47 128 7 100 3 371 2 001 7 476 67 076 19 231 86 307 P 6 875 1 534 674 3 752 636 13 471 29 332 42 803 K 6 432 1 435 708 6 254 2 032 16 860 17 159 34 019 Total 60 435 10 069 4 753 12 007 10 144 97 408 65 722 163 130 N 154 294 31 458 954 2 166 9 963 198 834 57 007 255 841 P 15 124 6 796 191 4 061 848 27 020 58 831 85 851 2020 K 14 148 6 357 200 6 769 2 707 30 182 30 718 60 900 Total 183 566 44 611 1 345 12 996 13 518 256 036 146 555 402 591 * Coffee. NR II has the highest application rates with 381 kg/ha each of compound D and of ammonium nitrate. On maize. Smallholders apply . As the crop is largely grown in the large-scale commercial sector. Where wheat rotates with soybeans. Policies to stimulate fertilizer use can raise the smallholder application rate significantly. miscellaneous Maize Compound D and ammonium nitrate are the most commonly used fertilizers on maize. Farmers occasionally use other fertilizers such as single superphosphate and muriate of potash.5 percent per year in the large-scale commercial and smallholder sectors. respectively. The fertilizer application rates on wheat are already high and no major upward change is expected. The bulk is again in NR II. National fertilizer application rates average 639 and 101 kg/ha in the large-scale commercial and smallholder sectors. Fertilizer application rates for rainfed cotton are expected to increase by 0. t nutrients 1994-96 (480. Projections for 2020 indicate that maize production will require 154 294. soybeans. With the fertilizer use growth rate on maize projected at 1. residual N from the latter benefits the subsequent wheat crop. respectively. P and K by 2020 (Table 10). the national sector average is expected to be 129 kg fertilizer/ha by 2020.
1997 & 1998.4 2.5 0. .ha.1 1. 1996.9 0.5 1.5 2. yield .4 0.0 0.7 6381 23243 29624 6363 82949 89312 602099 394965 997064 600656 1409561 2010217 82794 358707 441502 82596 1280163 1362759 9998 194137 204135 9974 692840 702815 444 36026 36470 443 128572 129014 701716 1012922 1714639 700031 3614939 4314970 912 94 194 33 28 3 26 3 718 74 153 16 22 2 21 2 428 36 91 8 13 1 12 1 337 28 72 6 10 1 10 1 548 50 116 11 17 2 16 1 431 40 92 8 13 1 13 1 689 110 146 23 21 3 20 3 542 87 115 18 17 3 16 3 967 164 206 35 30 5 28 5 762 129 162 27 24 4 22 4 840 92 178 20 26 3 24 3 Area* (ha) Yield* (t/ha) Production* (t) Apparent fertilizer application rate** kg/ha 662 73 Nutrient application rate*** (kg/ha) N 141 15 P 21 2 K 19 2 N 228 506 734 228 1805 2032 21530 8592 30122 21478 30665 52143 2961 7804 10764 2953 27850 30803 358 4223 4581 357 15073 15429 16 784 800 16 2797 2813 25092 22036 47128 25032 P 33 74 107 33 263 296 3141 1253 4394 3133 4473 7607 432 1138 1570 431 4063 4494 52 616 668 52 2199 2251 2 114 117 2 408 410 3660 3215 6875 3652 K 31 69 100 31 246 277 2938 1173 4111 2931 4185 7116 404 1065 1469 403 3801 4204 49 576 625 49 2057 2106 2 107 109 2 382 384 3424 3007 6432 3416 Nutrient requirement (t) 129262 11473 10732 154294 15124 14148 *** Compound D and Ammonium Nitrate in the proportion 1:1 and converted into N:P:K Source: Central Statistical Office (CSO). fertilizer use efficiency improvements are excluded 1623 32689 34312 1275 91878 93154 132968 313689 446657 104470 881681 986150 25684 422869 448554 20180 1188552 1208732 3900 501619 505519 3064 1409892 1412957 222 130406 130627 174 366529 366703 164397 1402903 1567300 129163 3943117 4072280 5.1 3.(t)).8 (national average 1988-97) NRI: 1994-96 LSC SH Tot 2020 LSC SH Tot NRII: 1994-96 LSC SH Tot 2020 LSC SH Tot NRIII: 1994-96 LSC SH Tot 2020 LSC SH Tot NRIV: 1994-96 LSC SH Tot 2020 LSC SH Tot NRV: 1994-96 LSC SH Tot 2020 LSC SH Tot Total: 1994-96 LSC SH tot 2020 LSC SH tot * ** Table 4 Fertilizer application rates are based on yield elasticity and historic national fertilizer productivity by sector.3 0.t/ha and production . t nutrients Fertilizer productivity/ha LSC=5.9 4.9 3. Crop Production on large-scale commercial farms (for area .0 0.6 0.e. Agriculture and Livestock Survey in Communal Lands. Agricultural Production on small-scale commercial farms.3 3. i.9 and SH=9.A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe 25 TABLE 9 Maize fertilizer requirements by region and sector.7 2.7 1.4 4.2 0.8 5.6 4.3 5.3 0.
240 1.5 402 4 407 1. yield .3 11.ha.864 5.26 Fertilizer demand TABLE 10 Wheat fertilizer requirements by region and sector.797 775 25.035 13.8 1.712 613 24 636 1.4 4.654 6 1.783 31 1.016 7.835 10.3 10.649 34.7 1.429 43 39.935 30 2.094 189.005 218 13.425 188.3 6.849 2251 1782 31458 6796 6357 404 87 82 1133 897 7100 31458 1534 6796 1435 6357 203 44 41 1755 2414 4144 7100 895 1534 837 1435 315 68 64 884 1216 935 4144 202 895 189 837 158 34 32 2001 535 491 935 106 202 99 189 359 78 73 1007 270 111 491 24 106 22 99 181 39 37 2247 396 1487 111 321 24 301 22 403 87 81 1132 199 336 1487 73 321 68 301 203 44 41 2369 1382 25269 336 5459 73 5107 68 425 92 86 1193 697 5703 25269 1232 5459 1153 5107 214 46 43 1575 217 67 5703 15 1232 14 1153 283 61 57 Area* (ha) Yield* (t/ha) Production* (t) Apparent fertilizer application rate** kg/ha 793 109 15 67 3 15 3 14 Nutrient application rate*** (kg/ha) N 142 P 31 K 29 N 15 P 3 K 3 Nutrient requirement (t) ** Fertilizer application rates are based on yield elasticity and historic national fertilizer productivity by sector.689 23 3.980 671.7 8. Crop Production on large-scale commercial farms (for area .9 11.6 5.0 3. I.915 8. 1996.3 7.179 77. Agriculture and Livestock Survey in Communal Lands. 1997 & 1998.571 109.367 86 1.5 4.207 278 151.334 834.5 4.814 151.935 1.8 (national average 1988-97) NRI: 1994-96 LSC SH Tot 2020 LSC SH Tot NRII: 1994-96 LSC SH Tot 2020 LSC SH Tot NRIII: 1994-96 LSC SH Tot 2020 LSC SH Tot NRIV: 1994-96 LSC SH Tot 2020 LSC SH Tot NRV: 1994-96 LSC SH Tot 2020 LSC SH Tot Total: 1994-96 LSC SH Tot 2020 LSC SH Tot * Table 4 107 8 115 238 30 268 26.8 9.3 8.923 256 35.452 5.8 0.4 0. fertilizer use efficiency improvements are excluded *** Compound D and Ammonium Nitrate in the proportion 5:3 and converted into N:P:K Source: Central Statistical Office (CSO).753 1.561 115.5 2.2 5.966 13.733 59.223 24.833 841.452 301 59.905 39. Agricultural Production on small-scale commercial farms.165 484 13.t/ha and production .485 669.911 924 78.5 5.472 2.901 134 6.5 1.7 3.660 3. .(t)).899 6 8.9 5.649 84 26. t nutrients Fertilizer productivity/ha LSC=4.e.
Cotton has been a profitable crop. muriate of potash (9 percent). is also used. including compounds A.24 t/ha.0 percent (for irrigated tobacco) would see the national averages rise from 254 to 286 kg/ha (dryland) and 322 kg/ha (irrigated) by 2020. With the projected increase in production. 191 and 200 t of N. 674 t of P and 708 t of K. Sugar cane The main fertilizers for sugar cane are ammonium nitrate (which accounts for 65 percent of the fertilizers used on the crop). the volume of production will also drop. If in 1995 the country required 3 371 t of N. Here. 848 and 2 707 t. respectively by 2020 (Table 13). Changes in smallholder fertilizer rates for irrigated cotton can be up to 3 percent per year. For the same reason. fertilizer requirement projections considered these five in a ratio of 65:20:9:4:2. the smallholder sector enjoys benefits that are more pronounced. fertilizer (NPK) estimations are based on the nutrient content of compounds B and V. There is some degree of profitability on wheat production if farmers produce the crop without using expensive methods such as irrigation. the Crop Packs Programme supplied. but with a different level of sulphur. The projected national average yield is envisaged to grow from 1. mainly because of the competitive prices received. The P and K content in the three fertilizers is the same.5 percent (for dryland) and 1. B and C. Fertilizer application rates in NR V are quite high. and with it the amount of fertilizer required. compounds D (4 percent) and M (2 percent). Analysis indicates that while it is profitable to use fertilizer on maize in the commercial sector. 4 061 and 6 769 t of N. mainly for use in NR II (Table 12). most of the fertilizer used by smallholders. Smallholders apply 1 percent of their fertilizer on tobacco. cotton or tobacco will determine their profitability. P and K. free of charge. The amounts of fertilizer applied to cotton are not as high as those for maize or tobacco. In 1992-97. Compound V with the same NPK content as compound B. Tobacco Several types of fertilizers are used. projected annual increases of 0. . tobacco provides a good return on fertilizer. Two factors determine profitability: producer price and input cost.A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe 27 8 percent of their fertilizer on cotton. P and K by 2020 (Table 11). Consequently. PROFITABILITY The assumption is that if farmers find fertilizer use profitable. other things being equal. P and K in 1995 to 9 963.10 to 1. However. the cost of fertilizer in the production of maize. the Government has intervened several times to help smallholders. In the smallholder sector. single superphosphate (SSP) (20 percent). 636 and 2 032 t N. fertilizer requirements should increase from 7 466. these figures should fall to 954. particularly for smallholders. tobacco will require 2 166. respectively. By 2020. Because of the projected decline in area under cotton. This is the major region growing irrigated sugar cane. The ratio of compound L to ammonium nitrate on cotton is approximately 1:1. Current national application rates in the large-scale commercial sector average 764 kg/ha. then they will continue with it. Thus.
308 4.211 332 209.3 219 419 638 41 187 228 40.ha. yield .755 10.229 16.935 102.7 and SH=19. t nutrients Fertilizer productivity/ha LSC=4.923 957 18.0 0.t/ha and production .6 1.9 1. I.161 14. Crop Production on large-scale commercial farms (for area .169 14.5 1. fertilizer use efficiency improvements are excluded *** Compound L and Ammonium Nitrate in the proportion 5:3 and converted into N:P:K Source: Central Statistical Office (CSO).514 3.663 10 17.1 0.926 4.6 0.8 2.5 1.336 1.1 1.939 795 2.491 45.672 19.821 3.28 Fertilizer demand TABLE 11 Cotton fertilizer requirements by region and sector.7 (national average 1988-97) NRI: 1994-96 LSC SH Tot 2020 LSC SH Tot NRII: 1994-96 LSC SH Tot 2020 LSC SH Tot NRIII: 1994-96 LSC SH Tot 2020 LSC SH Tot NRIV: 1994-96 LSC SH Tot 2020 LSC SH Tot NRV: 1994-96 LSC SH Tot 2020 LSC SH Tot Total: 1994-96 LSC SH Irrig-SH Tot 2020 LSC SH Irrig-SH Tot * Table 4 125 1.627 50.1 0.461 21 371 392 21.520 36 15.8 2.6 2. .314 502 47 92 99 9 18 20 2 4 21 2 4 395 29 92 78 6 18 16 1 4 16 1 4 489 41 97 8 19 2 20 2 434 26 86 5 17 1 18 1 751 43 148 9 30 2 31 2 666 27 132 5 26 1 28 1 339 46 67 9 13 2 14 2 301 28 59 6 12 1 12 1 453 59 89 12 18 2 19 2 402 37 79 7 16 1 17 2 420 26 83 5 17 1 17 1 Area* (ha) Yield* (t/ha) Production* (t) Apparent fertilizer application rate** kg/ha 373 16 Nutrient application rate*** (kg/ha) N 74 3 P 15 1 K 15 1 N 9 4 13 2 2 4 1701 207 1908 319 92 411 214 419 632 40 187 227 8 344 352 1 153 155 410 52 461 77 23 100 2341 1024 6 3371 495 458 1 954 P 2 1 3 0 0 1 340 41 382 64 18 82 43 84 126 8 37 45 2 69 70 0 31 31 82 10 92 15 5 20 468 205 1 674 99 92 0 191 K 2 1 3 0 0 1 357 43 401 67 19 86 45 88 133 8 39 48 2 72 74 0 32 33 86 11 97 16 5 21 492 215 1 708 104 96 0 200 Nutrient requirement (t) ** Fertilizer application rates are based on yield elasticity and historic national fertilizer productivity by sector.602 64.139 598 20.7 2.(t)).441 28.9 0.069 3.778 10. 1997 & 1998.957 1.629 191 34.801 2.291 61 64.635 20.e.621 9.820 46.693 21.747 63 54.103 41.947 11.306 7.9 1.349 9.541 4.594 74. Agricultural Production on small-scale commercial farms.313 15.329 34.144 55.5 0.0 0.2 1.709 114 56.5 3.8 0.616 29.851 5.218 602 158.671 61.3 0. Agriculture and Livestock Survey in Communal Lands.836 2.545 78.992 49.4 0.9 3.999 179.9 0.787 5.8 1. 1996.568 7.916 17.
9 1.6 1. Agricultural Production on small-scale commercial farms.3 2.5 2.(t)).1 2.7 1.t/ha and production .3 2.1 1.6 1. t nutrients Fertilizer productivity/ha LSC=3.0 2.2 1. 1996.3 0.3 (national average 1988-97) NRI: 1994-96 LSC SH Tot 2020 LSC SH Tot NRII: 1994-96 LSC SH Tot 2020 LSC SH Tot NRIII: 1994-96 LSC SH Tot 2020 LSC SH Tot NRIV: 1994-96 LSC SH Tot 2020 LSC SH Tot NRV: 1994-96 LSC SH Tot 2020 LSC SH Tot Total: 1994-96 LSC SH Irrig-SH Tot 2020 LSC SH Irrig-SH Tot * Table 4 654 15 669 539 28 568 64197 2151 66348 52942 4077 57019 2621 553 3174 2161 1047 3209 24 19 42 20 35 55 87 1 88 72 2 74 67583 2738 54 70375 55734 5190 25510 86434 2.2 0.e.9 1.3 0. 1997 & 1998. Crop Production on large-scale commercial farms (for area . fertilizer use efficiency improvements are excluded *** Compound B converted into N:P:K Source: Central Statistical Office (CSO).7 2.8 1.5 and SH=4.7 2.6 1.ha. Agriculture and Livestock Survey in Communal Lands.2 1. I.9 2.A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe 29 TABLE 12 Tobacco fertilizer requirements by region and sector.2 0.8 2.5 1452 8 1460 1227 16 1242 165587 2246 167833 139870 4361 144231 5745 698 6443 4853 1355 6208 44 32 77 37 63 100 193 1 194 163 1 164 173022 2985 94 176101 146150 5796 48163 200109 747 259 437 30 10 17 56 19 33 93 32 55 730 252 407 29 10 16 55 19 31 91 32 51 648 158 26 6 49 12 81 20 632 154 25 6 47 12 79 19 547 411 22 16 41 31 68 51 534 401 21 16 40 30 67 50 640 299 26 12 48 22 80 37 625 292 25 12 47 22 78 37 753 248 30 10 56 19 94 31 735 242 29 10 55 18 92 30 648 126 26 5 49 9 81 16 Area* (ha) Yield* (t/ha) Production* (t) Apparent fertilizer application rate** kg/ha 633 123 Nutrient application rate*** (kg/ha) N 25 5 P 47 9 K 79 15 N 17 0 17 14 0 14 1888 21 1909 1595 40 1635 66 6 72 55 13 68 1 0 1 0 1 1 2 0 2 2 0 2 1973 28 1 2001 1666 54 446 2166 P 31 0 31 26 0 26 3540 39 3579 2990 76 3066 123 12 135 104 24 127 1 1 2 1 1 2 4 0 4 3 0 4 3699 52 2 3752 3124 101 836 4061 K 52 0 52 44 0 44 5900 65 5965 4983 126 5110 205 20 225 173 39 212 2 1 3 1 2 3 7 0 7 6 0 6 6165 86 3 6254 5207 168 1394 6769 Nutrient requirement (t) ** Fertilizer application rates are based on yield elasticity and historic national fertilizer productivity by sector. . yield .6 1.1 1.
Agricultural Production on small-scale commercial farms. t nutrients Fertilizer productivity/ha LSC=97.30 Fertilizer demand TABLE 13 Sugar cane fertilizer requirements by region and sector. fertilizer use efficiency improvements are excluded *** Compounds M. Crop Production on large-scale commercial farms (for area . D. Agriculture and Livestock Survey in Communal Lands.(t)). yield . 1997 & 1998. and MOP. .e.ha. I.5 Area* (ha) Yield* (t/ha) Production* (t) Apparent fertilizer application rate** kg/ha NRI: 1994-96 LSC SH Tot 2020 LSC SH Tot NRII: 1994-96 LSC SH Tot 2020 LSC SH Tot NRIII: 1994-96 LSC SH Tot 2020 LSC SH Tot NRIV: 1994-96 LSC SH Tot 2020 LSC SH Tot NRV: 1994-96 LSC SH Tot 2020 LSC SH Tot Total: 1994-96 LSC SH Tot 2020 LSC SH Tot * Table 4 9963 848 2707 39181 109 4252783 1113 254 22 69 7476 636 9963 848 2032 2707 33141 96 3191394 987 226 19 61 7476 636 2032 38597 110 4246351 1128 258 22 70 9948 847 2703 32647 98 3186567 1001 229 19 62 7465 635 2029 21 3 61 29 7 1 2 0 0 0 18 3 46 26 6 1 2 0 0 0 562 11 6371 116 27 2 7 15 1 4 476 10 4781 103 24 2 6 11 1 3 1 1 0 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 5 Nutrient application rate*** (kg/ha) N 1 P 0 K 0 N 0 0 P K 0 Nutrient requirement (t) ** Fertilizer application rates are based on yield elasticity and historic national fertilizer productivity by sector. 1996.t/ha and production . SSP and Ammonium Nitrate in the proportion 2:4:9:20:65 and converted into N:P:K Source: Central Statistical Office (CSO).
However. especially between rural traders and smallholders. and May and then a large hike in August.A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe 31 The coefficients of elasticity for the five main crops show that the own-price elasticity of fertilizer consumed by these crops is high for both farming sectors. they do not bear the increases in costs. . Fertilizer price increases in January-May would share the burden. Companies hedge forward to reduce their foreign exchange exposure. However. and inventories management of imported fertilizers. which are passed on to smallholders. Fertilizer companies buy raw materials through credit facilities. Because of high interest rates. However. At the same time. the cross-price elasticity for cotton and maize in the smallholder sector are highly inelastic. there are small increases in fertilizer prices in January. could promote fertilizer sales and fertilizer use while simultaneously helping with output marketing. while rural traders and smallholders buy on a cash basis. Most exporters require a letter of credit before they dispatch products. March. Because most large-scale farmers buy fertilizer before August. for example tobacco and horticultural crops. There is a need for cash discounts to compensate smallholders and agricultural input dealers accessing short-term finance at high interest rates. PROCUREMENT Optimal economic financing methods for fertilizer importation depend on suppliers and the relationship between fertilizer companies with their suppliers. The high profitability smallholders enjoy in the production of maize and cotton explains why they are increasing their area under these crops. the volatility of the Zimbabwean dollar increases uncertainty. This is because smallholders only buy fertilizers after the start of the rainy season and there is a need to hold inventories in stock for at least three months to meet that peak demand. Fertilizer companies finance local raw material purchases and operations through commercial bank overdrafts. requiring them to obtain short-term credit from commercial banks. this presents logistical difficulties in ensuring a timely supply to smallholders. firms are now importing and manufacturing fertilizers on demand in order to avoid over stocking and under stocking. complicates the pricing. commercial farmers are reducing their area under maize and cotton and expanding into production of more lucrative crops. More than 90 percent of large-scale commercial farmers purchase fertilizers on credit. Currently. Encouraging the bartering of maize grain for fertilizer. The seasonal nature of fertilizer demand makes it difficult for companies to generate sufficient cash flow from sales to finance operations.
the only operational one produced 152 000 t of rock concentrate in 1995. companies have to obtain permits from the Ministry of Agriculture (MOA). Because of the recent increase in international ammonia and urea prices due to an increase in oil prices. The authorities require that all fertilizer products be registered with the Department of Research and Specialist Services (DRSS) before they will issue import permits. and sodium nitrate (3 000 t per year) for tobacco. Traditionally dominated by Zimbabwean-based companies. Transport to the superphosphate processing plant in Harare increases the raw material cost by 26 percent. to import fertilizers. However. Fertilizer exporters require an export permit from the MOA. The horticulture industry has started importing calcium nitrate. and the customs rules and regulations make exports difficult. the fertilizer industry is now undergoing a period of restructuring. fertilizer registration. Customs officers are now requiring registration numbers to clear fertilizers. which exceeds the local ammonia plant’ capacity. Of the three major phosphate rock deposits in Zimbabwe. its price has escalated and the ammonia plant accounts for about 9 percent of Zimbabwe's annual electricity consumption. Domestic production meets over 90 percent of the country's total ammonium nitrate requirements. requiring s 115 000 t of ammonia. The country’ ammonium nitrate plant has a capacity of 250 000 t. . Progressive deregulation culminated in the decontrolling of all fertilizer prices in 1995. These new products have targeted large-scale commercial farmers and spin-offs to smallholders have yet to occur. The ammonia plant imports electricity from Kariba. Though initially cheap. This deposit is low grade (6 percent P2O5). thus making the process increasingly uneconomic. private companies have registered more than 262 new fertilizer products based on their research in other countries. although contract sales of prescription blends are allowed and fertilizer regulations do not prohibit the importation and contract sale of unregistered products unless they are for general sale. Concentration by flotation produces 36 percent phosphate rock concentrate. it is cheaper to import nitrogen in Zimbabwe than to manufacture it. claim through customs and pay import duties on the border value of products. Zimbabwe imports two other nitrogenous fertilizers: ammonium sulphate.A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe 33 Chapter 6 Fertilizer supply Fertilizer prices in Zimbabwe have risen towards import parity since the lifting of production subsidies and price controls. Because it lacks the manufacturing capacity. Farmers in Zimbabwe use in general rather low grade fertilizer compounds. Imports from South s Africa make good the annual shortfall of 40 000 t of ammonia. In 1997. total nitrogenous fertilizer imports were 176 000 t (exports were 200 t). However. Only two new products were introduced in the period 1960-1990. Consequently. there may be problems of sulphur and calcium deficiencies in smallholder areas if high grade fertilizers replace low grade ones. Since then. import and export procedures remain barriers to entry and to the introduction of new products. for direct application on tea estates.
The industry has sufficient capacity to meet expected growth in demand from domestic production because of four factors. The other half comes from locally obtained iron pyrites. First. Following agricultural market reforms. increased use of high-grade fertilizers reduces the quantity that has to be manufactured and applied in crop production. the local fertilizer market is opening up to international competition. phosphate fertilizer imports totalled 13 000 t (exports were negligible). better production know-how. Zimbabwe has an annual production capacity of 200 000 t of single superphosphate and 60 000 t of triple superphosphate. Zimbabwe imports micronutrients such as zinc (South Africa) and boron (Turkey). if there is a significant increase in fertilizer consumption. The total annual production capacity of Zimbabwe’ fertilizer granulation plants is s 300 000 t. so necessitating imports. In 1997. mostly to Zambia and Malawi. Zimbabwe currently lacks the capacity to produce high-grade phosphate fertilizers such as monoammonium and diammonium phosphates. larger plants and economies of scale. imports of compound (NPK) fertilizers increased from an annual average of 130 t for 1990-93 to 90 140 t for 1995-97.34 Fertilizer supply About half the sulphuric acid required to manufacture single superphosphate comes from imported elemental sulphur (Canada). In 1997. Zimbabwean fertilizer companies should be able to sell their fertilizers in South Africa though they have yet to do so. However. potassic fertilizer imports totalled 98 000 t (exports 4 000 t). Fertilizer firms export about 4 percent of their production (compound fertilizer exports were about 1 000 t in 1997). economies of location to the Zimbabwean market. particularly from South Africa. the establishment of bulk blending plants has provided additional capacity. Second. low-cost raw materials. With the removal of trade barriers. Zimbabwean fertilizer companies want tariff protection against what they claim is predatory pricing by South African firms. as South Africa applies no duty on fertilizer imports. Finally. South African firms enjoy competitive advantages resulting from excess capacity. just sufficient to meet the country’ current phosphate s requirement. Third. Zimbabwe also manufactures triple superphosphate by using phosphoric acid and rock phosphate. phosphate demand will exceed capacity. more advanced technology and export incentives. These are mainly high-grade fertilizers for large-scale commercial farmers (20 percent of all fertilizers used by this sector). Therefore. The two leading firms have recently installed bulk blenders with capacities of 100 000 and 50 000 t respectively. . the move to bulk blending enables companies to produce relatively quickly compared to granulation. Zimbabwe imports the bulk of its potash from Israel. They have expanded their capacity and flexibility to supply adequate quantities to meet demand from domestic production and imports. fertilizer firms have invested in plants and equipment.
at subsistence level. A farmer who is not confident about good returns will tend to stay at subsistence level. which comprises the bulk of the rural poor.5 percent. building. For cash crops. while livestock provides 10 percent. Where grown. • a medium performance group (the overwhelming majority). Low soil fertility and erratic rainfall in the smallholder sector are the major reasons why yields in this sector are so low. SMALLHOLDER INCOME In the smallholder sector. Crops contribute nearly 73 percent of total cash income in the rural household. cotton (NRs II. . the two main concerns of smallholders are: • the limited technological options in dry areas. The future development of Zimbabwean agriculture will rely on smallholders. selling vegetables and fruits produced by the largescale commercial farmers. In this context. and • a low performance group. tobacco and soybeans (NR II). Maize. contract or full-time employment in the formal sector. comparatively well-developed markets exist. Declining soil fertility in smallholder areas could lead to unsustainable production levels.A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe 35 Chapter 7 The smallholder farming sector Farmers in the smallholder sector consist of: • a high performance group (a small minority). What smallholders sell depends on what they produce and how much they obtain for it. limit risk and be unwilling to pay out cash for inputs in anticipation of production increases. which produces marketable surpluses under diversified patterns and with rather high input/output ratios. cash income accounts for nearly 53 percent of total income and income in kind for 47 percent. According to the Zimbabwe Farmers’Union. Non-farm activities include panning for precious metals. which has adapted crop production technologies to varying extent. This reflects the subsistence nature of agricultural production. in the staple food sector. and risks are higher in terms of producer prices. and smallholders will require greater access to free markets. and • the stagnation of yields in the small-scale sector. rapoko. sorghum and groundnuts are sold whenever there are surpluses. Agricultural income may also include those agricultural products retained for home consumption. brewing beer for sale. uncertainty prevails. handicrafts. However. but whose performance is constrained by a lack of management skills and financial resources. remittances 13 percent and non-farm activities 4. III and IV) and sunflowers (NRs IV and V) are for sale. Diversification may be the best means of lowering risk in the absence of guarantees. price parity between producer prices and input prices will be crucial.
The ability to pay for fertilizers is thus crucial to their use by smallholders. The purchase of fertilizers depends largely on incomes and available financial resources at the beginning of the cropping season. and improved farming systems and practices. Fruit sales contribute significantly to rural income in NRs I. cotton (20 percent) and groundnuts (5 percent). This is because the process involves more cash expenditures from a limited budget for the procurement of essential agricultural inputs. improved water resources and soil moisture management. and • constraints are reduced (mostly cash and labour). Income is of major importance to farmers’ ability to adopt more effective and sustainable production technologies. but that smallholders will adopt production intensification when: • risk perceptions are lowered. This increase was mainly due to: • a steady increase in fertilizer consumption due to various government initiatives to promote consumption in this sector. fertilizer costs were 16-62 percent of total cash income received by smallholders. to achieve the desired intensification of production. which have a positive bearing on capitalization processes. followed by NR III (29 percent). Livestock income is significant in NRs IV and V. The largest share of income from crops in the smallholder sector comes from NR II (45 percent). Profitability assessments show that the cost/benefit ratios are attractive for most crops. farmers will be more able to repay crop loans and augment savings for productive investments. and technical support services can reduce constraints. appropriate financing possibilities are essential for enhanced fertilizer use. for at least one hectare of maize and half a hectare of other crops). However. For this reason. for the period 1983-1996. and • the Crop Packs Programme (designed initially to provide packages for 1 million farms. III and IV. The fertilizer bill for the smallholder sector rose from Z$19 million in 1982 to nearly Z$500 million in 1996. Improving access to financial services. NRs IV and V (11 percent each) and NR I (3 percent). • rising fertilizer prices. enhanced crop and livestock diversification. an unaffordable level (Table 14). II.36 Institutional aspects From 1983 to 1996. Farmers' perception of risks can be lowered through: • • • • improved input/farm-gate price parity. SMALLHOLDER FERTILIZER CONSUMPTION Improved smallholder access to fertilizer is a stated short to medium-range goal. smallholders sold 30 percent of their gross crop production. NRs II and III produce about 84 percent of the maize crop. In terms of total value of crop production. especially since deregulation. When the cost of fertilizer inputs falls to 5-6 percent of their total available cash income. . to markets and inputs. the most important crops in the smallholder sector are maize (over 45 percent of total value).
Smallholder fertilizer purchases are now trending down.0 19. With inflation. Almost 70 percent of smallholders use fertilizers.8 62. and • the farmers purchasing large quantities of fertilizers (seven bags or more) are those located in irrigated areas and those with larger holdings.A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe 37 TABLE 14 Proportion of fertilizer value in household cash income Year 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 Notes: 1. 22.9 25.7 28. In 1997/98. Currently. The purchasing pattern of smallholders reveals that: • nearly half purchase one bag or less of fertilizer per year (84. .7 16. Farmers indicate that their cash position is the most important factor affecting the amount they apply.9 36.9 32.5 percent in NR II). subsidies. informal price controls imposed by the government on maize flour and grain are reducing profitability and farmers’ability to purchase fertilizer. the price of fertilizer is high and rising in terms of the Zimbabwean dollar though static in US dollar terms.0 38. the actual cost of fertilizer to the smallholder farmers was negligible. or research into crop varieties that use fertilizer efficiently. back to their natural commercial levels.9 Fert Cost as % of Income Excluding the Crop Packs Programme. a non-price support scheme to develop a network of agricultural input dealers throughout smallholder areas replaced the Crop Packs Programme. Without policy measures to make fertilizer affordable.0 17. grain-fertilizer price parity. and credit availability.3 53. Estimates from Farm Management Data for Communal Areas and 1995 Poverty Assessment Survey Study Livestock Income (Z$) 18081 22321 23653 15676 29642 50942 43203 61209 106809 164741 176647 115177 79824 163277 Crop Income (Z$) 66198 46045 104431 224822 221459 84110 301210 294629 226990 287074 27600 1055205 1026040 281862 Off-farm (Z$) 20063 24304 25637 17661 31628 52929 45191 63198 108799 166732 178639 117170 81818 165272 Total Income Fert Cost (Z$) (Z$) 104342 92670 153721 258159 282729 187981 389604 419036 442598 618547 382886 1287552 1187682 610411 18912 31610 49113 58709 58449 56373 61445 62407 73963 127846 227382 237403 255915 307620 30.2 22.6 19. Although some 63 percent of farmers expect to increase their fertilizer use. From Agricultural Statistical Bulletin 2.4 percent in NR V). four main factors will condition this choice: • • • • price stability. it may be difficult to increase smallholder fertilizer consumption.4 percent of the total (50.
Fertilizer purchases by large-scale commercial farmers vary much more significantly. other factors relating to access. depots and large-scale consignment stockists in urban centres. a 10-15 percent rise in hard currency terms. Smallholders buy fertilizer during the cropping season and in small quantities as and when the rain comes.38 Institutional aspects Smallholders hardly seem to change their fertilizer purchases from one year to another. Fertilizer use Most smallholders apply basal dressing after germination as a risk management strategy. there was no corresponding increase in smallholder fertilizer purchases. This results in inefficient fertilizer use as potash and phosphate are applied too late for the crop to use during the year of application. This results in inefficient application. Commercial farmers are switching to high-grade fertilizers and special blends for high value crops. logistics and fertilizer use hamper smallholder performance. CONSTRAINTS AND DEVELOPMENTS In addition to credit/financing problems. and transporting farm products to urban markets. loan repayment situations. storing. Possible explanations are: • smallholders do not perceive intensification as a means towards capitalization and/or higher incomes. infrastructure. Large-scale commercial farmers can manage business risk. This is because they have higher learning costs as their experience and knowledge of NPK nutrients is limited. • the perception of risk among smallholders is very high and/or production constraints are too high. Many smallholders have no draught animals. Up to 40 percent of the fertilizer sold to commercial farmers consists of blends and concentrates. . and generally no access to mechanized alternatives. and they lack the finance to make investments in highgrade fertilizer technologies. thus land preparation often delays planting. They apply the limited quantities purchased from previous crop sales over large areas instead of applying the appropriate quantities on small areas. bulking. In a period when producer prices for maize rose from Z$250 to 950/t. They lack access to technical services such as soil tests and advice provided by government and fertilizer companies because these services are centralized in Harare. This is because they consider a combination of factors: • • • • expected prices of crops. and the presence of residues of plant nutrients in the soil. Access Smallholders lack access to both local and international markets for their products and receive low farm-gate prices as commodity traders need to make a profit for assembling. and buy fertilizers before the beginning of the rainy season and in bulk directly from factories. rotation practices. Smallholders buy traditional low-grade compounds. plan ahead. Many smallholders face problems in accessing inputs. blends are more difficult to apply by hand. and • capitalization processes are very slow and hampered by factors such as cost of living increases.
The logistics of supplying fertilizers to smallholders require a wide range of products to be made available at affordable prices in small packs at outlets within walking distance at all times during the cropping season. and there are specific training programmes to improve their activities. The diversification of channels and distributors should foster competition. the GMB introduced fertilizer sales through its network of deposits. The adoption of just-in-time methods can reduce storage time. First. The logistics of managing packaging. Smallholders often receive fertilizer deliveries too late during the planting season because of the poor condition of roads. and low profitability of servicing their needs. there is a lack of good communication. They pay higher farm-gate prices for fertilizers because of poor marketing infrastructure and lack of competition among transporters and retail storeowners in communal areas.A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe 39 Infrastructure and logistics Investment in physical and social infrastructure in smallholder areas has lagged behind. in turn. to the benefit of farmers. However. there will be a need to increase storage facilities. Storage facilities are currently adequate for the quantity of fertilizers handled. materials handling. Second. small agro-dealers have thrived under the concept of agribusiness. Fertilizer firms are placing on consignment with agricultural traders lots of about 10 t that can be stored in a room on the premises. should reduce direct acquisition from urban centres. The involvement of farmers' unions and producers' associations would enable such systems to be sustainable. This. During the 1995/96 season. Developments In recent years. The remaining 40 percent buy directly from factories in Harare. there is congestion in offtake from fertilizer plants during peak periods. Fertilizer companies have been experimenting to find more timely and convenient ways of distributing fertilizer to smallholders in remote areas. especially in smallholder areas. Care International and the African Centre for Fertilizer Development (ACFD) started to support the development of a network of community-based . there is lack of timely availability of transport for immediate deliveries. particularly telephones. Commodity associations can be active in supplying services to farmers. Third. warehousing. With fertilizer output. if fertilizer use increases at the projected rate. inventory control and transportation of fertilizers are different for large-scale commercial and smallholder farmers. exports and prices no longer under government control. are supplied by urban-based distributors. combined with the presence of more distribution points in the field. Fertilizer manufacturers have not developed networks of rural depots and traders as they have considered smallholder demand too small to justify the investment. there is pressure to change fertilizer logistics. especially in October-December. imports. shortage of transport vehicles (existing transport facilities result in bottlenecks during peak periods). but currently there is a perceived lack of general market information. The effective price smallholders pay for fertilizers are 25 percent higher than ex-factory prices. Thus. Government authorities could promote the establishment of market information systems to help farmers make decisions about cropping patterns and input purchases. about 60 percent of smallholders currently buy their fertilizers from rural traders and distributors which. Three problems need resolving for suppliers to use just-in-time programmes. In 1997/98. to permit agricultural dealers in smallholder areas to order just enough fertilizer for a specific sale or fertilizer firm to order just enough material for a specific production run.
this distribution structure results in high prices for fertilizers. Additionally. fertilizer-manufacturing firms are now exploring the possibility of establishing their own agricultural input dealers. The capacity of the smallholder to satisfy demand will largely depend on national policies that stimulate production in this sector. The availability of affordable fertilizer and high producer prices will guarantee the future sustainable utilization of fertilizer by smallholder farmers. factors such as the transport crisis and declining terms of trade have affected agricultural production in Zimbabwe. the logistics channel is long because it involves shipping fertilizer to appointed distributors. agricultural research and support service institutions need to have the capacity to support the sector effectively and efficiently. The creation of employment opportunities through the setting up of rural agro-processing industries will contribute significantly to incomes. However. Only major structural changes can reduce the impact of such factors. A policy that promotes an increase in crop production should improve smallholder incomes. improvements in transport infrastructure. The project is expanding to establish a network of 500 community-based agribusiness agents throughout smallholder areas around the country. As rural areas develop.40 Institutional aspects agribusiness dealers in five districts. e. The on-going resettlement programme should make more productive land available to the smallholder sector.g. To cut out intermediaries and reduce farm-gate prices. In addition to the biophysical constraints. . Because different intermediaries need to recover their costs. who in turn move fertilizer to traders to sell to farmers. more income should flow from non-farm activities that add value to agricultural produce.
universities and private research institutions/associations. farmers' unions. as well as for the regulation and restriction of the importation and sale of the same. The MOA appoints inspectors who have the authority to make quality controls in the field. farm feeds. The sub-committee is composed of technicians. fineness or purity specified in the application for its registration. RESEARCH AND EXTENSION The public agricultural research body in Zimbabwe is the DRSS of the MOA. is responsible for the laboratory for fertilizer and soil analysis. Financial constraints have limited quality control implementation. The MOA undertakes the registration of fertilizers. and is responsible for setting priorities and orientations in this field. The Chemistry and Soil Research Institute.A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe 41 Chapter 8 Institutional aspects REGULATIONS The 1996 Fertilizers. Farm Feeds and Remedies Act provides the legislative framework for the registration of fertilizers. The policy objectives for agricultural research and technology are: • to develop technologies which will generate sustainable agricultural production systems with minimum adverse effects on the environment. is an advisory body on all research matters. a specialized institute of the DRSS. Greater enforcement of quality controls would encourage agro-dealers to be more quality conscious. The Fertilizer Advisory Sub-Committee and the Fertilizer Advisory Committee review technical and regulatory matters relating to the fertilizer sector. its container is not branded. marked and sealed in the prescribed manner. Farmers can also address complaints about fertilizers to the laboratory. each one of them being responsible for its area of research. composed of representatives from government authorities. efficacy. and it is not of the composition. Restrictions on or prohibitions of the sale of a fertilizer apply if: • • • • it is not registered properly. The Agricultural Research Council. sterilizing plants and remedies. it is not packed in the prescribed manner. The DRSS consists of several different institutes which carry out applied research in specialized centres. Manufacturers and importers pay a fee to register a new compound/product. labelled. . and the committee takes decisions based on their recommendations.
who could be more involved in on-farm experimentation. and to organize agricultural shows on a regular basis. External financing supports some programmes. the use of manure and mineral fertilizers. • to develop animal production systems in terms of species and breeds. and • to provide efficient technical and regulatory functions to the entire agricultural industry. and producers. in order to reduce dependency on budget allocation. soil management and irrigation methods. Budgetary constraints and a lack of capital investment have reduced considerably the extent and magnitude of the operations of the DRSS and AGRITEX. there should be closer. . to carry out demonstration sessions. and recommendations to smallholder farmers on the use of fertilizers are scarce. Public institutions should refocus their interventions. One such programme has undertaken a full soil and nutrient analysis on 2 000 farms so far. results are often not shared widely among farmers. Moreover. The World Bank has contemplated the financing of an agricultural extension development fund. Currently. This self-financing practice should partially compensate for the lack of public financing and introduce a different mentality in servicing farmers. Other private initiatives have links with farmers' unions and producers' associations. government authorities should set in motion. where there is little possibility that they can or want to pay for them. In 1999. it is totally dependent on foreign assistance and has only a limited geographical scope. the commercialization of public services and the use of revolving funds. on a systematic basis. Though this programme can have a beneficial effect on soil fertility management. formerly free public services will be charged for. The programme makes recommendations on lime applications. Under this practice. and updates a database for extension purposes. crop protection and post-harvest management technologies in such a way as to maximize wealth creation for farmers and also for the nation. the difficulty lies in drawing the line between services that the commercial sector can afford. feeding strategies and overall management so as to maximize their productivity. Crop responses to fertilizers are not totally documented. and incorporate opportunities for cost recovery in a new strategy. universities. and services needed by smallholders. The area of influence covers 19 districts (with another 9 projected for 1999) and the programme is based on 100-200 sample farms in each district. Most public institutions have yet to initiate this reorientation process. In a context of limited public resources. to organize field days on specific issues.42 Institutional aspects • to increase economic returns from cash crops through cultivar selection. articulations in the field are weak. participatory links between research and extension institutions. there is little knowledge about integrated plant nutrient systems (IPNS). The Agricultural Technical and Extension Services (AGRITEX) Department of the MOA is in charge of public extension. Its role is: • • • • to assist farmers directly with specialized advisory services. However. Though collaboration between government and private institutions on identifying problems and orienting activities is adequate. However. the active participation of the farming sector is the key to greater sustainability.
Experience shows that small traders who earn most of their income through the input trade are the ones who take this activity seriously. The Zimbabwe Fertilizer Company operates a scheme targeted at providing credit through the trade to rural traders through consignment stocks. which rural traders should pay for soon after selling. soil fertility and water conservation options. mainly commercial banks. which provides credit lines to smallholders from government sources. community banks. and enable some nutrient monitoring with a view to introducing corrective measures. In order to generate practical effects beyond the mere recognition of specific problems and solutions. Lime is available in the country. However. it is important that these networks gradually gain importance and that farmers. Tight selection of honest traders based on their history and reputation is the most effective way of increasing the success of this approach. e. The articulation of plant nutrition policies based on long-term agricultural development strategies for the balanced development of differently endowed ecological zones is also required. and the Small Enterprise Development Corporation. . participate actively in these initiatives. Such pilot projects should receive greater dissemination. and credit is a critical factor in development purposes. the AFC now plans to convert its operations into commercial banking activities in 1999. which means that public lending to rural areas would disappear. with primary financing coming from social development funds and NGOs. The limited resource base of smallholders is a major constraint on their ability to purchase fertilizers. NGOs.g. through associations and/or their respective unions. Alternative financing has been developing in rural areas for about a decade. The Zimbabwe Association of Micro-Finance Institutions is an umbrella organization for non-formal financing and could serve as a reference for future regulatory purposes. The ACFD undertakes applied research programmes to develop new farming systems. the Soil Fertility Network and an FAO regional network. as is a more decisive introduction of IPNS at farm level. traditionally serving the large-scale commercial farmers. and • micro-financial institutions. but more promotion is needed to properly address the problem. The use of green manure also warrants promotion that is more intensive. • public institutions such as the AFC. Research and extension activities also need to include cost/benefit analysis of fertilizer application rates and farming practices for improved soil fertility. The structure of rural finance in Zimbabwe consists of three channels: • private institutions. Some networks exist to address the issue of soil fertility through the exchange of information and experiences. One specific problem is the growing acidity of some soils.A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe 43 Research and extension activities should focus more on a farm management approach. They face problems accessing credit from commercial banks and the parastatal Agricultural Finance Corporation (AFC) because they lack capital assets such as title deeds to use as collateral and they also lack proven track records. taking into account crop diversification. savings and credit co-operative unions. CREDIT AND FINANCING The existence of financial services is key to capitalization processes in cash economies. The AFC has 53 offices throughout the country and extends loans to farmers at subsidized rates in the form of individual or group lending. These initiatives should generate interesting data.
Although private banks collect savings from rural areas. The Zimbabwe Farmers' Union is by far the largest union (165 000 affiliates). proactive in promoting their products and in dealing with specific problems regarding each commodity. Given smallholders’ limited cash resource capacity and their limited handling capacity. This would enable smallholders to take well-informed decisions about cropping patterns and marketing. . By contrast. representing large-scale commercial farmers. Short-term loans are needed to strengthen smallholders' operations for production intensification. the farmers' unions are also very much involved in working with research and extension institutions. There are also a number of crop producer associations. and high interest rates as constraints on their use of credit. This increases barriers to entry and results in high mark-ups by traders. in part due to the lack of collateral. About 26 percent of households have used credit for their farm operations. FARMERS’ORGANIZATIONS There are three generic farmers' unions in Zimbabwe: • the Commercial Farmers' Union.44 Institutional aspects Large-scale commercial farmers purchase more than 90 percent of their fertilizer on thirty or sixty-day trade credit terms. credit activities for smallholders are risky unreliable and expensive. Credit facilities for rural traders and farmers are insignificant. Medium to long-term loans for investment in irrigation could also be important. representing smallholders of all types of land tenure. the marketing of fertilizers in 25-kg bags should be encouraged. and • the Zimbabwe Farmers' Union. • the Indigenous Commercial Farmers' Union. which reflects the relative importance of smallholders in the farming sector. These unions could be instrumental in the dissemination of information about commodity prices. The farmers who do not use credit identify cumbersome loan procedures and other institutional constraints as the main obstacles they face. Some cite lack of knowledge about credit institutions. Active in lobbying for their respective groups' interests and concerns. representing mainly small-scale commercial farmers. Urban-based distributors enjoy profit margins of about 8-10 percent while rural traders make 14-18 percent. rural traders and smallholders buy fertilizer in cash.
For example. . The extension service should educate farmers about IPNS. The fiscal discipline and public expenditure controls needed to fight inflation also entail constraints on public support services such as research and extension. no attempt at developing a fertilizer strategy can ignore the impact of a poor balance of payments situation. most of the land in NRs IV and V is unsuitable for the common medium-season varieties of maize. Research institutes should receive support in their efforts to develop short-season and drought resistant varieties. IPNS will enable farmers to accelerate crop production and enhance the future productive capacity of their land. and by s promoting soil moisture conservation and water retention techniques among smallholders. This set of measures provides a favourable context for farmers' decisions and options. by increasing the productivity of that land. Irrigation is vital to intensification and strongly correlates with increased fertilizer use. It is beyond the scope of this paper to analyse the macro-economic situation. fertilizer has an important role to play in the intensification of productivity and in meeting the broader economic and social goals of the country. more imports or both. a deteriorating exchange rate. This also means controlling soil erosion in adjacent upland areas. It is important to develop and promote conservation tillage systems for both the large-scale commercial and smallholder sectors. more significantly. Zimbabwe s can increase its agricultural production by increasing the area under agriculture and. Soil erosion and soil acidity should continue to be serious concerns for extension activities. Zimbabwe has pursued a programme of economic reform and trade liberalization since 1991. Projections for the five major fertilizer consuming crops for 2020 indicate an overall requirement of 256 000 t of N. so curbing domestic investments. urbanization and per caput income will require greater domestic food production. 86 000 t of P and 61 000 t of K. Although the bulk of food production will come from rainfed cropping. Because of unreliable rainfall. and pave the way for greater real farmer participation. The demand for agricultural exports will also play a role in determining the future size and composition of Zimbabwe’ agricultural production. However. Together with inflation it creates greater uncertainty.A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe 45 Chapter 9 Conclusions Increases in population. high inflation and the measures needed to rectify matters. particularly by smaller undertakings. a deteriorating exchange rate favours exports but makes imported inputs more expensive. This should be a priority in the key maize growing areas. there is scope for developing Zimbabwe’ irrigation potential through improvements to existing dams. The introduction of fees should help focus research and extension priorities. However. Orientations designed under the ZAPF will be strengthened when the impact of more open market conditions translates into increases in farmers' incomes. The commercialization of services and the introduction of revolving funds in public institutions will help curb expenditure and promote self-financing practices. Thus. as well as for the expansion of the agriculture sector. These should include services such as soil analysis or the allocation of water rights. fertilizer use in irrigated areas can only bear fruit where the irrigation infrastructure receives adequate maintenance.
Price support measures to augment rural income are no longer feasible in the context of market liberalization policies. The scope for expanded fertilizer use by smallholders is limited unless farmers obtain substantially higher yields. where higher fertilizer nutrient use efficiencies can respond to fluctuating soil moisture availability within the season. The commercialization of agriculture requires improved forecasting of fertilizer requirements. Enhancement of the ACFD’ institutional s capacity to provide such information services warrants consideration. In the medium term. there remains ample margin for improving land use efficiency in the large-scale farming sector and for achieving greater land productivity among smallholders. For new technologies to be economically viable. domestic production of fertilizers includes a wide range of NPK compounds and straight fertilizers. The implementation of market liberalization measures has been of particular relevance for the smallholder sector. The domestic production of nitrogenous fertilizer may become unfeasible as energy costs increase. where public sector intervention had long been of major significance. The aim is to double crop yields. fiscal constraints will exacerbate the government’ inability to extend direct support to the farming community. However. To be sustainable. Given the size of the domestic market. It is important to monitor improvements in fertilizer use efficiency. balanced and efficient fertilizer use is essential. and that smallholders’application rates could rise significantly. The articulation of support measures in plant nutrition management calls for the integration of the capacity to mobilize resources with the development of technical. and socially targeted incentives on crop productivity and international competitiveness. The future of agricultural development depends on smallholders' capacity to intensify production. Currently. It is of paramount importance for farmers to dedicate more cash to the procurement of essential agricultural inputs. the price elasticity of the demand for fertilizers with respect to maize is highly elastic. this trend . The advantages of developing adequate domestic manufacturing capacity lie in lower logistics costs and a reduced exposure to international price fluctuations. The development of open markets. The marginal rate of return in maize production in the smallholder sector is higher than in the large-scale commercial sector. A continued effort is required to collect data from farmers on fertilizer use per crop. organizational and financial innovations. meeting nitrogen fertilizer demand will require considerable amounts of foreign exchange. Such information and that on fertilizer costs. There is ample scope for achieving such yields in NRs II and III. fiscal arrangements. it is also essential to assess the impact of support measures.46 Conclusions Though types of land tenure reflect different production intensification and cropping patterns. This would suggest that commercial farmers’ fertilizer application rates are close to the economic optimum. This includes assessing the feasibility of meeting future demand through domestic production or imports. The process of production commercialization requires smallholders to attain and maintain substantially higher levels of crop productivity through the adoption of new technologies and management practices. In evaluating improved fertilizer use. farm-gate produce prices and rural incomes indicate fertilizer profitability and farmers’ ability to pay for fertilizers. further expansion into export crops. The own-price elasticity of demand for fertilizer is rather inelastic. and production intensification will introduce more farmers into a cash economy. s The MOA has adopted a strategy that aims at achieving the commercialization of agricultural production systems in the smallholder sector. particularly with measures to improve the productivity of the capital invested in fertilizer.
which are more appropriate to the economic. Such investments will have a beneficial effect on farmers’ ability to adopt adequate plant nutrition management practices through lower risks. research and extension services. Crops which enjoy a significant comparative advantage. if smallholders are to meet the projected increased demand for agricultural produce. Given smallholders' needs and handling capacity. the authorities could develop a legal framework. However. and measures to increase land use efficiency and productivity.A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe 47 requires the development of adequate rural financial services. Among the key parameters for economic success are an open economy. the prospects for Zimbabwean agriculture are promising. . including linkages between alternative intermediaries and banks. Given its diversification and land potential. Their profit margins will depend on producer prices and input (fertilizer) costs. The effective implementation of fertilizer regulations would encourage dealers to be more quality conscious. Boosting smallholder incomes would have a considerable. are necessary. high producer prices. the more likely smallholders are to increase the amounts they use. fertilizers should be more readily available in 25-kg bags. Such improvements would facilitate smallholder fertilizer use and enable the sector to play a full role in the developing market economy. The more profitable fertilizer use is. There is a need to develop farm systems. Alternative financial channels and schemes should be promoted to service smallholders. including the collection of savings and the allocation of loans adapted to farmers' needs. positive effect on the general economy. Investments in infrastructure. financing. the challenge facing Zimbabwe is to extend broad-based growth to all groups of society. This can help farmers evaluate risks and develop a more entrepreneurial attitude towards production intensification. with the participation of farmers' unions and producers' associations. increases in productivity will require a favourable and stable environment if they are to be sustainable. input purchases and commodity marketing. technology and market access. they will need to intensify production. especially in the farming sector. This means increasing fertilizer use. which are competitive in both domestic and international markets. marketing. the public and private sectors should work together to improve: input. To this end. More participatory programmes with the direct involvement of farmers' unions and producers' associations would enhance sustainability. In summary. Many research programmes are dependent on external funding. Research should examine options for maximizing economic output and incomes in a sustainable fashion. and for which demand (and hence probably price) is trending upward should offer smallholders their best chance of obtaining stable. especially in soil moisture conservation and irrigation water resources mobilization. The development of a market information system. lower input costs and higher output prices. smallholder access to markets and inputs. At the same time. port facilities in Beira and rural roads. It is important to develop a farm management approach among smallholders. should help smallholders make better-informed decisions about crop allocations. training. Financial documentation should be made extensive to new farming practices and production patterns experimented in various programmes. social and resource environment of smallholders. infrastructure (particularly transport and storage). In particular.
48 Bibliography .
Moyo and B.J. 1996 and1997. Agricultural Production on Resettlement Schemes 1995. L. Agricultural Production on Communal Land Irrigation Schemes 1994.P. Mushaka. Madzudzo. 1997. 1990. Chatham. M. 1995. Central Statistical Office. Bernardi. Agriculture and Rural Resettlement. Crop production on Large Scale Commercial farms. National Early Warning Unit for Food Security. held at Kadoma Hotel and Conference Centre. Central Statistical Office. Central Statistical Office. Agriculture and Rural Resetttlement. Physical Resource Inventory of the Communal Lands of Zimbabwe – An Overview. Central Statistical Office. UK: Natural Resources Institute. Madzudzo.J. P. Statistical Yearbook 1995. Central Statistical Office. 1990b. Zimbabwe. Central Statistical Office. Agricultural Production on Resettlement Schemes 1994. Crop Production on Large Scale Commercial Farms 1994. Cotton situation and outlook report 1989/90. Agricultural Production on Small Scale Commercial Farms 1994. 1997. Crop Yield Estimates based on the Water Requirements Satisfaction Index.J. 1998 (in prep.) Soil Fertility Improvement through Agroforestry in Zimbabwe. Zimbabwe. 1996. Ministry of Lands. Zimbabwe. Brinn. I. Ministry of Lands. Tapfumaneyi and J. 1993. NRI Bulletin 60. Central Statistical Office. Harare. Agritex. Agritex. Agriculture and Livestock Survey in Communal lands 1995/96. Survey on fertilizer adoption and use. 1997. 1997. Joint publication of the National Agroforestry Steering Committee (NASCO) and Transactions of the Zimbabwe Scientific Association (In press). Crop Production on Large Scale Commercial Farms 1996. ACFD (African Centre for Fertilizer Development) / University of Zimbabwe. 1997.. Central Statistical Office. Central Statistical Office. Harare. Agricultural Production on Communal Land Irrigation Schemes Farms 1993. & S. Central Statistical Office. Agro-Climatology Applied to Crop Production in Zimbabwe. 9-10 October 1997. Nyakabau (eds. 1995. 1996. Central Statistical Office (CSO. Nyamwanza. Central Statistical Office. & S. Bernardi. Central Statistical Office (CSO). Agritex. 1989 Series of maps with information on various climatic parameters prepared by the Early Warning Unit for Food Security. Kadoma. Agriculture and Livestock Survey in Communal lands 1994/95.). 1996. Agricultural Production on Small Scale Commercial Farms 1995. . Agricultural Marketing Authority (AMA). 1996. Anderson. 1990a. 1997. National Early Warning Unit. Crop Production on Large Scale Commercial Farms 1995. Agricultural Production on Communal Land Irrigation Schemes 1995.A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe 49 Bibliography A. Central Statistical Office. 1996. 1998. Central Statistical Office. Agriculture and Livestock Survey in Communal lands 1993/94. Proceedings of the Second National Agroforestry Seminar. M. M.
Soil Fertility Research for Maize-Based Farming Systems in Malawi and Zimbabwe. Vol. Field document. M. Irrigation Development in Zimbabwe. M.The Philippines. 1998a. FAO. October 1998. Paper. Country Economic and Agricultural Sector Profile.M. Chitsiko. Government of Zimbabwe.1978. January 1997. Budget Estimates for the year ending December 31. pp 277-288. Government of Zimbabwe. Department of the Surveyor-General. Grant. Budget Statement 1999 presented to the Parliament of Zimbabwe on October 15.for Conference “Water Development for Diversification within the Smallholder Farming Sector. June 1998. First Merchant Bank of Zimbabwe Ltd. 1996. Friedrich Ebert Stiftung / Zimbabwe Farmers Union. Chenje.. 1979.50 Bibliography Central Statistical Office. University of Zimbabwe Publications. 1998. FAO. Zimbabwe. Chidzero. Government of Zimbabwe. Restoration of productivity of depleted sands. The fertilization of sandy soils in peasant agriculture. Cole Desiree L. . Land Classification Map. M.K (eds. Plant Nutrition for Sustainable Agricultural Development in Pakistan. 1999. Quarterly Guide of the Economy. 1994. B. Government of Zimbabwe. The State of Zimbabwe’ Environment 1998.J. D. 1998. Department of Research and Specialist Services. pp 169-175. ARDA Estates 1993 – 1997. Zimbabwe Agricultural Journal. Tobacco research and development. and S.) Zimbabwe's Agricultural Revolution. Central Statistical Office. Ministry s of Mines. 1998 by the Minister of Finance. Agricultural Production on Small Scale Commercial Farms 1996. 1998b. M. October 1998. DANIDA / WORLD BANK / MINISTRY OF LANDS AND AGRICULTURE. Plant Nutrition for Sustainable Agriculture . L. In Rukuni. FAO. Technical report. Department of the Surveyor-General. Zimbabwe Programme for Economic and Social Transformation 1996/2000 [ZIMPREST]. Government of Zimbabwe . October 1998. 1995. University of Zimbabwe Publications. Rhodesia Agricultural Journal 67: 131137. Harare. Zimbabwe. Agricultural Policy Framework 1995-2000. Rural Finance Study Phase I : Status of Rural Finance in Zimbabwe. June 1997. Harare. Chavunduka.” CIMMYT / SOIL FERTILITY NETWORK. Constraints and Opportunities. 1998. Agricultural Production on Resettlement Schemes 1996. P. 78 (5). Paleczny (eds). Central Statistical Office. C.) Zimbabwe's Agricultural Revolution. Natural Regions and Provisional Farming Areas Map. 1994. pp 277-288. Cole. Environment and Tourism. African attitudes to conservation.Ministry of Agriculture. Provisional Soil Map of Zimbabwe Rhodesia 1:1 000 000. Grant. Macro-economic adjustment and trade liberalization. 1981. Zimbabwe 1:1 000 000. Sola and D. The Impact of ESAP on Comunal Areas of Zimbabwe. Zimbabwe 1:1 000 000. Zimbabwe. In Rukuni. C.1991/1995. P. and Eicher. M. 1970. Rhodesia Agricultural Journal 75 (3): 61-63. and Eicher. 1998.K (eds. A Framework for Economic Reform . 1998. R.
L. M. Bill H. L. 2-4.R. F. Sithole. Place.N. pp. Sanchez and F. M. University of Nairobi. Draft Country Paper on Zimbabwe. P. International Society of Soil Science. Mabasa. Statistical Bulletin. P. 1998. Calhoun (eds. In Hikwa. In Ruigu G. 1962. Harare Zimbabwe. M. Saunder.D. Workshop on Rural Household Dynamics. Kwesiga.J. L. University of Zimbabwe Publications. 1995. and S. Use of anion exchange resin for determination of available soil phosphorus. D. R. Nandwa and B.L. November 1997. University of Zimbabwe Publications. Nairobi. Purves. M. E. Harare.G. USA. 1970-1995. Mukurumbira. Ndiritu and P. Kenya. and H. Jansen. Soil Science Society of America Special Publication # 51. D. Ministry of Lands and Agriculture (MoLA).S. American Society of Agronomy. Mokwunye. D. D. Thompson. R. Zimbabwe Agricultural Journal.. Shepherd. Sanchez and F. DRSS. 47-61. M.) Replenishing Soil Fertility in Africa. Kupfuma and E. and C. B. Soil fertility in Africa is at stake. Mugwira. University of Malawi Publication. Dambo Farming in Zimbabwe: Water Management. Owen. Soil Science Society of America Special Publication # 51.1961.M. Wisconsin. 1-46. Harare. Dhliwayo and. University of Zimbabwe / Free University Amsterdam. Rukuni (eds. CSRI. Harare. Standard Chartered Bank Zimbabwe Ltd. Hikwa. and J.A. 1994. Determinants of Rural Household Incomes and their Impact on Poverty and Food Security in Zimbabwe. (eds. B. J. S. 3.. 1995. Makadho.. Rukuni. June 1998. In Buresh R.K Eicher (eds) Zimbabwe's Agricultural Revolution. Buresh.CIMMYT-Zimbabwe. Annual legumes for improving soil fertility in the smallholder maize-based farming systems of Zimbabwe. Chibudu. In Rukuni.H.) Replenishing Soil Fertility in Africa..H. November 1998. Vincent. Soule. . Ministry of Lands. 1997. Metelerkamp. Wisconsin. 1978.) Irrigation Policy in Kenya and Zimbabwe. SADC . Mudhara. USA.R.D. The agricultural sector of Zimbabwe.A. March 1998. C. 993. et al (ed). Impact assessment of cotton research and the enabling environment in Zimbabwe. Anandajayasekeram. pp 277-288. A Soil Fert Net/Bunda College.A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe 51 Hikwa. Waddington. Smaling.pp 13-24. and M. Maasdorp. Part 1 – Agroecological survey.L. Salisbury. The Macro-economic Impact of Drought. American Society of Agronomy. 1997. An agricultural survey of Southern Rhodesia. Calhoun (eds. Government Printers. Woomer. New Zealand. pp. C. S. Sanchez. Waddington. and H. Proceedings of a workshop held at Mangochi. Technical Handbook No. 15-17 July 1996. Thomas. V. Business Trends Zimbabwe.G. pp..R. Rukuni. In Mphepo. 1991. Kinsey. S.U. M. Madison. SADC/SACCAR (Southern AfricanDevelopment community/Southern African Centre for Cooperation in Agricultural Research). Botswana. Izac.. Phombeya. T. High-Level Regional Drought Policy Seminar. In Buresh R.) Dissemination of Soil Fertility technologies.A. (1998).Southern African Development Community: The Micro-economic Impact of Drought. Policy and Planning Division of MoLA.G. Soil fertility replenishment in Africa: An investment in natural resource capital. Zimbabwe. Mazhangara. Cropping and Soil Potentials for Smallholder Farming in the Wetlands. and R. P. Conference Proceedings.. Agriculture and Rural Resettlement. An overview of smallholder irrigation in Zimbabwe.J.K.M..R. 1986. Gaborone. Madison. A. A Guide to the Soils of Zimbabwe. F.A. Irrigation development. and W. P. Conceptual Framework for the Communal Lands Development Plan. Harare. A. Soil fertility management options for maize-based cropping systems in the smallholder farming sector areas of Zimbabwe.M. Malawi. D. K.
1992b. 1995. October 1993. Harare. Small-Scale Agriculture in Zimbabwe. Harare. Small-Scale Agriculture in Zimbabwe. World Bank. Harare. Agriculture and Water Development. Volume II: Main report. E. Zimbabwe Fertilizer Company (ZFC). P2O5 and K2O composition in various Zimbabwean fertilizers). Volume III: Annexes. (ed). World Vision International. Country Economic Memorandum. A Handbook for Commercial Farmers in Zimbabwe. Whingwiri. Rockwood Publishers. Towards Sustainable Smallholder Agriculture. Book 1: Farming Systems. Types of fertilizers used in sugarcane production and their yearly fertilizer consumption. et al (ed). Laser Print.E. 1999. . 1989. Promoting Food Security through Savings and Asset Creation. Policy and Infrastructural Development. Commercial Grain Producers Association. Rockwood Publishers. Book 2: Field Crop Production. Ashworth. E. et al (ed).52 Bibliography Vowles.E. Whingwiri. April 1995. May 1991. Vincent A. Background documents. Fertilizer Price List (showing N. ZTA (Zimbabwe Tobacco Association) / FDT (Farmers' Development Trust). Zimbabwe Sugar Association (ZSA). 1992a. Conservation Tillage. World Bank / Ministry af Lands. World Bank. Zimbabwe .Achieving Shared Growth. Agriculture Sector Memorandum. M. November 1995.
education and age. the significant factors were: age. though three-quarters of the farmers interviewed knew about the general benefits of fertilizer use. previous use. and grain-fertilizer price parity and credit availability. knowledge of incremental value. fertilizer availability. price information. the survey sought to develop a dialogue with farmers on the fertilizer market. size of landholding. . the factors they consider when deciding on fertilizer purchases. In addition. More than half of the farmers (56. with 47.5 percent) failed to obtain the desired results from using fertilizers. education. tabulated and analysed by experts in Zimbabwe. In 1996-97 80. distance from a sale point. Nonetheless. and access to an all-weather road. sex and education. The two types of fertilizer applied to maize by the farmers were Compound D (by 49. Some 63 percent of the farmers interviewed expected to increase their use of fertilizers. their knowledge about how and when to apply fertilizer. which fertilizer provides which specific benefits.7 percent of them selling grain in order to obtain cash to be able to do so. The farmers indicated their cash position as the most important factor affecting the quantity of fertilizer they apply. The data were then processed.6 percent). fertilizer supplies and availability of extension services. and grain sales. The number of farmers using fertilizers has grown considerably since independence. credit availability. the overall trend in fertilizer consumption is upward. and what sort of incremental value fertilizer use brings was not always correct and was sometimes mistaken. previous use. For fertilizer demand the significant factors were product knowledge. these unsatisfactory results were due either to too much rain or to too little rain. grain sales. Overall. government subsidies.A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe 53 Annex 1 Fertilizer adoption and use survey: Zimbabwe SUMMARY This annex concerns fertilizer use in Zimbabwe and presents the finding of a recently conducted nation-wide survey into small-scale farming and fertilizer adoption and use. grain sales. From the survey it emerges that 69 percent of small-scale farmers use fertilizers. In their view. sex. and the role of prices in determining fertilizer demand. This was easily the top ranked crop in terms of fertilizer application with cotton second (13. most of whom (76 percent) first learned about the benefits of doing so from Agritex. The probit estimation looked at critical levels of fertilizer application. the reasons underlying their fertilizer allocation decisions. credit availability. Of the various factors included in the survey as possible determinants of fertilizer adoption. For fertilizer purchases.1 percent). Survey teams travelled around the country to interview a sample number of small-scale farmers in order to obtain information concerning their knowledge of fertilizer benefits. the four main factors for encouraging increased fertilizer use which influence their decision to buy fertilizers are price stability.9 percent) and ammonium nitrate (by 50.7 percent of the farmers interviewed had applied fertilizer to maize. Cash shortages and lack of credit were given as the major reasons for failing to apply the recommended quantities of fertilizer. The following variables were significant for fertilizer adoption: natural region. those that the data showed significant were: age. product knowledge. In their view.
Zimbabwe has been divided into five natural regions (NRs). • determinants of disruption in fertilizer use. Analysis of the determinant factors The determinants of total fertilizer demand were grouped into the following three categories and analysed to evaluate their impact: • determinants of fertilizer adoption. Defining the variables As a farmer’ decision to adopt and use fertilizer is determined by several variables. Information developed by the survey will be used to develop and refine strategies for further liberalizing the fertilizer marketing and distribution system in support of improved availability. agricultural production. In view of the fact that the regions were created. which have a greater influence on small-scale farmers in the adoption and interruption of fertilizer use and the level of fertilizer purchases. • determinants of fertilizer purchase. Although the various factors affecting total fertilizer demand may well be interrelated. and pattern of fertilizer use. level of agricultural development. The country has a total area of 38 945 750 ha under cultivation. a number of s factors were included in the interview questionnaire. it was decided to consider each of the five NRs as a survey zone. • to develop a procedure for identifying the reasoning behind farmers’ allocation of fertilizers to different crops in different years in different areas of the country. • to open a dialogue with farmers on the structure and functioning of the fertilizer market. the African Centre for Fertilizer Development (ACFD) and other development agencies on actual and potential demand for fertilizer and current farming practices among smallholder farmers in Zimbabwe. Therefore. FAO. On the basis of rainfall. The NRs have distinct features relating to: rainfall (amount and distribution). • to develop an empirically based understanding of the role of pricing in fertilizer demand. to plan and monitor the growth of agriculture and research and that the development of agriculture is planned on the basis of these NRs. primarily. efforts were made to identify the factors. each factor can play a significant role in the decision-making process.54 Fertilizer adoption and use survey: Zimbabwe SURVEY OBJECTIVES Objectives of the fertilizer adoption and market survey The overall objective of the survey was to collect data and develop information for use by the Government of Zimbabwe. increased aggregate demand and effective use of fertilizers. The specific objectives of the survey were: • to measure the extent and depth of farmers’knowledge of the usefulness of fertilizers. population of small-scale farmers. Outline of the area covered Zimbabwe is an important agricultural country located in southern Africa. • to develop a preliminary understanding and ranking of the factors which farmers take into consideration when deciding to purchase fertilizers. soil type and climatic factors. The responses received from the respondents were analysed and grouped into the following six categories: .
in general. phosphate or potash fertilizer (specific type(s) used) on specific crops (maize. Information required: What factors are involved in farmers’ decisions (a) to use different amounts of fertilizers each year or (b) to use fertilizers at all in each of these years? These factors could be availability of supply at the right time. access. wheat. sorghum and pulses)? Objective: To develop a procedure for identifying the reasoning behind farmers’ allocation of fertilizers to different crops in different years in different areas of the country. Information required: What level of fertilizers did farmers use on the various crops specified above in the last three years and what yields were obtained? What levels of fertilizers are farmers planning to use in 1997/98 and why? On what calculations/deliberations is this level based? Objective: To develop a preliminary understanding and ranking of the factors which farmers take into consideration when deciding to purchase fertilizers.)? . availability or lack of money. The information required for each objective is given below. cost of fertilizers. Information required: How important is the price of fertilizers in the decision to use/not to use. product knowledge and awareness. Survey results The survey results are presented in the form of largely self-explanatory tables with brief comments as necessary to highlight particular aspects. logistics and supply factors. Objective: To measure the extent and depth of farmers’knowledge of the usefulness of fertilizers. knowledge of probable local market crop. credit availability. level of rainfall or irrigation water. understanding of cost-benefit ratio. be attributed to the use of a certain amount of nitrogenous. fertilizer and grain prices. Information required: How many farmers know what fertilizers do (or can do) for them in terms of increased yield? How general or specific is this knowledge? Which farmers know the yield difference (measured in kilograms per hectare) that can. perception of credit risk. or use moderate amounts on the crops cultivated compared to other factors (e. Objective: To develop an empirically based understanding of the role of pricing in fertilizer demand. degree to which crops are marketed. and soil types being cultivated. etc. level of access to markets.g. resource endowment.A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe 55 • • • • • • personal attributes. DETAILS OF THE SURVEY APPROACH Information required The specific objectives of the survey necessitated the gathering of specific related information. in the right quantity and quality. credit availability.
cotton. sorghum and pearl millet. Survey zone 4 (NR IV) NR IV has a total area of 15 515 887 ha (40 percent of the total area of Zimbabwe). Mutasa. Kadoma. Marange. Zaka. Livestock farming is also conducted on an intensive basis in this area. . Goromonzi. A total of 85 samples were planned for this survey zone. Nyanga. pearl millet. Survey zone 2 (NR II) NR II has a cultivated area of 5 861 043 ha (15 percent of the total area of Zimbabwe) and 213 000 cropping farmers. Farming settlements from the districts of Chipinge. Magunje. NR III is known as the semi-intensive farming zone of the country. sunflower and rapoko. Gokwe South. cotton. Guruve. Muzarabani.56 Fertilizer adoption and use survey: Zimbabwe Objective: To open a dialogue with farmers on the structure and functioning of the fertilizer market. Chipinge. The sampling locations were randomly selected from the districts of Chikomba. Maize. sunflower. the small-scale farmers grow tobacco. finger millet. It is known as the semi-extensive farming area of the country. Hwedza. Gweru. Chimanimani. For interview purposes. cotton. the villages/farming settlements were selected randomly and in consultation with Agritex staff from the districts of Chimanimani. Hurungwe. groundnuts and sunflower are the main crops grown by the small-scale farmers in this region. groundnuts. groundnuts. Mutasa. Gokwe south. Hwedza. A total of 780 samples were planned for this zone. Murehwa. Murehwa. The region receives an annual rainfall of 450-650 mm. Zvishavane and Gokwe North. The villages/farming settlements from the districts of Chegutu. Chivi. Marondera. Marange. It has an average rainfall of 900-1 700 mm per year and is known as the specialized and diversified farming area of the country. Zimbabwe was divided into five survey zones corresponding to the five natural regions (NRs) of the country. A total of 600 samples were planned for this survey zone. There are 442 505 small-scale cropping farmers with a total cropped area of 844 256 ha. Survey zone 3 (NR III) NR III has a total area of 7 292 367 ha (19 percent of the total area of the country). Guruve. A total number of 252 269 small-scale cropping farmers are settled in this region. It has an annual rainfall of 750-1 000 mm and is known as the intensive farming area of the country. sorghum. Magunje. Maize. Hurungwe. groundnuts and sunflower are cultivated in this zone. Kadoma. finger millet. Nyanga and Mutare were selected for sampling on a random basis. Information required: What are farmers’ views on the fertilizer supply and distribution system? Do farmers think that having private as well as public fertilizer retailers and wholesalers is a good idea? Is it important for the government to continue to set prices? What do farmers think should be done to improve the system? Survey design For the purposes of the survey. It receives an annual rainfall of 650-750 mm. Maize. Nyanga and Mutare. Survey zone 1 (NR I) NR I has a total area of 680 560 ha (2 percent of the total area of the country) and a population of 58 755 small-scale farmers with 160 000 ha under cultivation. Masvingo. Esigodini. pearl millet. Mutoko. finger millet. The major crops grown by the small-scale farmers are maize.
of small-scale farmers 58 755 213 000 252 269 442 505 165 869 1 132 398 No. Each NR was subdivided into survey circles.20 0. a team of 15 enumerators and 3 survey supervisors was recruited through the Institute of Development Studies. Kadoma. Selection and training of survey staff To carry out the survey. Mutoko. A total of 860 samples were planned from this survey zone. Gwanda. accessibility and mode of transportation. It receives less than 200 mm of rainfall per year and is primarily a dryland farming area of Zimbabwe. TABLE 1 Breakdown of planned samples Natural region I II III IV V TOTAL Total no. Muzarabani. cropping pattern. etc. Chipinge. Hurungwe. pearl millet and groundnuts. Survey zone 5 (NR V) NR V has a cultivated area of 9 590 743 ha (24 percent of the total area of the country). Table 1 presents the breakdown by NR of the population of small-scale cropping farmers and the planned number of samples for each survey zone. the following factors were taken into consideration: • • • • population of small-scale farmers. Due to time constraints. Chivi. Sample size It was planed to interview a total of 3 025 individual farmers from all five NRs of the country. Kariba.26 In selecting the number of farmers from each survey zone to interview. Masvingo. Gutu. efforts were made to make the survey as representative as possible. Chimanimani. Mutoko. However.15 0. fertilizer consumption pattern in the region. Gweru. Note: Several districts are included in more than one NR and therefore appear to be repeated in the survey zones. The main crops grown are maize. Efforts were made to engage people with relevant knowledge of the natural regions and sufficient experience in similar work. A total of 700 samples were planned for this zone. Kariba. Nyanga and Mutare. . The sampling locations were selected from the districts of Buhera. Gwanda. The survey team consisted of 15 men and 3 women. sorghum. Zvishavane and Gokwe North were selected for interview purposes.43 0. University of Zimbabwe.35 0. the actual number of samples had to be limited. Guruve.A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe 57 Gutu. the approaching rainy season and rural transport problems.20 0. There are 165 869 cropping farmers in this zone. It is known as the extensive farming area of the country. of samples planned 85 600 780 860 700 3 025 % of total population 0.
communication methods. A questionnaire provided by FAO was revised and modified to suit local conditions and requirements. Each team was provided with a brief outline of the sampling area to be surveyed. The questionnaires were then printed and copies provided to each member of the survey team. The purpose of each question was discussed in order to give the survey staff a thorough understanding of all the questions. use merits and methods of use of fertilizers. At the end of the training session. sampling techniques. . Although the enumerators could communicate in English in most sampling areas. fertilizer marketing scenario in Zimbabwe. The training curriculum included the following subjects: • • • • • product knowledge. the help of some local Agritex staff was needed in NR V in order to communicate effectively with the farmers. Method of data collection Individual interviews The enumerators visited the individual farmers at their homes/farms for face-to-face interviews. The survey teams were able to complete 2 969 questionnaires of the 3 025 planned (Table 2). introduction to the five natural regions of Zimbabwe.58 Fertilizer adoption and use survey: Zimbabwe A comprehensive five-day training workshop was organized to update the survey staff’ s knowledge on fertilizer marketing and enhance their data collection skills. To minimize travelling time. The areas to be visited were earmarked and the survey staff was grouped into three teams. Experts in the relevant fields were invited from the University of Zimbabwe and ACFD to discuss various subjects with the survey team. Development and pre-testing of the questionnaire The training workshop devoted considerable time to the development of the questionnaire. Logistics planning To ensure the efficient movement of the survey team. Two separate questionnaires were developed: • a questionnaire for individual farmer interviews. The problems encountered by the survey team were suitably addressed. each headed by a survey supervisor. • a questionnaire for interviews of group of farmers. This plan also facilitated the survey management team in its visits to the enumerators to inspect the work and offer on-the-spot advice for the efficient execution of the survey work. agro-dealers. The data collected were evaluated and the questionnaire was modified where necessary. three vehicles were provided to the survey staff. the questionnaires were pre-tested by the survey team in two nearby villages. a logistics plan was formulated through a proper understanding of the topography of the survey area.. Agritex representatives and officials of the MOA and fertilizer industry.
A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe
TABLE 2 Planned and actual samples NR I II III IV V TOTAL No. of samples planned 85 600 780 860 700 3 025 Actual samples 76 586 766 847 694 2 969 Variation -9 -14 -14 -13 -6 -56
Group interviews The survey supervisors and staff of the management team conducted fifty-five group interviews. Each group included 15-20 farmers, agro-dealers, and extension workers. Non-structured interviews The team leader and technical adviser had discussions with the farmers, Agritex staff, agrodealers, and sales staff of the agri-input industry in order to obtain firsthand information and to check the flow of information being gathered by the field staff. Efforts were made to develop an up-to-date picture of the fertilizer adoption and marketing situation in the country from information provided by the senior officers involved in policy making, and of the production, marketing and promotion of fertilizers in the country. Data analysis method Experts of the University of Zimbabwe processed; tabulated and analysed the data collected using the SPSS statistical methods. Experts of the ACFD shaped the data analysis document prepared by the University of Zimbabwe into a survey report. Variables and related hypotheses The following six categories were included in the survey. (i) Personal attributes Personal attributes such as age, sex, education and family size are expected to have an impact on the level of adoption and intensity of fertilizer use by small-scale farmers. These factors are defined in terms of: Age: Age is defined as the age of the head of the farming family. The hypothesis is that younger farmers are less risk averse than older farmers are. Age, therefore, was expected to have a negative coefficient, as older farmers should be less willing to adopt fertilizer use or apply higher doses of fertilizers as compared to young farmers. Sex: Sex refers to the head of the farming family being a male or a female. As families headed by women are generally poorer and more frequently have a subsistence level of farming, they are expected to have less capacity to adopt fertilizer use and to apply less fertilizer than farming families headed by a male member. This factor, therefore, was expected to have a negative coefficient. Education: Education refers to the literacy level of the head of the farming family. Being more exposed to information and written literature, literate farmers are expected to be more positively
Fertilizer adoption and use survey: Zimbabwe
disposed to the adoption of fertilizer and its optimum use as compared to illiterate farmers. This factor was expected to be a positive coefficient. (ii) Product knowledge and awareness Farmers’ knowledge of the fertilizer products, their use benefits, incremental value and farmers’ general awareness about agri-inputs and their contacts with Agritex staff are expected to have a positive impact on the decision to adopt and apply the optimum doses of fertilizers. The following factors were taken into consideration: Personal experience: Personal experience refers to the farmer’ own experience of fertilizer use s and the number of years a farmer has been using fertilizers. This factor is expected to have a positive correlation in the level of adoption and intensity of fertilizer consumption. Product knowledge: This refers to the farmers’ knowledge about the use benefits of the specific fertilizer products. It is assumed that the better the knowledge of fertilizer products, the better is the farmer’ selection of economical products, and this, therefore, results in a higher level of s adoption and intensity of fertilizer consumption. Incremental value of fertilizer use: This relates to the farmers’ knowledge of the additional quantity of crop obtained through investments in fertilizers. Correct knowledge about fertilizer incremental value is expected to have a positive influence on farmers’ decisions on the quantity of fertilizer to be applied. Fertilizer and grain prices: This variable relates to farmers who sell grain and correlate the grain and fertilizer sale prices when making decisions on fertilizer purchases. This variable is expected to have a positive impact on a farmer’ decision to buy fertilizer and is, therefore, a positive s coefficient. Knowledge about fertilizer recommendations: This refers to the farmers’ knowledge about the correct quantity and timing of fertilizer applications as recommended by Agritex. The optimum quantity of fertilizers applied at the proper time results in higher yields and is, therefore, a positive coefficient. Improved seeds and fertilizer use: This refers to the use of improved seeds and the application of fertilizers as a package. As improved (hybrid) seeds require higher doses of fertilizer, their combination in proper quantity results in increased yields and, therefore, has a positive correlation. Extension services: This variable relates to the farmers’ contacts with extension staff. The more contact farmers have with extension staff, the more likely they are to adopt the scientific package of farm practices, the result being higher crop yields. Therefore, this variable is expected to have a positive correlation. (iii) Resource endowments The agricultural resources of farmers are expected to have a direct bearing on their decisions on the adoption and use of fertilizers and other inputs. The following factors were included in this category:
A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe
Farm size: This refers to the area of the landholding. The hypothesis states that the larger the farm, the lower is the average use level of fertilizers. This factor, therefore, is expected to be a negative coefficient. Family size: Family size refers to the number of dependent members aged less than 10 years and above 65 years. It is expected that the larger the family, the more a farmer is compelled to grow crops for home consumption, i.e. subsistence farming, and therefore the less likely is the adoption of fertilizers. This factor is expected to be a negative coefficient. (iv) Logistics and supply factors The factors relating to farm location, such as the presence of an all-weather road, distance from the sale point, mode of transport available, and the availability of the right types of fertilizers in the area are expected to influence greatly farmers’ decisions on the adoption of fertilizers and the determination of the quantity to be applied. The following factors relating to the logistics of fertilizer supply were included in this category: Access to all-weather road: The location of the farm villages on a good road that facilitates the transportation of fertilizers and crop produce is a variable, which was expected to have a positive correlation. Distance from sale point: This refers to the distance a farmer is required to travel to the nearest sale point to buy fertilizers and to sell the crop produce. Distance is expected to have a negative influence on the purchase of inputs. Supply position: This variable refers to the availability of desired fertilizer types at the sale points at the time of purchase. The availability of the right type of fertilizer (and other inputs) at the right place were expected to have a positive impact on the adoption and use of fertilizers. (v) Fertilizer and grain prices The sale price of fertilizers and other inputs as well as grain prices (crop produce) are factors which can have a great bearing on farmers’ decisions concerning both the level of adoption and the intensity of fertilizer use. The information about fertilizer prices and farmers’ own perceptions of the prices of fertilizer and grains are some of the variables included in this category. (vi) Credit availability The availability of credit for the purchase of fertilizers, farmers’ perceptions about their capacity to repay the loan from increased crop production, and whether the farmer thinks it proper to buy fertilizers on credit, are some of the variables included in this category. Quality control The following measures were taken to ensure the good quality of the data: • The questionnaire was properly designed, reviewed, discussed and pre-tested. • The selection of the survey team was done through the experienced staff of the University of Zimbabwe. • A comprehensive training programme was designed and executed with the help of experts of the ACFD and the University of Zimbabwe.
language was a constraint on communication with the farmers. Table 4 ranks the sources of learning about the use benefits of fertilizers. The data analysis was unexpectedly delayed because of the closure of the University of Zimbabwe in June 1998. certain difficulties were experienced which resulted in the delay of the preparation of the survey report. Farmer groups Table 6 presents information provided by the 55 farmer groups contacted by the survey teams on the length of fertilizer use in communal areas. % 1 Agritex 1643 76 2 Family members 250 12 3 Neighbours farmers 143 7 4 Commercial farmers 50 2 5 Agro dealers 25 1 6 Coop societies 20 1 7 Others (fertilizer sale 16 1 staff etc) 8 Development projects 20 1 9 Research centres 5 0 TOTAL 2102 100 . followed up. STATUS OF ADOPTION OF FERTILIZERS AND OTHER INPUTS Adoption of fertilizer by small-scale farmers in Zimbabwe Individual farmers Table 3 presents the responses of 2 969 individual small-scale farmers concerning the use of inorganic fertilizers as an agricultural input. supervised and checked by the senior members of the management team. TABLE 3 Status of fertilizer adoption by small-scale farmers Particulars No. % of total Farmers using fertilizers 2102 69 Farmers who never used 867 31 fertilizers TOTAL 2969 100 TABLE 4 Source of first time learning about fertilizer use Ranking Source No. Problems encountered Although no serious problems were encountered in conducting the survey. In Matebeleland. • Experts of the University of Zimbabwe and the ACFD processed the data. cleaned and edited. Some of the problems faced were: • • • • The period of data collection (November-December 1997) coincided with the rainy season and therefore restricted the movements of the survey staff.62 Fertilizer adoption and use survey: Zimbabwe • A logistics and movement plan was prepared. During the field survey. • The survey findings were reviewed. one enumerator fell ill and another left the team. so affecting the progress of the data collection. Table 5 presents the information provided by the 2 102 small-scale farmers using fertilizers about when they started using fertilizers.
A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe 63 Fertilizer industry data confirmed that only about 25 000 t of fertilizers. were sold to communal farmers in the pre-independence period.e. Farmers’choice of fertilizer products Table 9 presents the farmers responses concerning their preferences for the fertilizer products available. Indicators used by farmers to identify fertilizer products Table 10 presents the characteristics smallscale farmers stated that they use as indicators to identify the fertilizer products. 6.) 1773 Urea 17 All fertilizers 88 No difference what is used 94 % 44 56 100 % of total 0 37 1 55 1 3 3 TABLE 10 Indicators to identify fertilizer products Fertilizer No. Farmers’ knowledge of use benefits of fertilizer products Table 11 presents the extent of farmers’ knowledge on the use benefits of fertilizers.(farmer groups) growth rate Period % of farmers (average) adopting fertilizer use 18-20% 1970-1980 233% 42-45% 1980-1990 95% 40-42% 1990-1997 TABLE 7 Crops using improved/hybrid seeds Crop Number of farmers Maize 2848 Cotton 599 Sunflower 234 Groundnuts 198 Vegetables 134 Pearl millet 101 Paprika 50 % of total 96% 20% 8% 7% 5% 3% 2% TABLE 8 Knowledge about agro-chemicals Farmer type No. Agro-chemicals Table 8 tabulates respondents’knowledge of the benefits of agro-chemicals (insecticides/ fungicides/herbicides). It was further reported that only a few farmers in the communal areas used fertilizers in the pre-independence period. Adoption of improved seeds and crop chemicals Improved (hybrid) seeds Table 7 presents information provided by 2 969 farmers on the adoption of improved/ hybrid seeds in the communal areas. 1 Farmers knowing the use 1312 advantages of agro-chemicals 2 Farmers not knowing the use 1657 advantages of agro-chemicals Total 2969 TABLE 9 Choice of fertilizer products Particulars No. of farmers % of total 16 336 1970-1980 40 841 1980-1990 44 925 1990-1997 TOTAL 2102 100 TABLE 6 Estimated length of fertilizer use . DAP 0 Compound D/L/C 1200 SSP/TSP 22 Ammonium Nitrate (A. in general. TABLE 5 Length of fertilizer adoption (individual farmers) Particulars No.N. of % of total characteristics farmers Color 838 33 Label 1536 61 Physical appearance 163 6 Others 0 0 . and that of different fertilizer products in particular. It is evident that fertilizer adoption in Zimbabwe has increased considerably since independence and indeed approximately half of the communal farmers using fertilizers adopted their use in the first decade after independence.25 percent of the total. A growth rate of 233 percent was witnessed in the number of fertilizer user farmers in this period. i.
A similar majority had no knowledge of fertilizer products such as DAP.2 1.6 0. 78 percent of respondent farmers stated that they apply AN at the tasselling stage (for maize. the tasselling stage occurs 70-80 days after germination).1 3.7 6.2 93.6 2. of farmers 2 226 % of total 75.1 97. the vast majority of farmers stated that they knew the use advantages of Compound D and ammonium nitrate fertilizers (marketed in Zimbabwe). Regarding product knowledge and the merits of using a specific type of fertilizer. .9 Though 75 percent of the farmers claimed to know the use benefits of inorganic fertilizers. On the common timing of application of top dressing fertilizers (AN).8 5. even though these products are very popular in the world market and are being used in the neighbouring countries of Malawi and TABLE 12 Zambia.64 Fertilizer adoption and use survey: Zimbabwe TABLE 11 Farmers’knowledge of use benefits of fertilizer products Particulars Farmers knowing the use benefits of fertilizers in general Farmers claiming to know the use benefits of specific fertilizers products: DAP Urea Compounds C/D/L AN SSP/TSP MOP Farmers indicating that basal fertilizers (Compound D) benefit the crops by: boosting vegetative growth • increasing the number of tillers • assisting crop maturity • Farmers indicating that top dressing fertilizers (AN) benefit the crops by: boosting vegetative growth • increasing the number of tillers • assisting crop maturity • No.4 87. of farmers % of total Basal fertilizers (Compound D) Before sowing At the time of sowing After germination Before rains/irrigation After rains/irrigation Anytime Top dressing fertilizers (A/N) Before sowing Mix with seed After germination Before rains/irrigation After rains/irrigation At tasselling stage Anytime 0 21 851 21 286 1625 64 0 1 4 1 14 78 4 320 1108 440 4 120 11 16 58 27 1 6 6 Timing of fertilizer application Table 12 tabulates the responses of smallscale farmers concerning the timing of fertilizer applications and the crop growth stage when they applied fertilizers. urea and MOP. 25 percent of small-scale farmers could not say how fertilizers benefit the crops and what the specific advantages of using fertilizers in crop cultivation are.0 2 64 2 011 2 038 55 5 2 068 17 41 120 1 952 154 0.0 5. Farmers were of the view that this is the time when the plant needs more energy and therefore more nutrition is needed.4 98. Method and application timing of fertilizer Time of fertilizer application Particulars No.
at the time of planting. Therefore.3 percent) of smallscale farmers said that they did not understand the real incremental value of fertilizer use and therefore failed to calculate the absolute benefits of fertilizer application. Estimated incremental value (as mentioned by farmers): 500% 396 42 450% 40 4 400% 11 2 350% 67 7 300% 30 3 250% 98 11 200% 72 8 150% 108 11 100% 119 13 Table 15 presents the responses of the 55 farmer groups when asked to give the yield estimate per hectare of maize with the use of inorganic fertilizers. with 42 percent of them believing that fertilizer use can increase crop yields by 500 percent. 23. Farmers’ knowledge about mental value of fertilizer use incre- TABLE 13 Method of fertilizer application Particulars Basal fertilizer (Compound D) Incorporate in soil before sowing Mix with seed at sowing Broadcast before sowing Broadcast after sowing Side dressing Any other method Total Top dressing fertilizers (AN) Broadcast by hand Side dressing in rows Around the plants by hand Mechanical broadcaster Any other method Total No. The majority (68.0. The mixing of fertilizers and seeds. Table 14 presents the responses given by 2 969 individual farmers and 55 farmer groups about this question.7 t to above 3. Some 14. representing an incremental value of 1:6. i.7 percent of farmer groups felt that the maize yield could be increased to 4 000 kg/ha and above. Farmers saying they do not 2 028 68.e. Most of the maize crop in Zimbabwe is planted after the onset of the rains.0 t. 2. An almost equal percentage (23. 1 kg of fertilizer material can give an extra yield of 5 kg.7 percent of smallscale farmers who claimed to know the incremental value. expressed different views on the additional yields they obtain from fertilizer use.5 percent of . Fiftyfour percent of farmer groups considered the maize yield to be 250-750 kg/ha without the use of fertilizers.7 about the incremental value of fertilizer use. With the use of fertilizers.6 percent) of farmer groups felt that crop yields could be increased by up to 1. The 31. The views expressed by the farmer groups were similar to those of the individual farmers.8 to 1:12. Farmers claiming to know 941 31. Views of farmer groups on incremental value 71 758 1 203 6 64 2 102 3 37 58 0 4 100 TABLE 14 Perceived incremental value of fertilizer use Particulars No. of farmers % 341 927 100 16 525 193 2 102 17 45 5 1 25 9 100 The farmers were asked to indicate if they could calculate the incremental value of fertilizer use.3 know about the incremental value of fertilizer use 3.A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe 65 Methods of fertilizer application Table 13 presents the information provided by small-scale farmers on the common methods of fertilizer application. was the most common method and timing of basal fertilizer application in the small-scale farming areas. of % of farmers total 1. the application of fertilizers is per force linked to the rainfall period. This represents an incremental ratio of approximately 1:5 to 1:6.
Approximately half of the individual farmers.1 5 2 751-3 000 3.9 6 < 1 000 1 001-1 250 7.5 49.9 421 47 320 18 93 28 927 1 850 22.8 1 1 501-1 750 16.0 .3 4 1 251-1 500 1.6 2 3 001-3500 3.5 17.9 1. EXISTING LEVEL OF FERTILIZER APPLICATION Crops fertilized by small-scale farmers The small-scale farmers provided information about the crops to which they generally apply fertilizers. The data further reveal that only 45-50 percent of small-scale farmers thought that they could achieve an incremental ratio of 1:5.4 9 1 751-2 000 1.5 50.0 TABLE 17 Fertilizer application rates to maize Quantity (kg/ha) No. As is evident from Table 16. Table 17 presents the fertilizer application rates in terms of kilograms per hectare (50 kg = 1 bag). 44 percent of 9.66 Fertilizer adoption and use survey: Zimbabwe farmer groups did not know about the incremental value of fertilizers and failed to calculate the economics of fertilizer use. maize is the crop to which fertilizers are applied by the great majority of small-scale farmers. Of the 31 percent of respondents. Rate of fertilizer application As maize is the only major crop to which fertilizers are applied by the majority of small-scale farmers.6 18.0 5.0 Vegetables 6 6 0.0 1.1 100.3 1. when selecting fertilizers for application. followed by cotton and tobacco.8 2. 1996-97 Crop Ranking No. 39 percent of them stated that the recommended quantity of Compound D for maize was 3-4 bags per hectare.3 Paprika 4 45 2.2 14. considered the incremental value as being less than 1:3. The ranking of the crops has been determined on the basis of percentage of farmers using fertilizers for each crop.0 11 4 001& above 14. further information on the quantity of fertilizers applied was limited to this crop only. who claimed to know the fertilizer recommendations. consider Compound D and AN as substitutes for each other.1 TOTAL 2 290 100. of farmers Compound D (basal fertilizer) 169 51-100 48 101-150 350 151-200 201-250 23 251-300 267 above 300 66 923 Subtotal Ammonium Nitrate (top dressing fertilizer) 51-100 101-150 151-200 201-250 251-300 above 300 SUBTOTAL TOTAL % Table 18 summarizes the information provided by the small-scale farmers about their knowledge on fertilizer recommendations.6 2 3 501-4 000 20. of % groups 10. as well as the farmer groups.4 3.6 Tobacco 3 52 2.0 Sorghum 5 24 1. A large percentage of small-scale farmers (69 percent) said that they did not know the fertilizer recommendations given by Agritex or the fertilizer industry for maize or any other crop.5 8 No response 100. It was further noted that small-scale farmers. Regarding AN.0 55 TOTAL TABLE 16 Crops fertilized by small-scale farmers. Fertilizer recommendations as understood by farmers Farmers’ knowledge recommendations about fertilization TABLE 15 Estimated crop yields using fertilizers (farmers groups) Yield kg/ha No.3 Mhunga 7 2 0.1 2. of % of farmers farmers Maize 1 1 850 80.9 6 2 501-2 750 9.7 Cotton 2 311 13.2500 10.8 1 2 001.
The 251-300 28 10 number of farmers who could afford to apply above 300 7 3 250-350 kg of fertilizer per hectare to the maize crop ranged from 5. Fertilizer use efficiency Farmers obtaining desired results from fertilizer use Table 21 presents the responses received from 2 102 farmers using fertilizers.6-91. 94. % of Particulars total No. Table 20 101-150 6 5 shows that about one-third of the small-scale 151-200 39 36 farmers were able to apply the desired quantity 201-250 2 2 of fertilizers during the period 1994-97. of farmers claiming to know 31 922 the recommendations No. The table evidences the fact that a majority of them are not satisfied with results they obtain from fertilizer use. The table shows that small-scale farmers considered different quantities of basal (Compound D) and top dressing fertilizer (AN) as being recommended for maize. The desired quantity Fertilizer application % of farmers was based on farmers’ own estimations of the rate (kg/ha) Compound D AN quantity of fertilizer. In other words.2 percent of small-scale farmers failed to apply the desired quantities of fertilizers. For example.4 to 9. . Farmers applying the desired quantity of fertilizers in the last three years TABLE 18 Knowledge about fertilizer recommendations No. Ratio of basal and top dressing fertilizer applications Table 19 presents the ratio that emerged between basal and top dressing fertilizer applications in communal areas from the fertilizer recommendations as understood by the farmers.A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe 67 respondents said that only 1-2 bags per hectare were recommended. while 18 percent of farmers thought that 1-2 bags of Compound D were recommended for one hectare of maize. of farmers claiming not to 69 2 047 know the recommendations Fertilizer application rates mentioned by farmers as recommendations for maize crop: Compound D (kg/ha) 51-100 101-150 151-200 201-250 251-300 above 300 AN (kg/ha) 51-100 101-150 151-200 201-250 251-300 above 300 165 55 360 19 258 65 406 46 332 18 92 28 18 6 39 2 28 7 44 5 36 2 10 3 The respondent small-scale farmers were asked to confirm if they had been able to use TABLE 19 Ratio between basal and top dressing fertilizer the desired quantities of fertilizers in the last application (maize crop) three years (1994-1997).8 percent. 44 percent of farmers thought that 1-2 bags were recommended for AN. which they believed to be 51-100 18 44 sufficient to grow a good crop.
6 percent of farmers mentioning it as an important factor in their decision making.4 9. was the most important factor in deciding the quantity of fertilizers they would like to apply.3 TABLE 21 Fertilizer use efficiency Particulars Farmers obtaining desired results from fertilizer use Farmers not obtaining desired results from fertilizer use TOTAL No.8 250-300 203 9. 1 187 2 102 56. Credit availability ranked last with only 2. On the other hand.0 332 114 191 637 15.3 percent of farmers considering it as an important factor in their decisions on the quantity of fertilizer to apply. 35 percent of farmers believe that it is inadequate rainfall which causes the low efficiency of the applied fertilizers. Fertilizer price ranked fifth with only 24.68 Fertilizer adoption and use survey: Zimbabwe Reasons for fertilizer use unsatisfactory results from Table 22 presents the reasons given by the smallscale farmers who do not obtain the desired results from fertilizer use as being responsible for low fertilizer use efficiency. in various quantities. Trend in fertilizer consumption in small-scale farming Table 23 presents the fertilizer application data provided by the farmers for the period 1994-1995 to 1996-97 and the growth in fertilizer consumption in the small-scale farming sector.2 301-350 122 5. of % of fertilizer farmers user farmers 1996-97 351-400 361 17.8 32.5 percent of farmers the cash position. of farmers 915 % of total 43.1 30. i. TABLE 22 Reasons for unsatisfactory results Factors affecting No.1 6. the money available with the farmers at the time of fertilizer purchase. of % of Total fertilizer use farmers Not enough rain 415 35 534 45 Too much rain 6 Pest damage 71 Excessive weeds 71 6 96 8 Other factors TOTAL 1 187 100 .6 340 129 205 674 16.e. A large percentage of respondent farmers (45 percent) consider that excessive rains are responsible for low use benefits with the applied fertilizer being washed away or leached into the soil.5 Factors affecting the rate of fertilizer application Farmers were asked to indicate the most important factors which influence them when determining the quantity of fertilizer to be applied to maize and other crops.5 100 Table 24 shows that for 48. The data in Table 23 show a steady increase in the number of farmers using fertilizers. TABLE 20 Farmers able to apply desired quantity of fertilizers Quantity No. during the period 1994/95 to 1996/97.6 TOTAL 1995-96 351-400 301-350 250-300 TOTAL 1994-95 351-400 301-350 250-300 TOTAL 686 32.8 5.1 9.
A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe 69 TABLE 23 Fertilizer consumption. 30.9 11.6 percent of farmers on an area of 1-2 ha.0 13.2 38.7 36.0 33.4 75.7 58. On the other hand.0 Advice of extension 4 512 24.7 62.6 25.4 74.1 88.0 11.2 7.4 percent of small-scale farmers grow tobacco on an area of less than 1 ha and that 64. The quantity of grain purchased varied from region to region (Table 28).3 41.3 5.1 20.7 7.6 56 Neighbours 8 Credit availability ANALYSIS OF THE PATTERN OF FERTILIZER ADOPTION AND PURCHASE Analysis of the cropping pattern Table 25 presents a breakdown of the crops planted by the small-scale farmers in the five natural regions of the country and overall percentage breakdown of these crops by area.4 36. The majority (82.7 72.2 percent) sold maize. in NRs II.4 81.6 TABLE 24 Factors affecting quantity of fertilizer applied % of Ranking Factor No.4 3.3 Past experience 2 605 28. that 94. Except for maize and cotton. Of the total . the number of farmers and the quantity of grains sold varied widely from region to region. primarily an export crop.0 79.0 75.5 64. of farmers/year % growth (over 1994. for example. A small percentage of farmers in NR I (2.6 V 56. TABLE 25 Breakdown of crops by natural region and by area Crop Natural regions (% of farmers) II III I Maize Sorghum Cotton Tobacco Millets Oilseeds Beans 13. 1994-95 to 1996-97 Fertilizer application (kg/ha) 350 and more 300 and more 250 and more No.8 61.4 percent) and in NR V (2.7 0. of farmers farmer s 1 021 48.3 154 Fertilizer prices 6 5.3 workers 5 7. more than 70 percent of the small-scale farmers in Zimbabwe plant all other crops on an area of less than one hectare. In the same year.2 33.3 30.0 ha 1-2 ha 17.2 28.2 percent of farmers purchased maize for home consumption (Table 27).6 25.8 63.1994-95) 95 96 97 332 114 191 637 340 129 205 764 361 132 208 701 8.0 88.4 IV 64.9 79.5 Table 25 reveals.6 25. III and IV almost one-third of farmers sold maize crop produce.5 Farmers’cash position 1 932 44.8 71.3 percent of small-scale farmers grow maize on 1-2 ha.1995.3 0.7 120 Fertilizer supply position 7 2.4 percent) of farmers purchased more than 100 kg of grain.7 Type of crops planted 3 527 25.3 27.1 94. However.0 6.3 24.1996.4 69.4 Total country < 1.6 0. Tobacco. Analysis of food grain (maize) sales and purchasing patterns The pattern of the sale of food grains (maize) as shown in Table 26 reveals that in 1997 the great majority of farmers who actually sold maize (91 percent) sold 250 kg or more of it.0 11.3 42.7 18. is grown by only 5.8 18.6 5. A wide variation is again evident in the regional percentages of farmers who purchased food grains.0 66.
4 31.9 IV 0.6 10.70 Fertilizer adoption and use survey: Zimbabwe number of farmers who purchased food grains (30.4 2.9 2.0 88.8 76-100 7.4 30. The farmers in NR I appear to have paid a higher price than those in NRs III and V.2 2.7 1.4 20.8 1.7 0 0.7 TABLE 28 Distribution of farmers by quantity of maize grain purchased in 1997 Natural regions (% of farmers) Quantity (kg) I II III IV < 25 7.2 Total 0.6 150-199 0 0.1 100 or more 69.0 TABLE 27 Distribution of farmers by purchase of maize grain in 1997 Purchased grain Natural regions (% of farmers) I II III IV YES 26.6 81.6 TOTAL 2.4 18.6 5.3 91.6 Analysis of farmers’fertilizer product knowledge Use benefits of different fertilizer products The data in Table 29 show that all the respondents failed to explain the benefits of DAP fertilizer.6 79.4 3.7 1.8 12.8 1.2 69.8 2.4 100-149 5.9 2.2 8.5 TOTAL 1.8 percent of farmers in NR IV and .5 82.9 30.4 1.8 15. the belief held by a large majority of farmers that Compound D boosts the vegetative growth of the plants is not based on correct product knowledge. TABLE 26 Distribution of farmers by quantity of maize sold in 1997 Natural regions (% of farmers) Quantity (kg) I II III < 60 0 0 1.5 91. considerable quantities of DAP are being used in neighbouring countries such as Malawi and Zambia.9 36.4 3.0 26-50 15.0 85.3 TOTAL 1.2 percent).7 Total V 58.9 4.8 100.6 2.8 24.1 63.0 200-249 0 3. In the case of urea.7 1. This highlights the lack of knowledge about this important fertilizer.1 1. By contrast. the majority (52.7 13.8 250 and more 90.6 0.3 1.1 52.1 3.5 1.0 percent) were located in NR IV.2 89.4 2.0 93.9 3.6 88.8 0.8 1.4 100.0 100.1 0.3 81.9 0. This reflects incorrect knowledge of this highly concentrated nitrogenous fertilizer. 25 percent of respondents did not know that urea helps boost vegetative growth. The price of the grain purchased varied from Z$1.8 51-75 0 1.9 10. all the respondents in NRs II.6 0.5 17.5 V 0 0 0 0 5.0 22. In NRs III and IV.1 0.5 80.8 0.0 1.9 4.7 10. III and IV replied that urea assists in crop maturity.2 42.0 V 0.4 NO 73. In spite of the fact that Compound D has been used by small-scale farmers for decades.0 32. and 23.0 0.7 TOTAL 2.7 4.8/kg of maize.0 1.5 to 1.0 Average price/kg (Z$) 1.4 80-99 5.8 41.2 60-79 0 1.
Although AN has been manufactured and used in the country for more than two decades.5 0 100 0 85.3 86. 19.4 83.4 100 84.9 100 100 96. The product knowledge of a significant number of farmers about the use merits of AN also appears to be inaccurate.7 percent of farmers in NR IV and 15.2 88.4 76.8 100 75.1 100 100 91.6 100 77. 22. 18.2 percent of farmers in NR III.5 93.3 75.0 0 84.7 87.7 100 75. 25 percent of farmers in NR II and 11. III. . Similarly.7 0 0 100 0 0 87.3 100 96.5 75 87. IV and V is aware that SSP helps in crop maturity.6 80.0 92. Similarly. The fact that a large majority of farmers consider SSP as responsible for vegetative growth of the crop further demonstrates a very poor level of knowledge about this product. No farmer in NRs I.7 100 100 75.A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe 71 15.8 87.4 77.1 82.2 9.0 100 100 100 0 0 87.6 percent of farmers in NR II held the mistaken belief that AN helps mainly in crop maturity.4 percent of farmers in NR III did not know that Compound D helps increase crop yields.2 100 100 85. TABLE 29 Use benefits of fertilizers (as understood by farmers) NR 1 NR II NR III DAP (18:46:0) • boosts vegetative growth • enhances yield • assists in maturity UREA (46% N) • boosts vegetative growth • enhances yield • assists in maturity COMPOUND D • boosts vegetative growth • enhances yield • assists in maturity AN (34% N) • boosts vegetative growth • enhances yield • assists in maturity SSP (16-20% P2O5) • boosts vegetative growth • enhances yield • assists in maturity MOP (60% K2O) • boosts vegetative growth • enhances yield • assists in maturity 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NR IV NR V TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 0 0 94. III and V knew that MOP assists in crop maturity. None of the farmers considered MOP as responsible for boosting the vegetative growth of the crop. The same holds for knowledge of MOP.9 86.2 percent of farmers in NR IV and 13.7 85.4 0 0 0 0 100 0 100 100 0 0 100 0 100 0 0 0 100 0 100 Timing and method of fertilizer application The analysis of the timing and method of fertilizer application (Table 30) shows that a large number of small-scale farmers mix fertilizers (Compound D) with the seeds at the time of sowing.0 100 0 91.0 81. All the respondents in NRs I and V said that they did not know the benefits of using MOP. None of the farmers in NRs I.9 87.6 80.0 100 100 75.8 percent of farmers in NR II did not know the specific use benefits of this nitrogenous fertilizer.1 percent of farmers in NR IV did not know that Compound D helps in crop maturity.5 84. 20 percent of farmers in NR III.
4 2.1 8.4 2.8 V 10. Method of application Mix with soil before sowing 30.4 0.3 4.9 47.3 65.7 2.8 7.72 Fertilizer adoption and use survey: Zimbabwe This apparently indicates an incorrect method and timing of the application of basal fertilizers.0 29.8 Mix with seed at sowing time 60.7 0.9 0.1 percent of farmers applied Compound D at the time of seeding the crop in NR V.0 19.9 1.0 1.2 Analysis of the fertilizer purchasing pattern The data in Table 31 reveal that nearly half of the small-scale farmers in Zimbabwe purchase less than one bag of fertilizer per year while 22.6 7.2 0.5 percent of farmers followed this practice in NR II.5 Before rains/irrigation 0. 1996-97 Quantity (kg) II I < 50 51-100 101-151 151-200 200-250 251-300 301-350 351-above 11. Only about 1516 percent of farmers appears to use the basal fertilizers at the right time and with the correct method of application.2 B.1 5.2 After rains/irrigation 0. Similarly.8 56.6.2 10.1 13. TABLE 31 Pattern of fertilizer purchase by farmers.7 5.5 2.4 1.6 Any other method 4.1 22.1 27.2 10.9 percent of farmers in NR II follow this method of fertilizer application.1 11.8 5. indicate improper methods and incorrect timings for the application of Compound D.0 1.1 0.7 2. There is a considerable variation among the number of farmers adopting different methods and timings in each NR.5 III 32.1 5.3 50.6 5. application before sowing by mixing the fertilizers in the soil.0 4.4 2.1 21.4 percent of farmers stated that they purchased seven bags or more in a year.7 100.5 percent of farmers in NR II applied Compound D after germination as side dressing. Timing of application I II III Before sowing 10.1 8.7 6.5 0.3 13. TABLE 30 Timing and method of Compound D application Natural regions (% of farmers) A.8 0.8 3.0 26.5 5.3 8.3 0.1 percent of farmers in NR V appear to have used this method.1 Total 16.0 34.0 38.0 10.3 6.0 9.9 4.0 17.8 14. only 8.8 81.7 81.8 After germination 16. as does the application of Compound D after crop germination by a considerable number of farmers (23.1 Broadcast after sowing 0.6 19. Similarly.2 TOTAL 46. 23.8 15.9 4.6 22.3 With seed 74.2 1.9 6.1 percent of farmers in NR V.4 8.e.1 V 84.0 12. the method of application of side dressing is incorrect.0 Broadcast before sowing 4.9 58.0 IV 18.5 8.9 0.0 2.6 14.5 16.0 44.3 2.9 percent). All the other methods used by 84-85 percent of farmers.4 .9 IV 65.6 27. i.0 4.5 31.1 4.4 3.9 Total 3. While 81. only 26.4 58.0 14. therefore.1 5. while 41. only 38.6 Side dressing 10.4 15.8 1.0 41.4 2.6 3. While the mixing of fertilizers with seed is a method followed by 81.5 70.8 13.
farmers were grouped into three categories on the basis of the quantity of fertilizers purchased annually: high (A) .6 7.4 TOTAL 31.3 0.5 percent of farmers purchase less than one bag.8 6. Farmer preferences for fertilizer sale points Choice of fertilizer sale point Table 33 reveals that in 1996-97 75. Classification of farmers by quantity of fertilizer purchased To obtain a clear idea of the purchasing pattern.0 II 61. Though only 6.A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe 73 Analysis at level of the natural regions of the purchasing pattern of fertilizers shows that 84. The situation is considerably different for NRs IV and V.7 18. In NR IV. its free pack programme is seen as a major source of fertilizer for farmers in NRs IV and IV.7 percent of farmers.2 5.0 46.1 III 31.0 82.2 84. a large percentage of farmers (61 percent) can be included in category A.2 Co-operative 8.8 0 0 0 0 19.4 percent of farmers buying 350 kg or more of fertilizers. and low (C) .5 V 8.2 4.6 bags or more. In NR III.9 15.5 0.0 AFC 0 5.5 Cotton Co.7 2.6 percent of small-scale farmers buy very little fertilizer.6 percent of farmers purchased fertilizers from private agrodealers (including commercial cooperatives).6 ZFU 0 1.8 65. Co-operative societies were patronized as a source of purchase only by 7.9 36.1 0.less than 1 bag of fertilizer per year. aside from the 22.4 7.1 38. of bags purchased per year (% of farmers) region 6 and more 2-5 <1 NR (A) (B) (C) I 39.9 65.1 IV 15. In NR II.2 2.0 50.0 32.8 4.2 8.0 Total 75.1 GMB 0 3. 65.2 2. while 50. medium (B) .2 2.2 percent of farmers obtained fertilizers from the government.0 2.0 23.2-5 bags.9 15. 0 3. TABLE 33 Preferred source of fertilizer purchase.6 76.0 Table 32 shows that 50 percent of farmers in NR I buy 2-5 bags of fertilizer per year and can therefore be placed in category B. TABLE 32 Classification of farmers by fertilizer purchase Natural No.0 3.6 Government 0 0. The farmers purchasing large quantities of fertilizer (seven bags or more) are those who are located in the irrigation schemes and those with larger areas of land.0 11. B and C in almost equal numbers.4 percent of farmers in NR V buy less than one bag of fertilizers a year.5 percent of farmers in NR II reported purchasing seven bags or more in a year.8 10.0 V 76.2 .6 0.3 1. The significant information that emerges from the analysis of the purchasing pattern is that.9 9. 1996/1997 Natural regions (% of farmers) Source of purchase I II III IV Agro-dealer 92. Over 84 percent of farmers in NR V buy less than one bag of fertilizer per year. farmers belong to categories A. 87.
3 77.0 15.0 27.8 92. The farmers who found fertilizer prices lower than expected are located in NRs IV and V where fertilizer use is extremely low and farmers generally buy less than one bag of fertilizer a year.4 2.7 53.0 98.6 93.1 0.9 0 38.3 52.5 24.6 1.9 Farmers’perceptions of fertilizer prices The analysis of farmers’ perceptions about fertilizer prices shows that the vast majority of farmers (91. A large percentage of farmers preferring farm deliveries indicate the supply of fertilizer under the government programme of free supplies.7 Total 7.0 48. an indication that small-scale farmers have become more critical of the increasing price of fertilizers and that the price increases have been greater than the farmers have expected.7 4.8 percent) in all the five regions of the country felt that the price of fertilizer in 1996/97 was higher than they expected (Table 35).1 6.5 88.1 16.4 0.8 12.4 percent of farmers stated that they obtained credit from their supplier and another 5.0 82.3 11.0 0 14. therefore.0 6.4 48. TABLE 35 Fertilizer price perceptions Farmers’ perception of price I 1996/97 As expected More than expected Less than expected 1995/96 As expected More than expected Less than expected 1994/95 As expected More than expected Less than expected 2.1 20.0 12.8 91.5 43.0 Total V 65.8 76. The NR values were broadly similar to one another except for NR V where farmers say that they obtain no credit from agro-dealers.9 79.3 V 9.3 10.0 4.4 Natural regions (% of farmers) II III IV 50.4 17.0 1.0 2. TABLE 34 Sale point preferences Factors Lower prices Sells on credit Efficient and timely supplies Delivers at farm Trusted supplier Sells wide range I 55.1 2.0 57.9 percent of farmers (Table 34).6 6.3 5.5 11.7 80.2 19.8 IV 9.8 0. There is.7 6.0 17.8 percent of farmers considered farm deliveries as a reason for preference.74 Fertilizer adoption and use survey: Zimbabwe Reasons for sale point preferences The availability of a wide range of products at a sale point was mentioned as a reason for preference by 12.6 7.8 6.0 0 18.9 9.9 2. Although a similar pattern emerges for 1995/96 and 1994/95.4 89.4 83.1 14.3 81.2 12. as no agro-dealer provides this facility in the communal areas in Zimbabwe.1 0.6 21.7 .1 2.3 82.3 52.6 9.0 Natural regions (% of farmers) III 7.9 6.1 0.1 74. a lower percentage of farmers reported prices as being higher than expected.6 12.3 82.0 86.4 20.6 83.4 0 17.0 0.9 53. Only 6.0 0 II 6.2 22.6 1.4 16.
8 0.3 IV 93.9 47.7 0 0 31.0 4.0 2.9 51.3 4.6 47.9 Total 0. In NRs I and V.9 Natural regions (% of farmers) III 94.4 29.8 0.5 0.7 percent of farmers indicated the sale of grains (reserved for purchasing fertilizers) as the source of their money. The data for 1997 are considered as fully representative as there were no significant variations in the figures for 1995 and 1996.4 31.3 29.1 6.1 0.3 32. TABLE 36 Credit purchases in 1997 Percentage of purchases on credit < 20 21-40 41-60 61-80 81-100 Total I 100.7 6. An almost equal percentage of farmers (47.2 4.6 51.2 31.6 0.0 II 91.9 9.8 100.2 50.5 1.4 0 50.8 0 0 0 56.0 . the farmers in the NRs are almost equally distributed.3 Natural regions (% of farmers) II III IV V 1.4 2.0 0.0 3.3 Sale of livestock Sale of grain held for consumption Total 0 0 0 70.5 45.4 3. except in NR V.8 percent) gave income from non-farm work as the source of cash for the purchase of fertilizers. or that the amount of credit they obtained was sufficient to buy only 20 percent of the quantity of fertilizers they wanted to buy.2 1.1 2.3 47.5 8.4 1.6 100.3 percent of farmers have yet not paid for the credit they obtained in past years (Table 38).6 11.2 5.0 66.9 0.0 0 62.7 18.8 0.7 32.0 0.7 5.0 5. Such farmers were distributed almost equally in all the NRs except in NR IV.A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe 75 Pattern of credit and cash purchases Fertilizer purchases on credit Farmers who purchased fertilizers on credit in 1997 indicated different percentages of their total requirements. Again.3 1.0 48.4 10.5 100.9 40. Table 36 shows that 93.0 3.5 33.8 percent of farmers (who could obtain credit) could buy less than 20 percent of their fertilizer requirements on credit. which they could purchase with the borrowed money.3 66.3 12.0 4.0 Cash purchases and sources of cash The farmers who made cash purchases of fertilizers in 1997 present a considerable variation in terms of source of credit. 100 percent of farmers purchased less than 20 percent of fertilizer on credit.3 V 100. The remaining respondent farmers were of the opinion that the higher gross TABLE 38 Source of cash to repay fertilizer loan Source of cash Natural regions (% of farmers) I II III IV V Total Loan not yet repaid 0 30. TABLE 37 Source of cash for fertilizer purchases Source Borrowed from neighbour Sale of grain held for this purpose Sale of grain held for consumption Sale of livestock Income from non-farm work Total I 0 50.4 5.0 Credit repayment An analysis of the position of credit repayment reveals that 31. Table 37 shows that 47.8 33.8 33.5 Total 93.3 0 18.
5 82.8 1.9 93.7 4.5 84.4 percent of farmers as the major reason for purchasing less than the recommended quantities.5 percent) of farmers gave shortage of cash as the reason for not purchasing the recommended quantities of fertilizers.9 percent of respondents considered the marketing costs of fertilizers as very high (meaning the price variation between Harare and the point of purchase). most of whom were located in NRs II and III. Agro-dealers asking for down payments for fertilizers were indicated by only 1.7 III 89.6 92.5 percent of farmers said that they sold grain reserved for home consumption to repay the loan they took for the purchase of fertilizers. A further 20.3 1.4 0.0 1. The farmers in NR I (near Harare) .1 76.9 0.4 96.9 Total 82.4 95.5 8.4 89.0 0 0.9 0.7 Reasons for interrupting fertilizer use An analysis of the reasons for interrupting fertilizer use (Table 40) shows that 82.5 0 IV 79.8 2.2 97.9 Non-availability of credit 100.4 4.1 0 0. TABLE 39 Reasons for purchasing less than recommended quantity Reasons Natural regions (% of farmers) I II III IV V Supply shortages Cash shortages Credit availability Timely delivery Mistrust of Agritex Transport difficulties Inconvenient package 5.6 97.9 percent of the farmers.8 V 76.3 97.8 percent of farmers (100 percent of respondents in NR I).1 Reasons for non-implementation of the fertilizer use plan Table 41 shows that of those farmers who planned to use a specific quantity of fertilizers but could not implement the fertilizer use plan in 1996-97. The non-availability of the desired type of fertilizers does not appear to be a major problem. Such farmers were almost equally distributed in all five NRs.76 Fertilizer adoption and use survey: Zimbabwe income they received from the application of fertilizers was not sufficient to repay the loan with 56.0 94.2 97.3 10.9 0.4 18. The lack of credit was given as reason for limited purchases by 94.4 0 0 0 5.9 0. Reasons for purchasing less fertilizer than recommended Table 39 shows that a high percentage (92.8 percent of them identified high fertilizer prices as the major reason for non-implementation of the fertilizer use plan. TABLE 40 Reasons for interrupting fertilizer use Reason I High prices 90.9 percent of farmers.0 5.8 93.8 percent of farmers who suspended fertilizers use in the last three years gave high fertilizer prices as a reason.1 95.1 0 1.3 percent of farmers saying that they sold livestock to repay the loan.5 1.6 82.6 0 0.2 100 0 0 100 0 Total 10.6 87.6 0.2 97.2 79.5 94.7 1. Another 12.4 0.1 3.2 0 0 100 0 7. Transport difficulties were indicated by 97.0 High down payment 0 Late delivery 0 Supply problems 0 No desired fertilizer 0 II 81.9 1.5 1. 93. Credit problems was indicated by 82.
3 6.10) Sex Table 43 indicates that the sex of the farmers is a highly significant factor as a determinant of fertilizer adoption reveals it. farmers in NR V did not mention the marketing costs as being high.A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe 77 did not consider the marketing costs high.6 20.5 5. Though the age factor was not significant in NRs I.4 5.5 0 9.5 percent male farmers had adopted fertilizer use.7 percent of female farmers had done so.8 V 95.6 69.6 77.4 8.4 30 or more 93 7 96 4 Total 94.7 54. Perhaps being located farthest away.0 2.01) (p < 0. The significance level was divided into three categories: highly significant (p < 0.5 DETERMINANTS OF FERTILIZER ADOPTION The determinants on the adoption of fertilizer in small-scale farming areas have been analysed to find their level of significance.05) Natural regions (% of farmers) III IV V Use Never Use Never Use Never used used used 75.6 *** * Significant NS Not significant (p < 0.4 9.9 26.5 percent of farmers as a bottleneck in the implementation of the fertilizer use plan. did not consider supply a problem.5 χ2 NS NS *** ** Highly Significant Moderately significant (p < 0.05) and significant (p < 0.1 95. it was a highly significant factor in NR IV.7 42. only 66. Similarly.01).4 79. they consider the marketing costs as justified and do not think they can be reduced. 1996/97 Reasons Natural regions (% of farmers) I II III IV High prices 100.8 20.8 40.2 24.1 2.3 57. TABLE 42 Age and adoption of fertilizer use Factor I II Age Use Never Use Never used used Under 30 100 0 92.5 0 0 4.6 95.5 4.7 18 19. While 72.7 39. II and V. There was a considerable variation among the regions.0 2.3 15.8 Transport problems 0 3.8 Unreliable rainfall 0 7.1 Total 93.3 *** 22.2 71.10).2 21.7 2.3 84. Women farmers appear to be more risk averse and less disposed to adopt fertilizer use. TABLE 41 Reasons for non-implementation of fertilizer use plan. due to their nearness to Harare.4 NS Total Use Never used 59.4 28.3 * 60. Transport difficulties were indicated by only 2. and significant in NR III (Table 42).9 5.4 Supply shortages 0 4.7 82 80. Age The analysis of age of farmers and the trend fertilizer of adoption revealed age as a highly significant factor.4 Low grain prices 0 6.7 91. .6 7.8 45.7 7.6 2.0 11.4 30.0 95. The farmers in NR I. because of the very low demand. and those in NR V. moderately significant (p < 0.0 High marketing costs 0 16.
0 87.5 96.8 40.4 * ** * Significant NS Not significant V Never used 31.4 9.4 22.5 28.05) NS Not significant 75.1 NS (p < 0.7 19.2 15.7 42.4 5.5 44.3 96.1 NS (p < 0.1 Primary Secondary or more Total χ2 Use Total Never used 55.1 30.8 94.3 Size of landholdings Table 45 shows the size of landholdings to be a highly significant factor influencing fertilizer adoption.3 17.5 27.3 44.3 19.5 4.3 5.7 95.01) ** Moderately significant (p < 0.4 *** *** ** 94.6 80.8 30.5 80.3 69.2 percent of farmers with secondary or higher education had done so.5 66.7 38.3 15.2 3.5 4.8 90.9 77.7 37.7 33.4 NS NS * ** Highly Significant (p < 0.8 79. Educated farmers are expected to have a greater understanding and more information about the merits of fertilizer use and therefore to be more favourably disposed to its adoption.2 69.05) Natural regions (% of farmers) III IV Use Never Use Never used used 84.6 3. 73.7 19.7 59.9 7. TABLE 44 Education and adoption of fertilizer use Factor Natural regions (% of farmers) I II III IV V Education Use Never Use Never Use Never Use Never Use Never used used used used used 90 10 92 8 67 33 38.2 45.6 19.7 82.6 55.1 40.9 94.6 *** Education Education was found to be a highly significant factor in fertilizer adoption (Table 44).6 72.3 5.7 95.5 80.4 .7 73.1 2.10) 26.5 NS NS * *** Highly Significant (p < 0.4 5.6 84.2 25.63 80.6 5.7 5.9 79.7 *** *** ** 100 0 96.10) 24.3 3.5 4.3 27.9 percent of farmers who had primary education and 72.01) * Significant Moderately significant (p < 0. TABLE 45 Size of landholding and adoption of fertilizer use Factor Natural regions (% of farmers) I II III IV LandUse Never Use Never Use Never Use Never Use holding used used used used (ha) Less than 2 2 or more Total χ2 V Never used Use Total Never used 35.9 69.7 74.9 68.8 54.9 79.78 Fertilizer adoption and use survey: Zimbabwe TABLE 43 Sex and adoption of fertilizer use Factor I II Sex Use Never Use Never used used Male 89.1 13.4 4.4 85 15 62.05) NS Not significant 73.3 57.01) * Significant Moderately significant (p < 0.1 20.3 94.4 26.1 96.6 42.4 Total 94.4 30.3 22.6 61.3 percent of farmers with no education were found to have adopted fertilizer use.4 3.8 59.7 61.5 71. While 55.5 10.9 64.6 95.2 None 92.8 Female 97.3 57.6 42.2 20.10) Use Total Use Never used 72.6 95.4 57.2 77.7 NS (p < 0.9 94.6 2 NS NS χ *** Highly Significant (p < 0.0 20.
9 86.4 20. III and V. the hypothesis that the farmers who can source cash are more positive in adoption of modern farming inputs like fertilizers was proved correct as 90. Age was.5 12. The hypothesis that farmers residing in villages connected to all-weather roads have better access to sale points and.10) DETERMINANTS OF FERTILIZER PURCHASES Age Table 48 shows support for the hypothesis that a higher percentage of young farmers purchase fertilizers.1 79.7 95.9 20.4 NS Access to all-weather road The linking of the farmers’ villages to an all-weather road and the level of adoption showed a highly significant correlation (Table 47).3 NS 70.9 9.8 percent of farmers without access to such roads did so. only 60.8 69.2 7.4 95.7 95.4 73 27 56.2 30.01) (p < 0.4 19.1 92.9 60.2 Total 94.2 0.2 percent of the farmers who did not sell grains and had no cash used fertilizers.3 5.9 percent of farmers with cash available had adopted the use of fertilizers.6 16.5 80.8 79.10) Use Total Never used 9. whereas only 59.8 84.05) * Significant NS Not significant (p < 0.5 4. though it was not a significant factor in NRs I.1 52 48 No 90.7 19.9 15. While 70. Nonetheless. found to be a moderately significant factor at the overall level.8 83.1 39.6 4.1 40.6 Total 94. TABLE 47 Access to all-weather road and adoption of fertilizer use Factor Natural regions (% of farmers) I II III IV Access to Use Never Use Never Use Never Use Never allused used used used weather road Yes 95.8 92. therefore.4 18.A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe 79 Financial resources Table 46 indicates that the availability of cash or financial resources (in this case from the sale of grains) does not have a statistically significant impact on the adoption of fertilizers.4 4.9 59.6 *** (p < 0. TABLE 46 Financial resources and adoption of fertilizer use Factor Natural regions (% of farmers) I II III IV V Use Never Use Never Use Never Use Never Use Never Sold used used used used used grain in 1996 Yes 100 0 99.6 42.6 4. The major impact of age was .9 No 87.4 29. II.9 percent of farmers connected to all-weather roads adopted fertilizers.01) (p < 0. are more likely to adopt fertilizers was proved correct.6 81.6 80.6 57.6 58.2 χ2 NS NS * ** NS *** ** Highly Significant Moderately significant (p < 0.5 7.3 5.05) * Significant NS Not significant Use V Never used Use Total Never used 22.4 51.5 95.1 41. therefore.4 43.5 73 27 48.3 57.8 422 2 NS NS * ** χ *** ** Highly Significant Moderately significant (p < 0.2 69.8 30.7 77.4 4.1 13.6 90.
3 11.6 100 0 88.4 Female 97.8 92.7 11.7 8.8 25.4 100 0 78.4 17.4 Total 96.1 80 20 84.8 15.4 7.2 15.9 91.8 89.1 5.05) Natural regions (% of farmers) III IV V Total Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No 81. TABLE 50 Education and fertilizer purchases Factor I II Education Yes No Yes No None 100 0 83.8 2 NS χ *** ** Highly Significant Moderately significant (p < 0.1 3.6 25.8 2 NS NS χ *** ** Highly Significant Moderately significant (p < 0.2 12.9 3.80 Fertilizer adoption and use survey: Zimbabwe observed in the NR IV.05) Natural regions (% of farmers) III IV V Total Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No 85.5 Primary 96.6 7.9 NS * NS ** * Significant NS Not significant (p < 0.4 15.8 18.1 15.6 16.8 NS * *** * Significant NS Not significant (p < 0.2 8.3 26.2 12.7 30 or more 95 5 90.5 86.05) Natural regions (% of farmers) III IV V Total Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No 87.3 82.2 11.4 87 13 84.7 14.7 (p < 0.10) Education Table 50 shows that education has a highly significant impact on fertilizer purchases.6 *** * Significant NS Not significant .9 91.8 16.01) (p < 0.3 percent of farmers aged 30 years and above.7 83.5 16.10) 13.3 75.3 27.2 86 14 73. The hypothesis that male farmers are more likely to purchase fertilizers than female farmers was supported.1 2. where 82.3 65.3 16.2 8.6 100 0 83.8 84.2 13.2 10.01) (p < 0.5 16.7 87 13 74.2 3.4 86. TABLE 49 Sex and fertilizer purchases Factor I II Sex Yes No Yes No Male 94.8 84.3 72.9 90 10 Total 96.2 *** 86.9 24.8 87 13 NS 74.10) Sex Table 49 shows that the sex of the farmers has a highly significant impact on the purchasing decisions of small-scale farmers.1 74.4 26.3 6.6 25.3 NS 84.1 3.4 percent of younger farmers purchased fertilizers as compared to 73.6 34.7 81.9 92.2 83.3 χ2 NS ** *** ** Highly Significant Moderately significant (p < 0.9 13.01) (p < 0. TABLE 48 Age and fertilizer purchases Factor I II Age Yes No Yes No Under 30 100 0 94.3 88.5 88.7 15.5 21.7 87.8 73.7 12.6 Secondary 93.7 18.3 87.2 83.3 5.7 96.1 or above Total 96 4 91.6 9.
TABLE 53 Length of fertilizer use and fertilizer purchases Factor Natural regions (% of farmers) I II III IV V Duration Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes (years) 1-4 100 0 85.9 91.4 9.2 Total 96 4 91.1 92.2 2 NS ** *** *** χ *** Highly Significant (p < 0.2 14.6 86.5 Total 96 4 91.9 percent of farmers who had been using fertilizers for 1-4 years.9 15.3 13. TABLE 51 Family size and fertilizer purchases Factor I II Family size Yes No Yes No Fewer than 100 0 91.1 83.6 8. Over 92 percent of farmers with more than 10 years experience of using fertilizers purchased fertilizers in 1996-97 compared with 70.05) NS Not significant No 17.1 3.5 92.7 100 10 or more 96.7 15.6 88.8 8.4 8.5 12.7 25.8 NS Total Yes No 70.10) ** Moderately significant (p < 0.9 42.9 84.5 1 0 30 70 0 0 57.6 *** .9 25.7 NS Product knowledge Table 52 indicates that farmers’ knowledge about the use benefits and the methods of use of different types of fertilizers has a highly significant impact on their purchasing decisions.05) Natural regions (% of farmers) III IV V Yes No Yes No Yes No 80 20 78.7 86.1 10.7 27.01) * Significant (p < 0.2 75.3 21.3 84.8 87.8 89.4 87 13 84. There was little difference in the overall pattern of fertilizer purchases between farmers with fewer than five family members and those with larger families.7 100 0 89.01) ** Moderately significant (p < 0.4 2 NS NS χ *** Highly Significant (p < 0.01) * Significant (p < 0.3 93 7 90.9 13.6 86.6 0 11.1 74.2 24.4 5-9 90 10 93.3 5.9 82.10) NS Not significant Total Yes No 85.3 87 13 ** NS NS * Significant (p < 0.9 26.3 15.8 73.6 15.9 3.2 6.2 10.1 3.2 8.9 89.8 16.1 34.5 7.6 24.4 29.2 13 74.2 87 10.3 65.4 No 0 0 87.3 8.7 7. TABLE 52 Product knowledge and fertilizer purchases Factor Natural regions (% of farmers) I II III IV V Total Knows Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No benefits Yes 96.8 13.7 91.9 91.8 5 5 or more 94. The length of fertilizer use was found to have had a highly significant impact on fertilizer purchases by farmers in 1996-97.3 15.7 2 NA NS NS *** NA *** χ *** Highly Significant (p < 0.05) NS Not significant NA Not applicable Length of fertilizer use Table 53 confirms the hypothesis that farmers who have been using fertilizers for a long period are more likely to continue purchasing them.A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe 81 Family size Table 51 shows that family size does not have a significant impact on farmers purchasing behaviour.1 87 13 84.1 Total 96.4 8.2 75.1 14.10) ** Moderately significant (p < 0.8 13.1 84.8 72.5 12.8 86.
2 25.4 17.3 24.9 91.5 NS* 86.01) (p < 0.7 13 NS Yes Total No 13.6 73.05) Natural regions (% of farmers) III IV V Yes No Yes No Yes No 88.3 13.4 26.5 11. 90.3 88.1 92.7 16.8 92 8 89.2 NS 89.6 Total 96. credit availability is very restricted in small-scale farming areas.2 2 * NS χ *** ** Highly Significant Moderately significant (p < 0.3 10.7 7.10) Contacts with Agritex Contacts with Agritex did not have a significant impact on the fertilizer purchases of small-scale farmers either overall or in four NRs.5 * Significant NS Not significant (p < 0. However. Credit availability The hypothesis that a larger number of farmers who can obtain credit buy fertilizer as compared to those to whom credit is not available was proved correct and a moderately significant correlation was observed (Table 57).8 6.82 Fertilizer adoption and use survey: Zimbabwe Knowledge of incremental value The impact of knowledge of the incremental value of fertilizers on fertilizer purchases in 1996-97 was found to be highly significant both overall and in NR IV (Table 54).8 8. where this was a significant factor.2 2.5 percent of farmers who seek the advice of Agritex staff purchase fertilizers as compared to 85.3 87 10.1 3.6 23.9 11.2 11. The impact of credit was not found to be significant in NRs II and III.01) (p < 0.3 83.3 15.7 82.4 83.7 84.8 22.4 13.4 86 14 85. .4 14.4 11.5 12.1 2 or more 100 0 91.7 No 97.7 88. It may also be that the quantity of less than one bag of fertilizers applied by a large majority of small-scale farmers is too small to be correlated with the incremental value.6 86.4 8.6 16. TABLE 54 Knowledge of incremental value and fertilizer purchases Factor Natural regions (% of farmers) I II III IV V Total Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Knows incremental yield of compound D Yes 100 0 93. However.5 85 15 Total 98 2 92.9 7. TABLE 55 Landholding and fertilizer purchases Factor I II Landholding Yes No Yes No (ha) Less than 2 88.5 87. in NR III.7 75.6 2 NS NS NS *** NS *** χ *** ** Highly Significant Moderately significant (p < 0.6 86.6 75.2 87 13 76. In the other NRs smallscale farmers fail to relate the purchase of fertilizers to the exact economic advantage obtained by way of increased yield.8 NS 77.05) * Significant NS Not significant (p < 0.1 percent of farmers with no contacts with extension workers (Table 56).10) Size of landholdings The size of the landholding was not found to be significant in its impact on fertilizer purchases both overall and in four of the NRs (Table 55).8 74.6 24.
5 9.3 23.2 84.01) * Significant (p < 0.3 5.9 11.1 14.1 90.1 3.9 6.9 74.5 4.7 13.5 88.10) Perception of fertilizer prices No significant correlation could be established between the perception of fertilizer prices and farmers’actual purchasing behaviour (Table 59).74 93.6 85.8 84.2 2 NS χ *** Highly Significant (p < 0.9 12.3 10.4 15.5 11.1 90.8 90.9 Total 96 4 93.2 12.5 88.1 2 NS NS * NS NS NS χ *** Highly Significant (p < 0.3 87.7 87 13 76.9 91.7 87. TABLE 58 Prior price information availability and fertilizer purchases Factor Natural regions (% of farmers) I II III IV V Total Period Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No 0-13 days 95 5 90 10 89.1 6.7 86.2 NS ** * Significant NS Not significant 6.7 No 96 4 91.05) NS Not significant TABLE 57 Credit and fertilizer purchases Factor I II Credit Yes No Yes No available 1996 Yes 0 0 94.7 14 (p < 0.1 9.6 90.3 892 10.4 71.9 89.7 14.8 25.5 77 88.7 14.2 9.3 8.9 Total 96.9 14.1 14-29 days 100 0 92.7 11.1 93. 90.10) ** Moderately significant (p < 0.05) * Significant NS Not significant (p < 0.3 78.5 20.9 1-2 months 95.7 8.9 15.5 91.5 79.8 8.8 100 0 92.4 28.05) Natural regions (% of farmers) III IV V Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes Total No 91.3 84.6 7.5 95.01) (p < 0.3 86 ** 6.2 85.3 13 No No 93.1 91 9 85.A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe 83 TABLE 56 Extension workers and fertilizer purchases Factor Natural regions (% of farmers) I II III IV V Total Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Decision based upon advice of extension agents Yes 100 0 929 7.2 108 86. .8 10.4 89.5 23 21.6 Total 96 4 91.1 9.9 0 9.4 8.5 4.1 85.1 7.10) Fertilizer price information The impact of prior information of fertilizer price on farmers’ purchasing behaviour was found significant (Table 58).3 8.6 13.9 2 NS NS NS ** Ns * χ *** ** Highly Significant Moderately significant (p < 0.1 15.01) ** Moderately significant (p < 0.8 0 90.1 9.
8 100 0 84.3 76.9 20.84 Fertilizer adoption and use survey: Zimbabwe Access to all-weather road No significant overall correlation could be established between access to an all-weather road and the purchase of fertilizer.10) TABLE 60 All-weather roads and fertilizer purchases Factor Natural regions (% of farmers) I II III IV V Total Access Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes 95.4 2 NS NS NS NS NS NS χ *** ** Highly Significant Moderately significant (p < 0.01) * Significant (p < 0.9 13.5 12.4 15.2 79.6 87 13 84.10) .05) * Significant NS Not significant (p < 0.1 expected Lower than 0 0 100 0 100 0 80 20 100 0 90 10 expected Total 96 4 92 8 88.3 15.01) (p < 0.0 percent of farmers who were located within 20 km of a sale point purchased fertilizers as compared to 83.01) (p < 0.5 14.5 7.10) ** Moderately significant (p < 0. In NRs III and IV.7 91.1 85.7 13.5 92.5 2 NS NS χ *** ** Highly Significant Moderately significant (p < 0.5 Total 95.6 88.05) NS Not significant Distance from sale point A highly significant correlation between fertilizer purchases and distance from sale point was observed (Table 61).3 4.4 9. however.4 84.1 88.5 90 15 84.6 11.4 81. TABLE 61 Distance and fertilizer purchases Factor I II Distance (km) Yes No Yes No > 20 95.7 85.6 8.3 87.3 4.4 13.3 84. TABLE 59 Perception of fertilizer prices and fertilizer purchases Factor Natural regions (% of farmers) I II III IV V Total Price Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No perception As expected 100 0 94.3 18.2 3.6 Total 96 4 91.2 15.2 4.5 100 0 92 8 Higher than 95.8 84.9 5.2 11.1 94 20.3 12.9 12.4 11.4 86.4 15.4 86.5 percent of farmers who were located farther away. In NR III 94.3 4.3 73 27 85 15 84.6 88.5 7.3 87.9 7.7 79.2 92.3 8.1 92.7 91.8 13. a significant impact was observed (Table 60).7 87.6 25.6 80 0 90.5 20 or less 96.4 8.7 12.8 4.9 15.5 7.7 *** ** NS *** * Significant NS Not significant (p < 0.2 74.8 2 NS NS * * NS NS χ *** Highly Significant (p < 0.8 No 100 0 95.6 20.7 14.05) Natural regions (% of farmers) III IV V Total Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No 83.5 23.6 89.8 92.2 15.4 15.
1 4.7 11.2 23.6 15.7 28.05) * Significant NS Not significant (p < 0.05) * Significant NS Not significant (p < 0. Only in NR V did availability have a non-significant impact.8 6/2 90.3 6.01) (p < 0.8 15.8 87.9 93.7 85.9 percent of them were uncertain as to whether they would be able to purchase higher quantities of fertilizers in the future.9 2 ** ** *** ** NS χ *** ** Highly Significant Moderately significant (p < 0.1 No 83.9 12.7 percent of farmers expecting to apply up to two bags of fertilizers were almost equally distributed across all the NRs except NR II.6 100 0 Total 98 2 92. TABLE 62 Fertilizer availability and fertilizer purchases Factor Natural regions (% of farmers) I II III IV V Availability Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes 100 0 94.10) FERTILIZER DEMAND PROSPECTS Fertilizer demand estimates for 1998-99 and beyond About 63 percent of the farmers interviewed for this study expressed the belief that they would increase fertilizer use in the future.4 21.6 81. however.1 7.1 95.1 78.9 5.5 percent of them.8 13.3 2 NS * *** *** NS *** χ *** ** Highly Significant Moderately significant (p < 0.9 91.1 94 6 88 12 84.1 7.3 80. as compared to 78.9 6. replied that they would not and 1. Estimated demand for AN (1998-99) A large number of the 13.2 75 25 87 13 84. The 26.4 14.01) (p < 0.3 59.A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe 85 Fertilizer availability The hypothesis that fertilizer availability in an area has a direct impact on purchasing behaviour was proved correct and a highly significant correlation of this variable was observed (Table 62).6 80.7 10.7 89.4 88.10) Total Yes No 93 7 73. The percentage of farmers in NR V hoping to increase fertilizer consumption to four to six bags was rather small (1.9 percent).3 16.5 94.5 percent of farmers who forecast their using one or less than one bag (50 kg) of AN for the year 1998-99 are located in NR IV and V (Table 64).7 percent of farmers who could not sell grains.6 8.6 26.7 19.8 20.6 19.1 5.1 Total 96 4 91.4 8.9 No 93.3 *** Grain sales The hypothesis that a large number of farmers who could sell grain purchased fertilizers was proved correct and the correlation was highly significant (Table 63).2 32. TABLE 63 Grain sales and fertilizer purchases Factor Natural regions (% of farmers) I II III IV V Total Sold grain Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes 100 0 93.4 86.4 67. while 25.4 92. Over 92 percent of farmers who sold grains purchased fertilizers. .
5 percent of farmers I II III IV V Total stated that the government < 50 12.0 18.1 7.2 44.3 100. 1998-99 fertilizers (Table 66).1 15.2 6.200 201 .3 are located in NRs IV and V.8 7.9 29.3 46.250 251 .5 40.3 5.7 12.6 22.4 24.4 11.5 27.0 A majority of farmers (56.6 20.6 26.3 11.0 50. Other factors such as improved seeds.3 9.2 35.3 14.0 33.8 18.6 7.150 151 . 1 11.6 3.6 17.3 8.9 16.6 35.1 31.3 22.7 12.4 31.0 11.3 35.1 20.6 28.6 14.5 10.8 19. subsidies No supply problems No transportation problems Timely delivery Smaller packaging Availability of improved seeds I 83.8 35.0 5.7 13.5 2.2 6.5 6.2 25.4 19. TABLE 66 Factors favouring fertilizer use Factors Price stability Credit availability Govt.0 20.7 19.7 27.3 0.3 12.5 11.4 43.5 35.0 5.6 12.4 9.6 9. About 35 percent of farmers were of the view that price parity between grain and fertilizer prices is an important factor for encouraging the use of higher quantities of fertilizers.3 .6 6.8 15. while 15.0 16.8 8. 251 – 300 7.0 regions.3 2.5 11.5 4.5 28.1 5.9 19.7 percent of small-scale farmers thought that if government became the supplier.7 48. smaller packaging and timely delivery were considered important by a small percentage of farmers.7 28.5 12.9 1.2 3.1 18.1 5.9 21.5 6.4 1.4 31. A larger number 151 .4 20. Some Quantity (kg) Natural regions (% of farmers) Compound D 47.4 46.2 fertilizers.5 8.9 23.0 19.5 27.8 51.6 15. 3 1.9 10. Factors favouring increased use of fertilizers TABLE 64 Distribution of farmers by demand estimate of ammonium nitrate (1998-99) and beyond Natural regions (% of farmers) Quantity (kg) I II III IV V Total Less than 50 15.4 50.7 13.0 20.6 10.2 7.2 11.6 Natural regions (% of farmers) II III IV V 54.0 6.8 6.0 27.1 47.7 6.9 the two resource poor 301 or more 19.2 15.4 7.7 16.0 subsidy would encourage 51 – 100 26.86 Fertilizer adoption and use survey: Zimbabwe Estimated Demand Compound D for The data in Table 65 indicate that 24 percent of small-scale farmers expect to buy six bags or more of Compound D in 1998-99.5 51 .5 13.9 8. as supplier Availability of agro-dealers Grain prices commensurate with fertilizer prices Govt.2 them to use higher doses of 105 .0 was highlighted by a significant percentage of farmers from all five NRs.9 100.6 7.150 24.1 23.100 101 .2 9.2 13.0 16.7 19.5 12. their fertilizer consumption would be higher.2 66.8 2.1 4.8 38.9 6.9 15.3 15.6 of farmers wanting subsidies 201 – 250 0 5.9 31.3 11.6 3.2 8.5 3.2 percent) considered price stability an important factor for encouraging the TABLE 65 use of higher quantities of Distribution by Compound D demand estimate.9 13.8 40.5 12. Credit availability Total 3.2 28.8 13.7 13.5 Total 56.0 0.8 5.9 18.9 0 5.200 9.8 52.7 15.5 12.7 53.300 301 or more Total 40.8 12.5 4. 2 33.
5 43.6 4.3 8.0 15. subsidies No supply problems No transportation problems Timely delivery Smaller packaging Availability of improved seeds I 46.9 35.4 2.8 3. carried out in the five Natural Regions of Zimbabwe. WPS/96-3.7 percent) mentioned the level of government subsidy as a key factor in influencing their decision to buy fertilizers (Table 67). 1996 “Determinants of Adoption and Levels of Demand for Fertilizer for Cereal Growing Farmers in Ethiopia”. The methodologies employed in this study borrow heavily from Croppenstedt.7 2. 3 dprobit provides estimates of dF/dx calculated at the means of the independent variables.4 4. and Mulat Demeke. eventually generated 2 634 usable cases. A.8 21.0 5.9 13.8 0 Total 36.4 6.8 0.1 25. A majority of such farmers are located in NRs IV and V.4 4.2 3. In addition.2 17.3 percent of farmers.1 0 9. TABLE 67 Factors affecting fertilizer purchases Factor Price stability Credit availability Govt. Fertilizer price stability was indicated as a key factor by 36.3 8.4 11.2 1. 1 2 WLS regression was employed to deal with the problem of heteroskedasticity.9 1. Following data cleaning.0 20. for those farmers who have already used fertilizer2.5 1.8 6.5 10.5 8.A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe 87 Factors influencing farmers’decisions to buy fertilizers A large percentage of farmers (40.3 7.0 9.4 40.6 15.1 3.3 1.9 Natural regions (% of farmers) II III IV V 49. extrapolated out.0 5.3 6.4 13.1 13.2 23.8 1.3 7.0 11. dF/dx is the change in the probability function for an infinitesimal change in x.1 14.8 7. Methodology The data The Fertilizer Adoption and Marketing Survey in Zimbabwe (FAMSZ). and (2) weighted least squares regression (WLS)1 of the factors determining fertilizer consumption demand.1 4.9 45. the STATA regress [a weight = n] procedure was employed to estimate the WLS equation containing the variables described in Table 68.0 34. and imputation for missing values. the STATA dprobit3 and probit procedures were then applied to estimate an equation containing the variables described in Table 68.5 13. supplier Availability of agro-dealer Grain prices commensurate with fertilizer prices Govt. Centre for the Study of African Economies.2 40. this one presents the results of (1) probit estimation of the antecedents of fertilizer adoption.6 11.3 5.8 3.7 0 1.2 5.3 22.5 29.1 2. .6 38.6 0 11.4 FERTILIZER ADOPTION AND CONSUMPTION DEMAND AMONG SMALLHOLDER FARMERS Whereas the earlier analysis only involved simple bi-variable assessments.
0857* In (Dependents) 0.01 0.37 0.14 0.0412*** Access to roads 0.01 0. Else 0 Grain sales last year In (Farm size) In (Farm size) 1 if Yes.13 0.0 In (Farm size) -0. compared to farmers in Natural Region 4 (NR4) farmers in all the natural regions.07 -0.04 In (Adults) 0.9863*** -2. The results are discussed below in order of significance. number of dependants.30 *** p<0.14 -0.01.2179 2 634 1138. Else 0 (2) In (fertilizer/ha) Independents: In (Age of household head) In (Age) 1 if Female.00 -0.17 0.5928*** Nregion5 -0.01 0. In addition.5117*** Nregion3 0. * p<0. Else 0 Access to all-weather roads The results Factors affecting fertilizer adoption The results of the probit estimates for fertilizer adoption are given in Table 69. farm size and access to allweather roads are not found to be statistically significant.88 Fertilizer adoption and use survey: Zimbabwe TABLE 68 Description of the variables used in the probit estimation Variable Description Dependent: (1) Previous fertilizer use 1 if Yes. the sale of grain the previous year had the strongest effect on the likelihood of fertilizer adoption for every natural region.04 -0. TABLE 69 Parameter estimates for probit model of fertilizer adoption: FAMSZ 1998 Variable Coefficient Sex -0.05.00 .00 0.07 0.18 Grain sales -0.11 0.01 0. farmers who did were much more likely to have ever used fertilizer.15 -0.02 0. were more likely to have ever used fertilizer.02 0.3839*** Nregion2 1.23 Literacy 0. Grain sales: Compared to farmers who did not sell grain the previous year.03 0.02 -0.6575*** Grain sales 1.10 Constant N -2 (log likelihood) 2 χ df p 2 pseudo R TABLE 70 dF/dx estimates for the factors affecting fertilizer consumption demand Natural Region Variable I II III IV 0.35 12 <0.0423 Literacy 0.01 0.03 0.13 -0.27 -0.05 0.01 0. Else 0 Sex 1 if Yes.01 In (Dependents) 0. ** p<0.00 0. Natural Region: As expected. and as Table 70 shows.26 0. Else 0 Literacy In (number of adults) In (Adults) In (number of dependants) In (Dependants) 1 if Yes.0393 963.4301*** In (Adults) 0.22 0.00 In (Age) -0.0501 Nregion1 1.52 -0.0 In (Age) 0. a result that is also found to be highly significant (Table 69).01 Sex 0. The variables sex of household head.02 -0.03 Access to roads Total V 0.00 In (Farm size) 0. except NR5.02 -0. Farmers who had sold grain the previous year were on average 27% more likely to have ever used fertilizer than farmers who had not sold grain.
Compared to illiterate farmers.0964 Sex -0.0417* In (Distance) Constant 5. fertilizer consumption per hectare was about 96% higher among farmers who reported the said knowledge (Table 72).6049*** -0. * p<0. Else 0 Knows benefits 1 if Yes. The results show that sex. Else 0 In (Years used) In (Number of years fertilizer used) Fertilizer consumption demand Table 72 gives the parameter estimates for the demand for fertilizers.6397*** Credit Agritex 0. Years of fertilizer use Years of experience with fertilizer use also had a strong positive effect on fertilizer consumption (Table 72).0668 Expected yield Grain sales 0.5567*** -0. Else 0 Supply a problem 1 if Yes. TABLE 72 Parameter estimates for WLS model of fertilizer consumption demand: FAMSZ 1998 Variable Coefficient 0.5752*** In (Years used) 0. though there is a variation according to the natural region. Else 0 In (Farm size) In (Farm size) In (Distance) In (Distance to market) Contact with Agritex 1 if Yes.0063 In (Dependants) In (Farm size) -0.05. Age The effect of age on fertilizer adoption is negative with a one-year increase in age reducing the likelihood of fertilizer adoption by a factor of 0.01. literate farmers were more likely (22%) to have ever used fertilizer (Table 70). Else 0 In (Adults) In (number of adults) In (Dependants) In (number of dependants) Grain sales last year 1 if Yes.7092*** In (Age) -0.43 (Table 69). TABLE 71 Description of the variables used in WLS regression Variable Description Dependent: (1) Ever used fertilizer 1 if Yes.25 R *** p<0.0022 In (Adults) -0.A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe 89 Literacy The level of literacy had the next strongest effect on the likelihood of fertilizer adoption. obtaining the expected yield of the previous year.9606*** -0. Else 0 Credit previous year 1 if Yes.2289 N 1 828 2 0. Compared to farmers. ** p<0.2730* Supply -0. Else 0 (2) In (fertilizer/ha) Independents: In (Age) In (age of household head) Sex 1 if Female.10 . An additional year of fertilizer used increased the level of fertilizer consumption by about 71%. Else 0 Obtained expected yield previous year 1 if Yes.1786** Knows benefits 0. who did not report knowledge of these benefits. Knowledge of the benefits of fertilizer Reported knowledge of the benefits of fertilizer use had the strongest positive effect on fertilizer consumption. number of dependants and number of adults are found not statistically significant.
Distance As Table 72 shows. The group covered the Muzarabani. Agritex The results indicate that the availability of agricultural extension services facilitates increased fertilizer consumption (Table 72). access to credit also had a strong positive effect on fertilizer consumption. Compared to farmers who had not obtained credit the previous year. fertilizer consumption per hectare was about 64% higher among farmers who had obtained credit (Table 72). fertilizer adoption and marketing scenario. Compared to farmers.90 Fertilizer adoption and use survey: Zimbabwe Credit As in the base of knowledge and experience. Age Age was negatively associated with fertilizer consumption (Table 72). Sanyati and Mutoko districts. The farmers positively received the enumerators. . The field survey commenced on 20 November and ended on 15 December 1997. fertilizer consumption per hectare was about 18% higher among those farmers who had (Table 72). distance to marketplace was negatively associated with fertilizer consumption. CASE STUDY OF A SURVEY ZONE To obtain a clearer understanding of the socio-economic. Grain sales Consistent with the result for access to credit. fertilizer consumption per hectare was about 58% higher among farmers who had sold grain (Table 72). who had not had any contact with an Agritex official. Supply Fertilizer consumption by farmers who reported that fertilizer supplies were a problem were much lower than the level of consumption among those farmers who did not report that supplies were a problem (Table 72). Karoi. a case study of one of the survey zones was undertaken. Compared to farmers who sold grain the previous year. grain sales the previous year were positively related to fertilizer consumption. The survey team consisted of five enumerators and one survey supervisor. Farm size The total amount of land cultivated was negatively associated with fertilizer consumption (Table 72).
the main crops grown are maize and cotton. Sanyati The Sanyati sampling area covers both the Sanyati and Kadoma districts and the northern and southern areas of Gokwe district. in addition to maize. sunflowers and groundnuts.A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe 91 General profile of survey areas Muzarabani The Muzarabani area consists of the district of Guruve in Mash West Province including Dande in the Zambezi Valley along the Zambezi River. . Villagers are concentrated in pockets in agricultural lands close to the national parks.6 inhabitiants/km . The district has a 2 population density of 30. Though farmers have large tracts of land. The 2 population density is 19. cucumbers and potatoes for sale in Harare. which is one of the highest in the rural areas of Zimbabwe. Karoi The Karoi sampling area is an important agricultural area in Hurungwe in Mashonaland West Province. farming is not mechanized and a majority of the farmers relies on hand tools that make farming operations difficult and slow. Cropping pattern In Guruve district and Muzarabani. maize and cotton are the main crops. The tsetse fly problem in the area has exacerbated the situation (however. In Sanyati. Socio-economic and agricultural scenario In Dande. Karoi comes under NR II. Maize is grown on 40 000 ha. The 2 population density is 32. Mutoko has a population of 124 013 persons (58 489 males and 65 524 females). 1992). The majority of farmers are illiterate and live below the poverty line. Kadoma district is in Mashonaland West Province and has a total population of 151 112 persons (75 332 males and 75 780 females). 122 739 are males and 125 888 are females. they fail to utilize them all because of the limited draught power available (the majority of farmers do not have cattle). cotton on 25 000 ha. 64 627 are males and 70 614 are females. Much of the land is a national park protected area and is reserved for wildlife.1 inhabitiants/km . In the Mutoko and Murehwa districts. Gokwe district is in Midlands Province and has a total population of 403 653 persons (194 537 males and 2 209 116 females). sunflowers on 15 000 ha and groundnuts on 7 000 ha. in addition to the major crops of maize and cotton. which is the nearest market. The area comes under NRs IV and V. The total population of Murehwa is 152 505 persons (72 942 males and 79 563 females).4 inhabitiants/km (CSO. horticultural activities are quite significant. In the valley the population is sparse compared to around Guruve. In Hurungwe district. Of the total population. efforts are underway to bring the situation under control).2 inhabitiants/km (CSO. The Guruve Rural District Council administers the district. Mutoko The Mutoko sampling area in Mashonaland East Province consists of the districts of Mutoko and Murehwa. The population density is 26. which is heavily populated. 1992). farmers also grow sunflowers and groundnuts on a small scale. Farmers grow tomatoes. Of the total population of 248 627.
Droughts are experienced about every five years. the yield will double. In Mutoko and Murehwa districts. The area has black soils. In the Karoi area. farmers have mainly small landholdings. farmers grow hardly any maize for sale because there are no GMB depots or agro-dealers in the area. It is a very hot region with unreliable rainfall patterns suitable only for drought resistant crops. Fertilizers are available from agro-dealers. Droughts occur every three years. The telephone network is very poor but the roads are relatively good. Temperatures are always high. cucumbers and mangoes to raise additional income.92 Fertilizer adoption and use survey: Zimbabwe In Muzarabani. Many farmers in this region do not use fertilizers because of the belief that the soil fertility levels of their soils are still good. In Sanyati and Gokwe. soils range from sandy loams to clay loams. In Gokwe. Most husbands work in the towns. In Muzarabani. A large majority of the farmers do not have proper knowledge of fertilizers and the fertilizer use per hectare is very low. but farmers face many transport difficulties. red soils and sandy soils. All-weather roads are found in most areas. though price is a major issue. farmers have mainly smallholdings of 1-1. The roads are good and the means of communication have improved considerably. the soils are light and heavy textured. In Sanyati.25 ha. In Hurungwe district. The rainfall pattern is very erratic. Farmers do a lot of other activities to earn money. . The majority of farmers understand the benefits of fertilizer use. Wild animals such as elephants often destroy crops in the fields. the situation is relatively good. the farmers are in a position to send their children to school and still have some money to purchase fertilizer with. In Hurungwe. The farmers and Agritex staff believe that if fertilizer application is doubled. Of the farmers who use fertilizers. The small-scale farmers have generally adopted modern methods of cultivation and are convinced of the benefits of fertilizer use. there are several agro-dealers and most farmers can access depots easily and purchase inputs quite near their farms. It is a very good rainfall area of moderately high temperature. Natural endowments Soils of moderate fertility are found in the Dande valley. Cotton being their major cash crop. mainly cotton. most soils are sandy. The valley is generally flat and levelled. Most areas can be accessed throughout the year. the landholdings are very small and there is a high population density. The Cotton Company has established one collection point in the valley. They are low in fertility. There is still plenty of unsettled land and squatters are settling in the area. and this has become a chronic cyclic pattern. the soils range from sandy to clay and most of them show signs of soil fertility depletion. the district produces about 100 000 t/year of maize. In Sanyati and Mutoko. They also sell onions. In Guruve. 25-30 percent of them uses adequate amounts. Intercropping is widely practised. though not in adequate amounts. The district produces enough food to feed Zimbabwe for a month.
the soils are mostly sandy although there are also a few patches of red soil. The AFC loan facility has very high interest rates and farmers are also limited on . Road construction has met with stiff opposition. Some farmers have received master farmer training. Cotton Company is now giving fertilizer on credit to its contracted farmers. a good example being that of boreholes. In Muzarabani. which the mhondoros were against although people were dying from contaminated drinking water. fertilizer demand has increased. Transport costs have also worsened the problem. The settlement pattern has tended to be clustered around the limited productive soils. Due to increased knowledge. The declining fertility levels of soils are now forcing farmers to make increased use of fertilizers. the market is very limited. In recent years. Cultural factors Most farmers in Dande and Muzarabani believe what their mhondoros (spirit mediums) say. with which they have to send their children to school and buy fertilizers and seeds for the next season. Agri-input supply has since improved in most areas. some areas have a poor supply of fertilizers because of their remoteness. However. Most farmers were against the idea as they thought they were going to be made labourers. some of whom disappear without paying the farmers. Some of the major problems mentioned by farmers are outlined below. This leaves the farmer unprotected and very vulnerable. Marketing problems At times. Fertilizer supply In most of the survey area. Land size and fertilizer use Farmers have mainly very small landholdings and the increased use of fertilizers appears to have limited scope. Of particular note is the case of the abandoned idea of introducing an irrigation scheme. Credit The availability of credit at reasonable interest rates is a major constraint in the small-scale farming areas. the area under maize has increased and this has increased the demand for Compound D and AN. because farmers lack knowledge about fertilizers. fertilizers had been introduced prior to independence. This has encouraged fertilizer companies to appoint agrodealers in the communal areas. The mhondoros are against fertilizer use.A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe 93 In Mutoko and Murehwa. If they say no to infrastructure development. it becomes difficult to do anything. A majority of the farmers now know the benefits of fertilizer use. The soils are no longer productive and soil fertility has generally been declining. GMB stops buying grain from farmers and they are eventually forced to sell to unorganized private buyers. Many crop produce marketing companies are also entering the fertilizer supply market. GMB has also been supplying fertilizers. marketing systems have been liberalized and agrodealers are becoming established in the productive markets. Farmers receive a very low annual income. In Hurungwe. Problems facing farmers Fertilizer prices have increased and the effect has been exacerbated by poor grain prices.
Farmers often have to attend funerals. AIDS AIDS has become a major menace affecting most rural farming communities and their environs. The buyers usually award the lower grades of C or D. and subsequently to collectively repay the money after harvesting the crop. The scheme also limits the number of bags farmers can purchase. The Cotton Company of Zimbabwe requires farmers to team up in order to qualify for fertilizer loans. The more motivated farmers do not wish to be ‘ policemen’ for other farmers. They believe that competition is also neutralized by this approach.94 Fertilizer adoption and use survey: Zimbabwe the quantity they can purchase. Some prejudice exists as communal areas are perceived and valued lower in a hierarchy of economic gradation that places large-scale commercial areas at the top. the whole group will not be considered for loans. Droughts Persistent droughts in most areas make it difficult for farmers to repay loans and to obtain more fertilizers. which are uneconomic and not easily transportable. are also affected. farmers with no formal land title cannot produce the collateral to be eligible for loans from commercial lending institutions. Uncertainties caused by weather patterns also have a strong bearing on the quantity of fertilizer purchased and/or used by farmers. fertilizers are becoming less affordable. They bring inputs from the city markets in peak selling months and sell to the farmers at very high prices. There is a need for up-to-date soil sampling and testing in order to apply proper types of fertilizers to maximize yields and achieve improved economic returns. who need a large labour force. Moreover. Crops grown Many of the farmers in the communal areas rely only on maize and some marginal crops. including the peri-urban areas such as growth points and rural service centres associated with the micro-economy. The delayed delivery of fertilizers in the communal areas leads to late application and this results in poor use efficiency. Produce grading system Most farmers are critical of the grading system applied to their crop produce. This entails their using most of the money they would have set aside to purchase fertilizers. If one farmer from the team fails to repay his portion. so the produce fetches lower prices. This trend is expected to worsen in the near future. Soil sampling Soil sampling for testing was done a long time ago and farmers only rely on blanket recommendations from Agritex. Fertilizer supply There are many informal agro-dealers who are mostly grocery shop owners. Grade B is the best they have obtained to date. Commercial farmers. . and the prospects for increased agricultural production are limited at this time. Because of increasing fertilizer prices. Some farmers feel their produce is grade A or B. so making it difficult for farmers to purchase adequate quantities of inputs.
A fertilizer strategy for Zimbabwe 95 ZIMBABWE NATURAL REGIONS I Specialized and Diversified Farming Region IIA Intensive Farming Region IIB Intensive Farming Region III Semi-Intensive Farming Region IV Semi-Extensive Farming Region V Extensive Farming Region 70 70% probability of receiving more than 500 mm rainfall during the period October – April This map has been derived from “Natural Regions and Provisional Farming Areas of Zimbabwe”. . The original Map was compiled from information supplied by the Department of Agricultural. 1998). 1:1. as compiled by the Early Warning Unit for Food Security.000. The 70% probability isoline is based on information from the Met. and Extension Services (Agritex). Technical.000 (Surveyor-General. Dept.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue listening from where you left off, or restart the preview.