OPPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGES FOR PRIVATE SERVICE

DELIVERY: THE CASE OF PRIVATE CROP PROTECTION AND

COMMUNITY ANIMAL HEALTH WORKERS’ SERVICE DELIVERY
IN ALABA SPECIAL DISTRICT, SOUTHERN ETHIOPIA

M.Sc. Thesis

MATHEWOS MUKE

October 2010
Haramaya University
OPPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGES FOR PRIVATE SERVICE
DELIVERY: THE CASE OF PRIVATE CROP PROTECTION AND
COMMUNITY ANIMAL HEALTH WORKERS’ SERVICE DELIVERY
IN ALABA SPECIAL DISTRICT, SOUTHERN ETHIOPIA

A Thesis Submitted to the Department of Rural Development and

Agricultural Extension, School of Graduate Studies
HARAMAYA UNIVERSITY

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the Degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE IN RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND
AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION (RURAL DEVELOPMENT)

By
MATHEWOS MUKE

October 2010
 HARAMAYA UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF GRADUATE STUDIES
HARAMAYA UNIVERSITY

As Thesis research advisor, I hereby certify that I have read and evaluated this thesis
prepared, under my guidance, by Mathewos Muke Munaje entitled: Opportunities and
Challenges for Private Service Delivery: The Case of Private Crop Protection and
Community Animal Health Workers’ Service Delivery in Alaba Special District,
Southern Ethiopia. I recommend that it be submitted as fulfilling the Thesis requirement.

Tesfaye Lemma (PhD) ______________ _____________

Major Advisor Signature Date

Ranjan S. Karippai (Prof) ________________ _____________

Co-Advisor Signature Date

As member of the Boards of Examiners of the M.Sc. Thesis Open Defense Examination, I
certify that I have read, evaluated the Thesis prepared by Mathewos Muke Munaje and
examined the candidate. We recommended that the Thesis be accepted as fulfilling the
Thesis requirement for the Degree of Master of Science in Rural Development and
Agricultural Extension (Rural Development).

_____________________ ______________ ____________

Chair Person Signature Date

_____________________ ______________ ____________

Internal Examiner Signature Date

_____________________ ______________ ____________

External Examiner Signature Date

ii
 DEDICATION

I dedicated this thesis manuscript with love to my mother, Bontole Tantu, for showing
me the firm ground and for her love and affection. I feel very happy that her efforts have
finally come to fruition.

iii
 STATEMENT OF THE AUTHOR

First, I declare that this thesis is my bonafide work and that all sources of materials used
for this thesis have been duly acknowledged. This thesis has been submitted in partial
fulfillment of the requirements for M.Sc. degree at Haramaya University and is deposited
at the university library to be made available to borrowers under the rules of the library. I
solemnly declare that this thesis is not submitted to any other institution anywhere for the
award of any academic degree, diploma, or certificate.

Brief quotations from this thesis are allowable without special permission provided that
accurate acknowledgement of source is made. Requests for permission for extended
quotation from or reproduction of this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by
the Department of Rural Development and Agricultural Extension or the School of
Graduate Studies when the proposed use of the material is in the interests of scholarship.
In all other instances, however, permission must be obtained from the author.

Name: Mathewos Muke Munaje

Signature: _____________________
Date of Submission: October, 2010
Place: Haramaya University, Haramaya

iv
 ABBREVIATIONS

AI Artificial Insemination
CBA t Cost Benefit Analysis
CBOs Community Based Organizations
BoARD Regional Bureau of Agriculture and Rural Development
CAHWs Community Animal Health Workers
DAs Development Agents
FAO Food and Agricultural Organization
FDRE Federal Democratic Republic Ethiopian, A Political Party that rule Ethiopia
since 1991
FFS Farmers Field School
FGD Focus Group Discussion
FHHH Female Headed House Hold
FMD Foot and Mouth Disease
FTC Farmer Training Center
GTZ Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit
Ha Hectare
HH Household
IPMS Improving Productivity and Market Success of Ethiopian farmers’ project
KIGs Key Informant Groups
LVIA Lay Volunteers International Association
MFI Micro Financial Institution
MoARD Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development
NGOs Non Governmental Organizations
OECD Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development
PA Peasant Association
PASDEP Plan for Accelerated and Sustainable Development to End Poverty
PCPS Private Crop Protection Service
PSD Private Sector Development
SWOT Strength weakness opportunities and threats
WoARD Woreda (District) office of Agriculture and Rural Development
WTP Willingness to Pay

v
 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

Mathewos Muke Munaje was born in Wolaita zone, Damot Woyde district, Mayo Kote PA
to his father Ato Muke Munaje and mother W/ro Bontole Tantu. He completed primary
and secondary school in Wolaita zone, Boditti Junior and Boditti Senior secondary school,
respectively.

He joined Mekelle University in October 1999 and completed his Bachelor of Science
Degree study in Land Resources Management and Environmental Protection in July 2003.
Following that, the author had been served for various government and NGOs in SNNP,
Oromia and Amhara regions under different capacities such as teaching in ATVET
College and Rural Development field in World Vision Ethiopia (WVE) and Food for the
Hungry International (FHI).

In October 2008, he joined Haramaya University through self sponsor to pursue his Master
of Science (M.Sc.) studies in Rural Development Stream in the Department of Rural
Development and Agricultural Extension, which this volume is the partial fulfillment. The
author is single.

vi
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First and foremost I express my gratitude to my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, for his
immense love, help and fidelity. I give Him the Honor and Glory for His all time goodwill
and assistance in general and for giving me the courage and endurance to start the graduate
studies and finalize this thesis in particular.

My greatest thank and heartfelt appreciation goes to my major advisor Tesfaye Lemma
(PhD) and co-advisor Ranjan S. Karippai (Prof) for allowing me the opportunity to work
with them, for their insightful contributions to my professional development, and for their
kindness and support. Without their assistances, the completion of this paper would have
been hardily possible. I am especially grateful to Dr Tesfaye Lemma, for his guidance,
encouragement, and patience. I will always appreciate the brotherly example he set in my
life.

I would like to express my thanks for ILRI/IPMS project for covering the research
expenses and graduate stipend that helped me to concentrate on the thesis research work. I
would like also to thank many people in Alaba especially staffs of the woreda Agricultural
Extension Work Process and Alaba IPMS project. I also owe my deepest gratitude to
Abebe Shiferaw, Bereket Dindamo and Shemisu Mohammed of the IPMS, for their
valuable assistance from the project. My special gratitude goes to Anteneh Girma and
Zerihun (ILRI-Statistician) for all supports they were giving me at their disposal. Bereket
Dindamo deserves my special thanks for accommodating and made my stay in Alaba
pleasant. My sincere acknowledgment goes to Afework Daniel, Tesfaye Soka and Addisu
Tutuno who made my stay in Alaba and Addis Ababa feeling as if at home.

In addition, World Bank Librarians and DAs of the Alaba WoARD deserve the same. I am
also indebted to Girma Deressa for making the necessary arrangement of time for data
collection and undying support from a distance. It is unfair not to mention my poor and
uneducated mum (Bontole Tantu) and dad (Muke Munaje) whose crucial decision to
invest part of their meager resource in my education had laid a base for me to reach where
I am today. Fortunately, my mum’s dream and determination to educate me until I reach
‘college’ has come true beyond her wish. I am highly indebted to my sisters Tigist &
Ayelech and brother Bereket for their consistent encouragement throughout the thesis
work. In addition, the following friends, Ayalnesh Fisha (HU), Tamirat Tefer, Abera

vii
Orcho, Mesay, Ashebir Asale; Gizaw Birhanu, Gemta, Getahun, Tadesse Adgo, Mesfine
Demissie, Fentaw Yimam and Gebre Telake from FHI; Tamene, Abebe Anjulo;
secretaries of WoARD (Aberash and Frehiwot); Cheniyalew, Sisay and Takele Geta from
HU, thank you all. I am also indebted to all classmates in the department of RDAE and
graduate colleagues at Haramaya University for making my stay pleasant and ever
memorable.

I wish to extend my gratitude to enumerators, the precious 120 sample farm HHs, key
informants and private service providers in Alaba for devoting their valuable time during
the data collection. I would like to thank my friends, Adugna Enyew, Takele Taye from
Norway, Mammo Lodamo, Asefa Bilhatu, Tigist Beyene and Ademe Ayalew for their
encouragement through emails and phone calls to accomplish my study successfully.

viii
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABBREVIATIONS v
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH vi
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS vii
LIST OF TABLES xiii
LIST OF FIGURES xv
LIST OF APPENDICES xvi
ABSTRACT xvii
1. INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Background of the Study 1
1.2 Statement of the Problem 2
1.3 Objective of the Study 5
1.4 Research Questions 5
1.5 Scope and Limitation of the Study 5
1.6 Significance of the Study 6
1.7 Organization of the Thesis 6
2. LITERATURE REVIEW 8
2.1 Concept and Definitions 8
2.2 Why Private Sector? 8
2.3 The Role of Private Sectors in Poverty Reduction 9
2.4 The Rationale and Types of Public Support for Private Sector Development 9
2.4.1 Strategic Thrusts for Private Sector Development 11
2.4.2 Major Types of Agricultural Services 12
2.4.2.1 Process of Selective Privatization 14
2.4.2.2 Focus on Poor Areas and HHs 15
2.4.3 Crop Protection Services 15
2.4.4 Livestock service delivery 16
2.4.5 Approaches to Extension Services 17
2.5 Evolution of Institutional Arrangements for Private Sector Development 17
2.6 The Economic Aspects of Privatized Service Delivery 19
2.6.1 Economic Impact of CAHWs Services 20

ix
 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

2.6.2 Market Efficiency and Access to Market Information 22

2.6.3 The Equity dimension of privatized service delivery 22
2.7 Empirical Studies 23
2.7.1 Privatization of Agricultural Services in Kenya 23
2.7.2 Privatized Agricultural Extension service delivery in Uganda 23
2.7.3 Issues and challenges of Privatization of Agricultural Services in Africa 24
2.8 Delivery Efficiency and Sustainability Issue 24
2.9 Willingness and Ability to Pay for Private Services 25
2.10 The Conceptual Framework 25
3. METHODOLOGY 27
3.1 Description of the Study Area 27
3.2 Research Design 28
3.2.1 Sampling Techniques 29
3.2.2 Survey Instrument and Administration 30
3.3 Data Sources and Data Types 30
3.4 Method of Data Collection 31
3.5 Methods of Data Analysis 31
4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 32
4.1. Characteristics of Sampled HHs 32
4.1.1 Local Wealth indicators and wealth categories 32
4.1.2 Demographic characteristics 34
4.1.3 Characteristics of HH Heads 34
4.1.5 Livestock Ownership 37
4.1.6 Access to Agricultural Knowledge and Information 38
4.1.7 Access to credit 39
4.2 Crop Production and Marketing Systems of the study PAs 40
4.2.1 Input use and management 42
4.2.2 Crop Production Opportunities and Challenges 45
4.3. Private Crop Protection Services and Uses 48
4.3.1 Capacity of Crop Protection Service Providers 48
4.3.1.1 Human Capacity 49

x
 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

4.3.1.2 Storage and Handling of equipment/materials and chemicals 52

4.3.1.3 Finance or credit linkages 54
4.3.1.4 Perception of Providers’ about Opportunities & Challenges to their
Capacity 57
4.3.2 Crop Protection Service Coverage and Use 59
4.3.2.1 Crop Protection Methods and Services 59
4.3.2.2 Service Coverage and Uses 61
4.3.3 Financial viability of Spray Service 63
4.3.4 Perception of User and Potential user Farmers 64
4.3.4.1 Comparison of Crop Protection Methods as Perceived by Farmers 65
4.3.4.2 SWOT Analysis for Private Crop Protection Service 65
4.3.5 Willingness and Ability to Pay for Private Crop Protection Services 68
4.4 Livestock Production and Marketing Systems in study area 70
4.4.1 Livestock Input use and yield trends 71
4.4.2 Opportunities and Challenges for Livestock production 72
4.5.1 Capacity of CAHWs 75
4.5.1.1 Human Capacity 76
4.5.1.2 Storage and Handling of equipment/materials and drugs 78
4.5.1.3 Finance or credit linkages 80
4.5.1.4 Perception of CAHWs about Opportunities and Challenges to their
Capacity 83
4.5.2 CAHW Service Coverage and Uses 85
4.5.2.1 CAHWs Service Type and Coverage 85
4.5.2.2 CAHWs Service coverage and Use 88
4.5.3 Financial Viability of CAHWs Service 90
4.5.4 Perception of User and Potential-user Farmers 91
4.5.4.1 Comparison of Animal Health Service Providers Perceived by Farmers 92
4.5.4.2 SWOT Analysis for CAHWs service delivery 93
4.5.5 Willingness and Ability to Pay for CAHWs Service 95
5. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 99
5.1 Private Crop Protection Service 99

xi
 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

5.1.1 Summary of key findings and Conclusions 99

5.1.2 Recommendations 101
5.2 CAHWs Service 103
5.2.1 Summary of key findings and Conclusions 103
5.2.2 Recommendations 105
6. REFERENCES 107
7. APPENDICES 110

xii
 LIST OF TABLES

Tables Page
1. Economic Classification of Agricultural Services .......................................................... 13
2. Extension Market Reform Strategies .............................................................................. 17
3a.Wealth Category of sample HHs, by PAs ...................................................................... 33
3b.Demographic Characteristics of sample HHs ................................................................ 34
4.Characteristics of HH Heads ............................................................................................ 36
5.Crop land holding and access ........................................................................................... 37
6.Livestock holding and oxen ownership ........................................................................... 37
7. Main sources for improved agricultural knowledge and technology, % of HHs ............ 38
8.Access to credit, Proportion of responding HHs (%)....................................................... 39
9a. Crop Land Use Pattern of 2008/9, by PAs (Ha) ............................................................ 41
9b. Input use and overall yield trends for subsistence and cash crop (% responding) ........ 43
9c. Opportunities and Challenges rankings, % of respondent ............................................ 46
9d. Major Pests and Disease problems & protection measures (% of reporting HHs) ....... 47
10.Educational Profile and Practical Experience of providers............................................ 49
11.Perception to practical skill-orientation of various trainings ......................................... 51
12.Providers’ Perception about supply of chemical inputs ................................................. 53
13.Current Assets and Capital of the PCPS providers, (% of yes) ..................................... 57
14.Constraints Perceived by PCPS Providers: rank order (1=first most important) ........... 58
15.Major Crop protection methods and services................................................................. 59
16.Crop Spray Service coverage in Hectare, by Provider ................................................... 61
17.Service Use rate by different wealth categories, by PA (% of user HHs) ..................... 62
18.Perception about the use of spray service, by user/potential user farmers..................... 64
19.Ranking of different providers for various indicators, by user/potential user farmers .. 65
20.SWOT analysis of PCPS ................................................................................................ 66
21. Perception to crop protection services Charging .......................................................... 69
22. Proportion of HHs willing to pay (WTP) for different spray service chargings ........... 69
23a. Livestock ownership pattern, % of owners ................................................................. 70
23b. Livestock input use and over all yield trends, % of respondents ................................ 71
23c.Livestock production Opportunities and Challenges ranking, (% of respondents) ...... 72

xiii
 LIST OF TABLES (Continued)

23d. Major livestock parasites and diseases and treatment measures ................................. 73
24.Educational Profile and Practical Experience of CAHWs ............................................. 76
25.Perception to practical skill-orientation of various trainings ......................................... 77
26. CAHWs Perception about supply of drugs ................................................................... 79
27. Current Assets and Capital of CAHWs for Service Delivery, (% of yes) .................... 83
28. Constraints Perceived by CAHWs: rank order (1=first most important)...................... 84
29. Sources of Animal Health diagnostic and treatment Services of sample HHs ............. 85
30. Major types of Animal Health services delivered ......................................................... 86
31. CAHWs livestock and Service specific coverage, by PAs ........................................... 88
32. CAHWs Service Use rate by different wealth groups, % user HHs ............................. 90
33. Perception about CAHWs services by different categories of HHs (%), by PAs ......... 92
34. Ranking of various animal health service providers, by user/potential user farmers ... 93
35. SWOT Analysis of CAHWs Service ............................................................................ 93
36. Perception of community for various CAHWs services charging ................................ 96
37. Proportion of HHs willing to pay (WTP) for different CAHWs service charging ....... 96
38. Proportion of HHs According to self-description related to payment for services ....... 97

xiv
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figures Page
1. Conceptual Framework to analyze Private Service Delivery System............................. 26
2. Map of the study area ...................................................................................................... 28
3. Wealth Categories by gender of HH Head ...................................................................... 35
4. Proportion of Cropped land area allocated to different crop categories ......................... 42
5. Actors Linkage Map showing access to Knowledge, Inputs and Finance to PCPS
Providers ..................................................................................................................... 55
7. Seasonal Calendar for demand of crop protection service .............................................. 60
8. Private Crop Protection Service Coverage in PAs .......................................................... 62
8. Actors Linkage Map showing access to knowledge, inputs and finance to CAHWs ..... 81
9. Seasonal Calendar of CAHWs service demand .............................................................. 87
10.CAHWs Service Coverage............................................................................................. 89

xv
 LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendices Page
1. General agrochemical/drugs retailers in and around Alaba .......................................... 111
2.Credit Mobilized from Mencheno Union to Private sectors in Alaba ........................... 111
3. Cooperatives in Alaba Special Woreda......................................................................... 112
4. Initial* CAHWs charging rate based on Community Consultation in 6 PAs ............... 112
5. Treatment charging rate of drugs in Alaba Public Animal Health clinic ...................... 113
6. Traditional Animal Health Practices in the study area.................................................. 113
7. Bio-pesticides and Natural Pest Control Methods ........................................................ 114
8. Common types of Pesticides used and handling ........................................................... 115
9. Private Crop Protection Service Providers.................................................................... 116
10. CAHWs Service Providers.......................................................................................... 117
11. Conversion Factors used for Computation of Tropical Livestock Unit ...................... 118
12. HH Survey Interview Schedule.................................................................................. 118
13. Checklist for Group Discussion of KIGs .................................................................... 127
14. Checklist for CAHWs or Private Crop Protection Service Providers ......................... 129

xvi
 OPPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGES FOR PRIVATE SERVICE DELIVERY:
THE CASE OF PRIVATE CROP PROTECTION AND COMMUNITY ANIMAL
HEALTH WORKERS’ SERVICE DELIVERY IN ALABA SPECIAL DISTRICT,
SOUTHERN ETHIOPIA

ABSTRACT

CAHWs and PCPS are the two community-based private services operating in Alaba since
three years. However, there was no systematic assessment of this initiatives have been
made to learn lessons and develop a strategy for scaling successful experience. This
research was initiated to fill this gap. Specifically the research attempted to address four
important questions: i) What are the challenges and opportunities for emergence and
expansion of these services? ii) What are the extent of service coverage and commercial
viability to providers? iii) How do the private service providers perceive the entrance and
expansion of service delivery? iv) Why some farmers use privately provided services and
others don’t? The key findings of research are i) the providers are different in their supply
capacity. Although the PCPS providers were relatively better capacitated with basic
equipments, CAHWs are lacking the minimum critical facilities for primary animal health
care provision. The providers have also perceived many opportunities yet specific to each
service. Constraints perceived are also different for each service and many of them are
non-technical, but are issue of policies and institutional challenges for both services and
require service- specific policy and institutional arrangement to promote the service
delivery system; ii) PCPS service coverage has shown the dominance of herbicide service
than that of pesticide as well as pre-harvest service coverage than that of post-harvest. In
CAHWs, the coverage is cattle dominated than other species with focus of antibiotic
treatment than other services. Overall, service coverage is an indicator of the
performance of service provider. Analysis of financial viability of the service to providers
has also showed its viability even if the current costs of chemical and drugs increased by
14 and 10% for CAHWs and PCPS respectively; iii) The PCPS better satisfied the nearby
PA users, whereas in CAHWs service the far PA users were better satisfied with
accessibility and effectiveness of the service; and iv) The survey has also revealed that
majority of users are willing to pay the said charge if it will improve their income as
farmers and empower them financially. The findings imply: i) the effective demand for
herbicide than pesticide and confirms the cereal crop domination of the district than cash
crop production; ii) the difference in performance of providers in respective PAs and
effective demand for CAHWs and PCPS in far and near PAs, respectively; iii) The
proportion of those who perceived the current CAHWs charge is lower are greater than
that of PCPS. This implies these users might have satisfied by the benefit they derived
from CAHWs service; and iv) An increase in income is an issue of ability to pay for
services. The key recommendations to seize opportunities & address challenges include: i)
For the future, the providers have to focus on existing opportunities at hand and should
explore effectively; ii) In response to the challenges identified, it is recommended to
develop supportive services and enabling policies and institutional arrangements; iii) In
order to avoid unfair competition, enforcement mechanism is vital regarding licensing and
policing. PCPS is quite new, needs service standards and guidelines; iv) the service
delivery should go beyond mere increase in yields into more of income generating
schemes and market facilities for users in order to sustain their income and this is an
important condition need to be attached to WTP.

xvii
 1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the Study

Ethiopia is one of the poorest nations in the world, where agriculture is the basis of
livelihood for the majority of the population. Real per capita income is very low, currently
estimated to be 140 USD per year. Poverty is widespread with an estimated 44% of the
total population living below the poverty line in the 1999/2000 and poverty incidence is
much higher in rural areas than urban areas (FDRE, 2002). Agriculture contributes 50% of
gross domestic production (GDP), employs 85% of the population and the main income-
generating sector for the majority of the rural population. Despite the potential for market
oriented agricultural economic development, smallholder farming performance and its
contribution to poverty reduction and economic development has remained very low
(Getahun, 2004). One, among many, of the reasons for this is lack of effective agricultural
services delivery. To ameliorate the challenges and realize the potential of the sector,
decades of efforts have been made to improve the provision of supportive services such as,
credit, research and extension, post harvesting services and marketing of agricultural
products but most of the service provision activities have been mainly carried out by the
public sector through various development projects (Azage et al., 2006).

Since 1991, Ethiopia has set forth a comprehensive economic development strategies that
target economic growth and poverty reduction through efforts designed to promote a
market-led transformation of the agricultural growth. Thus, PASDEP places a great
emphasis on commercialization and diversification of agricultural production and exports,
active private sector participation in supporting rural subsistence farming moving to small
scale market-oriented agriculture. Hence, the focus of the agricultural support service
delivery has to move from subsistence-orientation to a kind of service that supports
improving the productivity and market success of smallholder production systems (FDRE,
2002). Besides, pluralism is required in service delivery with increasing involvement of
the private sector, NGOs and farmer groups/cooperatives.

Globally, public monopoly in production of inputs and service delivery has recently
become under serious challenge. The service reform trends include decentralization, cost-
sharing and complete privatization/user fee. A range of pressures, both internal and
external are forcing a re-examination of public agricultural services. Hence, the world is
experiencing a situation where many countries are finding it necessary to implement and
experiment with different reforms including the option of complete privatization of
agricultural services. However, appropriate service delivery reform and institutional
arrangements in service delivery is context specific.

In Ethiopia, the agricultural service delivery system assessment revealed a weak demand
side since farmers and communities are not well organized to be able to analyze their real
needs and demand and validate it in view of their own resources. On the service provision
side, the public sector has retained its monopoly and few emerging non public service
providers are not working towards to the required level of effectiveness and efficiency
(Puskur and Hagmann, 2006). This may result from factors such as regulatory
environment, business linkages and lack of public support that affect organizational and
institutional set ups to support, organizing and respond to demands. Hence, the need for
understanding and analyzing the prevailing opportunities and challenges for the
emergence of vibrant private service delivery systems is imperative. It is also equally
important to look into the possible roles of and mechanisms for public support to private
service development for efficient and equitable functioning of the service provision. This
study contributes towards the same direction.

1.2 Statement of the Problem

In recent development strategy, Ethiopia has set forth a comprehensive set of development
objectives that target economic growth and poverty reduction through strategies designed
to promote a market-led transformation of the rural economy. PASDEP places a great
emphasis on commercialization of agriculture, diversification of production and exports,
and private sector investment in order to move the rural economy beyond subsistence
farming to small scale market-oriented agriculture. However, past efforts of public
agricultural service delivery system did not lead commercialization of smallholder
agriculture moving (FDRE, 2002). Hence, with the main thrust of commercialization, to
move a subsistence-oriented agriculture of the country to more productive and market-
oriented production systems, the agricultural supportive service has to be transformed and
should become more responsive, client-oriented and demand-driven.

2
After years of neglect, there is now renewed interest in privatization of agricultural
services in many developing countries. However, the issue of how best to provide and
finance private services remains controversial. This needs understanding the roles and
capacity of the public and private sector, and civil society while ensuring demand-driven
service delivery to meet the needs of farmers and making service provision more efficient
and financially sustainable to maintain equity among poor female farmers and other
marginalized groups have access to services. In view of this, the need for involving private
sector either fully or partially supplementing public sector service delivery is being
increasingly recommended in Ethiopia (World Bank, 2005).

Private sector development and the performance of private sector activities is now seen as
crucial to economic growth and poverty reduction in developing countries. However, past
experiences in many developing countries with contracting out indicate that it often takes
time for NGOs and small private-sector enterprises with the ability to provide adequate
services to emerge. This indicates the importance of public supportive services for the
emergence and development of small private enterprise. Further, government has a critical
role to play to create an enabling environment for private sector investment in various
aspects through, among others, capacity building, appropriate regulatory frameworks and
the implementation of competition law. Therefore, it is important to understand various
mechanisms of public support to promote the development of vibrant private sectors in
service provision. These have to remain public goods that the government will need to
provide for the proper functioning of the market. As private enterprise is a prime engine of
growth and development, it needs the public support that enhancing governance and the
rule of law to attract more and broader private investment (Kurokawa et al., 2008).

In the past, most developing countries have implemented various strategies from
revitalization within the existing public service to privatization to reform publicly
dominated agricultural services. These reforms have revealed that a public sector
monopoly in provision of agricultural services is no more justifiable. As a result, many
developing countries are taking various measures to improve national service delivery
systems through the involvement of private service providers. This has created a growing
trend for a state to move from being a simple provider of services to work of regulatory,
quality assurance and capacitating and scaling-up the participation level of private sectors
and farmers and their organization so that they would gradually shift from a passive

3
beneficiary clients to active partners in service delivery (Rivera and Qamar, 2003).
Beyond improving the investment climate, the public can do more to support the private
sector including expanding access to public goods and more importantly supporting and
capacitating private sectors for efficient and equitable provision of services.

Providing adequate and stable funding for agricultural service in developing country has
been a major problem due to lack of funding and other problems. In order to solve this
problem, privatization of agricultural services is seen as a tenable policy option to meet
problems associated with publicly funded agricultural service in developing countries.
This needs the redefinition of the role of the public sector in the provision of service and
the shift in financing the service system from government to producers. It is important to
know that these shifts are not without risk and complication. This is because an excessive
move to discard public sector roles in imperfect markets is often leading to chaotic market
conditions and manifested by moral hazard and adverse of selection (Kurokawa et al.,
2008). Thus, the public sector should also play an important role in ensuring fair and equal
treatment of all groups in a society, especially the poor and disadvantaged; and a principal-
agent problem in the sense that the community is hiring private service providers to
accomplish service delivery. This requires strong institutional mechanisms for regulating
the behavior of agent, enforcing ethics and regular dissemination of information to
minimize the information asymmetry. Hence this needs building a much stronger
investment climate through the promotion of a stable, efficient and harmonized legal
business framework, provision of infrastructure and increased access to finance including
strong support for the development of rural micro-finance. However, while these private
service providers are more common in the western world, they are slowly emerging in
developing countries.

The Improving Productivity and Market Success (IPMS) of Ethiopian farmers project in
Alaba Pilot Learning Woreda (PLW), in collaboration with public and NGO actors has
initiated the private service delivery system such as private crop protection and
community animal health workers’ services. However, there is no systematic assessment
of this initiative has been made to learn lessons and develop a strategy for scaling out
successful experience. There are a number of issues that need to be investigated. On the
one hand, farmers should have effective demand for privately provided service, and on the
other hand, there is a need for workable organizational and institutional arrangement to

4
support the response to demands. More importantly, private service provision ought to be
financially viable to survive and grow. It is also necessary to understand service users and
potential users perceptions about quality and benefit of private services. Therefore, this
study was initiated to address this knowledge gap with respect to private service delivery
in Alaba PLW from pluralistic service delivery perspective.

1.3 Objective of the Study

™ The general objective of the study was to assess the opportunities and challenges for
private service provision both from users and provider’s point of view.
The specific objectives were:
9 to assess perceptions of service providers about the opportunities and challenges to
enter and expand the service,
9 to assess the coverage and commercial viability of private spray and CAHWs service
providers,
9 to assess perceptions of potential users and the level of satisfaction of users with the
accessibility, effectiveness and benefit of privately provided services; and
9 to assess the farmers’ ability and willingness to pay for private crop protection and
CAHWs service in the study area.

1.4 Research Questions

The study was designed to address the following research questions:

1. What are the challenges and opportunities for emergence and expansion of private
service provision?
2. What are the extent of service coverage and commercial viability to service providers?
3. How do the private service providers perceive the entrance and expansion of private
service delivery?
4. Why some farmers use privately provided services and others don’t?

1.5 Scope and Limitation of the Study

Due to the large number of PAs in the district, the potential limitation of the study was that
it is focused on four purposive samples of rural PAs. Moreover, lack of information at the
grass root level and update in a timely manner constituted a major constraint for the study.
The study also limited in depth owing to time and financial availability.

5
It focused mainly on finding out the potential challenges and opportunities of providing
private service in general and private crop protection and community animal health service
in particular. Finally, it is important to note that Ethiopia is diversified in agro-ecological,
socio-economic, and cultural environment, and the study being location specific in nature,
its results may not be generalized to the zonal or regional level with blind
recommendation. However, the recommendations and policy implications of the study can
be used for the areas of similar contexts and as a basis for further studies.

1.6 Significance of the Study

Alaba district is purposively selected being one of the Pilot Learning Weredas of IPMS,
the sponsor of this research, and it is where both private crop protection and community
animal health services coexist. The public sector agricultural service in which Ethiopia
have invested large sums are achieving only limited impact but face unsustainably high
recurrent costs. Further, the fundamental promise of public sector service that low income
farmers are unlikely to obtain private services unless it is provided by government is
increasingly being challenged. The significant contributions of the crop protection and
livestock health services to the Ethiopian economy have been studied by different authors
(Admassu et al. 2005). However, through a review of the literature and a series of
informal discussion with major actors of the sector, it has been found that, despite its
importance, it has not been studied to as great extent within the context of challenges and
opportunities to private service delivery. But, determining the challenges and opportunities
with regard to the capacity of the service providers’ will help emphasis the strengths and
weaknesses of existing services delivery system and will provide foundational data to
potential providers and policy makers. However, currently, little information is available
to this regard. Therefore, this study was conducted with the intention to fill this gap and its
findings provide various insightful learning for service providers, researchers and students
interested in similar research theme for further investigation and contribute to improving
private service delivery system in the district.

1.7 Organization of the Thesis

This thesis consists of five chapters. Chapter one deals with the background, problem
statement, objectives and significance of the study. Chapter two reviews various literatures
related to the main research topic. Methodological issues including the study area

6
description is presented in chapter three. The fourth chapter puts the results of the study
and discusses their interpretation. The final chapter summarizes and concludes the thesis
and forward possible policy implications and recommendations.

7
 2. LITERATURE REVIEW

In this chapter the key concepts and ideas pertinent to the theme of the thesis are
discussed. In addition relevant empirical research and their findings are reviewed in order
to inform the current analysis.

2.1 Concept and Definitions

CAHWs: are community members formally/informally trained by NGOs, CBOs or

veterinarians who serve in the local communities in provision of animal health
services (DVM, 2001).
Privatization: is the act of reducing the role of government or increasing the role of
private sector in delivery of services or in the ownership of assets.
Market Orientation: when extension services relate to productivity and marketing advice
and linking farmers to national or international markets and additional support
systems.
Demand: is defined as what people ask for, need and value so much that they are willing
to invest their own resources, such as time and money, in order to receive
services (Sanne, 2006).

2.2 Why Private Sector?

Private sector development is crucial for growth, development and employment creation in
Africa. This is being recognized by donors in their support programs for the private sector
(Kurokawa et al., 2008). Private sector investments have grown faster than official
development assistance; in the early 1980s, yet, few developing countries attract 80
percent of private sector investments; it is necessary to catalyze private sector investments
to the others. In Asian countries the focus in the past has been on project-lending to
governments and on public sector-led growth; the current financial crisis has renewed
appreciation of the private sector’s role as an engine of growth. Strong challenges,
including globalization, technological changes, the rise of e-commerce, continuing
poverty, and population growth continue to press forward the need of private sector. The
private sector is needed and suited for sustaining rapid growth. The emerging Asian
countries experience shows that growth is the most powerful weapon against poverty and
to create jobs that use labor- the main asset of the poor.

8
2.3 The Role of Private Sectors in Poverty Reduction

The private sector in Africa is diverse. The private sector’s contribution to both
employment and GDP shows a strong positive correlation with GDP per capita. Thus, as
countries grow richer, there is an increase in the labor force employed in private enterprise
and overall, they make a larger contribution to GDP. There are different views about the
dynamic contribution of private sectors to grow. On the one hand, private enterprise may
contribute to competition and entrepreneurship. Some argue they are more productive as
long as key challenges are removed, and some argue private enterprise are better at
generating employment, and hence at reducing poverty (Kurokawa et al., 2008).

Private investment in service delivery can also create fiscal space and relieve pressure on
public budgets, thereby enabling governments to redirect more resources to social
spending. Private sector participation in infrastructure can also improve the delivery
efficiency of essential services and extend these to where there is poor. Private provision
of goods and services with public financing can also be well-suited to the social sectors,
where the private sector can be engaged to operate not-for-profit social facilities, e.g.,
schools and health facilities (ADB, 2000). But, the private sector cannot be expected to
undertake extensive poverty interventions on its own. However, in recent years major
changes in rethinking of the role of state have taken place in development strategy. For
decades the state was considered to be central to any development effort. Recently,
development economists increasingly call for a new role of the public sector moving away
from state interventions in economic activities and unleashing the creative forces of
private entrepreneurship. Given the weaknesses of government services as regards
efficiency and accountability and the ubiquitous challenges to public funding, the retreat
of the state up till outright privatization appears to be an obvious solution.

2.4 The Rationale and Types of Public Support for Private Sector Development

There are three components of the rationale for public support for private sector
development. First, there is the premise that private sector development is good for
growth. Secondly, the private sector is affected by growth challenges of a different nature
and magnitude (e.g. they may have less access to formal sources of external finance).
Finally, the challenges are due to market failures so that, in principle, there is a role for
government to address these.

9
Public support for private sector development is justified when markets fail to allocate
resources efficiently. Markets fail to allocate resources efficiently when property rights,
which define the control over assets and rights, are incomplete. There are various types for
public support for private sector development. In principle, the existence of market and co-
ordination failures justifies public involvement in private sector development. Again, the
scope and type of public intervention large in theory. Despite a strong theoretical case, it is
important to underline that public support may fail to improve private sector development.
This could be for several reasons. First, it seems questionable to assume that governments
can have perfect information and perfect foresight, or better information than private
firms. Investment climate reform might address market failures by establishing rules and
regulations when they are lacking. Secondly, government intervention can also suffer from
moral hazard problems (Stiglitz and Uy, 1996 as cited in Kurokawa et al., 2008). The
development of new technology and adoption of existing technology is characterized by
externalities which cannot be fully appropriated. Thirdly, there can be private non-market
means that can solve market failures. Joint action may raise collective efficiency, by
internalizing externalities. Fourthly, addressing national coordination failures based on
scale economies is probably the most far-reaching, but also the riskiest. Finally,
government intervention carries the risk of misallocation and rent-seeking behavior. The
public sector that is supporting the private sector need to assess the benefits and
weaknesses of each approach and weigh up their respective risks. Public can provide
support at least at three levels:
• The macro level (Policy): this refers to the overall investment climate and enabling
environment which can be shaped, amongst other things, by the government policies
and regulatory frameworks.
• The meso level (Institutional): which refers to labor and capital markets at the
national, regional or sectoral level. Public initiatives at this level aim to improve the
functioning of markets are often come under the rubric ‘making markets work.’
• The micro level (farm-household): this refers to a single business unit or a collection
thereof. Private sector support at this level may be in the form of a business
development service or firm specific assistance (e.g. in value chains).

The World Bank’s World Development Report (World Bank, 2005) on Investment
Climate emphasizes the need for creating an enabling environment for private sector

10
development, and argues that there needs to be a right balance between market and
government failures, and that enabling environment reform essentially addresses both
market and government failures. Several donors agree that effective private sector
development is good for pro-poor growth and that further support for the investment
climate is required to achieve this.

2.4.1 Strategic Thrusts for Private Sector Development

The new strategy for private sector development (PSD) has three integrated strategic
thrusts which capitalize on capabilities and experience in both public and private sector
operations (ADB, 2000). These include:

Creating enabling conditions

These include sound and stable macroeconomic management elements such as appropriate
competition policy; investment, trade, and price liberalization; reduced barriers to
competition; well-functioning financial and capital markets; flexible labor and land
markets; good physical, social, and technological infrastructure; equitable tax systems;
pension and insurance reform; sound environmental and social standards; and legal and
judicial systems that protect property rights, enforce contracts, and provide for dispute
resolution. This takes instruments like policy dialogue, economic and sector work,
program loans, project loans, technical assistance, co-financing and credit guarantees.

Generating business opportunities

In order to create business opportunities, it needs active private sector participation in
donor-financed public sector projects through contracts for supply, management,
concession, and leading; well-designed with poverty reduction impacts; and donor
supported privatization programs. Program loans, technical assistance, co-financing, and
credit guarantees are the possible instruments this to take.

Catalyzing existing private initiatives

This category should target on private sector projects with development impacts or
demonstration effects; and priority to infrastructure facilities, investment funds,
specialized financial institutions for small and medium-sized enterprises and pilot health
and education projects. The instruments are loans without government guarantees, equity
investments and co-financing (ADB, 2000).

11
Operational Priorities for Private Sector Development
The pursuit of the strategic thrusts should focus primarily on three priority areas of
operations: governance in the public and private sectors; financial intermediation and
public-private partnerships (PPP). These three areas of operational focus represent the key
vehicles for promoting private sector development and pro-poor growth in context of
developing countries. In each areas of operational focus, concentration should be on
activities in which it has underlying comparative advantages either governance in public
and private sectors, commercialization and privatization, and corporate governance.
Whereas, financial intermediation should focus on financial institutions and markets, local
currency financing, investment funds, and small and medium-sized enterprises. The PPP
concentrates on physical and social infrastructure development, and agriculture and rural
sector development. To implement these fundamental changes, two important operating
principles will guide the delivery of public supports and concentrate the development
organization’s efforts on where it can contribute best. Think PSD in public sector
operations which entails deliberate efforts by public sector operations to improve the
enabling environment for the private sector and to use the experiences of private initiatives
as inputs to these efforts; it means asking systematically whether components of public
sector projects can be undertaken by the private sector; it also calls for “crowding in” the
private sector. The second principle is think development impact in private sector
operations which entails an orientation to achieve greater development impact, and work
with governments to take deliberate steps to reduce poverty.

2.4.2 Major Types of Agricultural Services

Public and Private Goods

Based on nature, agricultural service can be categorized into public or private goods. The
concept and principle for analyzing public and private goods is of particular importance
when we deal with agricultural services. Two criteria determine whether a good or service
is closer to being public or private, the principles of excludability and subtractability
(rivalry). Excludability applies when access is denied to those who have not paid for the
product, while subtractability applies when one person’s use or consumption of a good or
service reduces its availability to others. A purely private good is characterized by high
subtractability and excludability and a purely public good has low subtractability and
excludability (Table 1). In between public and private goods are toll goods and common

12
pool goods. According to Umali and Schwartz (1994), toll goods are e.g. coded TV
broadcasts and semi privatized high ways and a common pool good can be a beach, lakes
etc. Table 1 classifies the basic types of goods. Because of the lacking excludability and
subtractability of public goods, it is impossible to define and claim private property rights
for them.

Table 1. Economic Classification of Agricultural Services

Excludability
Rivalry

Low Low High

Public Goods Toll Goods
High Common Pool Goods Private Goods

Ill-defined property rights, in turn, prevent private contracts on the production and
exchange of a public good or service and hence its supply. Private sectors will not provide
public goods, because it is difficult to restrict their use or make people pay for using them.
Public goods, therefore, are chronically undersupplied setting narrow limits for their
commercialization (Kurokawa et al., 2008). This public good problem can only be
overcome by collective institutions and full-fledged privatization is excluded. The public
good problem may also appear where a particular service is of private good nature in
principle, but its production and use affects public interests. This is the case of
externalities, which arise when individual actions affect others. However, from
privatization point of view services further can be classified into the following three
categories.

Services to be privatized
Services recommended for privatization fall into four categories depending on whether
they could be left to the private sector or whether they require initial or continuous
government support and /or regulatory supervision. They could use either of the following
forms; services to be left wholly to the private sector; services to be left to the private
sector with initial public sector support; services requiring regulatory supervision by the
government; or services requiring continuous government support and regulatory service.

Services to be commercialized
The distinction under this category is based on whether the services can be contracted to a
commercial agency and whether they can be subjected to full or only partial recovery

13
depending on the location of the beneficiaries of the service. They include: services to be
contracted to the private sector; services to be subjected to full-cost recovery; or services
to be commercialized and strengthened as full-cost recovery (GTZ, 1999).

Services to remain in the public sector

This category consists of those services which should exclusively be delivered by the
public sector because either: public sector has a distinct comparative advantage over the
private in service delivery; or public policy dictates that the public sector directly
discharges the service in fulfillment of the social contract; or the service falls under the
natural mandate of a restructured and rationalized public sector. This class consists of two
categories: services that require relocation within the government; or services to remain in
the domain of the MoARD.

2.4.2.1 Process of Selective Privatization

According to Umali and Schwartz (1994), animal health services cannot and should not all
be privatized. Instead, a policy of selective privatization should be pursued. The services
that are purely private goods should be shifted to the private sector as the first step. Then
other services can be slowly transferred to the private sector. They suggest that, to achieve
this, the government should lower trade barriers, remove price subsidies on publicly
provided drugs, eliminate restrictions on private practice, subcontract services to the
private sector, promote livestock and crop insurance plans, create a suitable environment
for the development of smallholder producer organizations, and provide targeted,
subsidized delivery in areas where animal health services are necessary but unprofitable
for private providers. In this connection, FAO (1998) has pointed out that, even when
services are recognized to be a state responsibility, they can be and often should be
delivered by the private sector with supervision from the state authorities. As long as
private practitioners can make a decent living, some services should be provided by
private practitioners and not the staff employed by government. The government may also
encourage private financing of the delivery of public or common pool services through
judicious use of information and regulation. Hence, considerable opportunities exist for
governments to overcome the fiscal constraints that presently limit the efficiency and
quality of service delivery in developing countries by privatizing many of the activities
that are presently being executed by the public sector.

14
2.4.2.2 Focus on Poor Areas and HHs

There is widespread agreement in the literature that conventional approaches of private

service delivery may not be suited to marginalized and resource-poor areas. These areas
rather require approaches that can overcome the structural constraints of high transaction
costs and low demand for services resulting from poor awareness and subsistence-
orientated production systems. A number of alternative models have emerged that are
effective in addressing the issue of service delivery in poor areas. These include CAHWs,
producer associations, community-based crop protection services, SHGs etc. These kinds
of groups can be very useful for improving access to private services in poor areas and the
government can play a significant role in promoting and facilitating them. However, most
countries have yet to develop the supportive institutional and legislative frameworks that
are necessary for these groups to be successful (Ahuja, 2004).

It is a myth to say that poor households in remote areas are not willing to pay for services
at all: in a number of such areas, some of the NGOs are already charging a fee. In southern
Sudan, for example, CAHws have been providing treatments and vaccinations on a cost
recovery basis. In areas where there are genuine problems in paying, the government has
the additional responsibility of nurturing the development process in a way that empowers
the farmers to demand quality services (Ahuja 2004). This implies targeted subsidy to
poor or building partnerships with local NGOs and channeling some of the public funds
through them. This requires an effort that aims at community empowerment and
awareness building to generate demand for these services.

2.4.3 Crop Protection Services

Crop protection research and extension services in Ethiopia dates back to the
establishment of the then Imperial Ethiopian College of Agriculture and Mechanical Arts
(now Haramaya University) in the late 1950s. The Establishment of the Institute of
Agricultural Research (now Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research, EIAR) during the
second half of the 1960s saw a more focused and organizational approach to crop
protection research in general. Currently Ethiopia is implementing an extension approach
called Participatory Demonstration and Extension Training System (PADETS). As part of
this extension system, food crops, post harvest services and improved inputs are the main
ingredients of crop extension package (Carlsson et al., 2005). In connection to this, a large

15
number of insect pests have been recorded to affect major crops in Ethiopia, but only a
few of these are considered to be of economic importance. Crop protection service is
totally undertaken by ministry of agriculture, except for individual effort on farmers’ plots.
No producer developed so far to license the private sector in crop protection. Although
there is legislation governing pesticide registration, clear guidelines on the importation,
testing, and use of pesticides, legislations have not been enforced effectively. Another
issue in crop extension is pesticides restricted in industrialized countries are observed
while widely used in Ethiopia. Furthermore, no pesticide has been officially banned in this
country.

2.4.4 Livestock service delivery

According to World Bank (2002) livestock services can be grouped into two major
functional categories: health and production services. Health services include curative and
preventive services and the provision of pharmaceuticals. Curative services include the
provision of clinical care, while preventive services consist of vaccination, vector control,
and disease control measures such as quarantines and movement restrictions. On the other
hand, production services include research and extension relating to improved livestock
husbandry and the provision of input supplies such as seeds, feeds and artificial
insemination (AI). Production services try to improve livestock productivity by such
means as genetic upgrading of livestock through artificial insemination, the improved
formulation of feeds, the use of improved forages and changes in management practices.

Consequently, the major players that shape the livestock services sector are veterinarians
and veterinary paraprofessionals, herders, consumers, government, NGOs in developing
countries, and private entrepreneurs providing specialized services. In some countries, the
limited number of trained veterinarians and their unwillingness to serve in remote rural
areas has made paraprofessionals very valuable. Increasing competition in the livestock
sector market has led to complementary livestock services extension, designed to promote
and strengthen customer loyalty and expand market shares (Umali et al. 1994). They
foresee strong support for livestock development in the near future as there is now
increasing realization, that livestock development programs can play an important role in
reducing rural poverty in the developing world. Second, the demand for animal products in
the developing world is growing fast, and it can be expected to continue. Recent

16
projections show that over the next twenty years, the demand for meat in developing
countries will increase by about 2.7% and the demand for milk by 3.2%.

2.4.5 Approaches to Extension Services

The World Bank (2002) prefer to focus on specific approaches to extension that have
appeared in the last three decades as an attempt to overcome some of the weakness
inherent in the public extension systems. These include Training and Visit,
decentralization, privatized extension and Farmer Field Schools (FFS). In contrast, Rivera
et al (2001) distinguishes between a variety of public sector reform strategies supporting
the new paradigm market-driven income-generation (Table 2). According to this
distinction, market reforms encompass four major reform strategies. These include:
revision of public sector systems, pluralism, cost recovery and total privatization.

Table 2. Extension Market Reform Strategies

Funding
Public Private
Revision of public sector via Cost recovery (fee-based) systems
Public
downsizing and some cost (OECD countries, previously in Mexico)
Delivery

recovery
Pluralism, partnerships, power Privatization (total), commercialization
Sharing (Chile, Estonia, (The Netherlands, New Zealand,
Private
Hungary,Venezuela, S.Korea, England and Wales)
Taiwan)
Source: Rivera et al., 2001

2.5 Evolution of Institutional Arrangements for Private Sector Development

Public service delivery is in many cases characterized by low efficiency of service

delivery, isolation from customers and low degree of client orientation, lack of
accountability and poor guidance by policies and weak public demand and control. The
still dominant model of a public service - combining funding and service delivery - has
been questioned for quite some time. Alternative institutional arrangements and forms of
service delivery are emerging (Box 1). In the evolving arrangements, private and third
sector organizations take a role both on the supply as well as on the demand side of the
service system. Cost recovery and commercialization of public services indicate a greater

17
role of non-public actors on the demand side, whereas subcontracting and, at the extreme,
full-fledged privatization leaves the supply of services to market actors.

Most goods actually fall in between the private / public distinction or are affected by some
public concern. Hence, in most cases the provision of services requires the participation of
both public and private actors to be generated. Therefore, institutional environment and
institutional arrangement are another group of fundamentally important concepts which
refer to the relationship between various, notably public and private actors. The term
institutional arrangement describes the property rights, norms and mutual contractual

Box 1. Evolution of Institutional arrangement for private sector development

Source: GTZ, 1999.

obligations that govern the way in which economic units cooperate and/or compete.
Institutional arrangements are embedded in the institutional environment that is the set of
fundamental political, social and legal ground rules that establishes the basis for
production, exchange and distribution (Box 1). For a private market to function, a strong

18
state is needed enforcing property rights and contracts. A weak state may be tempted to
undermine market development by arbitrary confiscation or rent extraction (GTZ, 1999).

2.6 The Economic Aspects of Privatized Service Delivery

Efficient market functioning requires strong institutions and organizational arrangements,

and it is therefore very useful to discuss the economic issues together with the larger
political economy and the issue related to governance because this can be one area where
future thinking in service delivery will need to focus. Farmers make economic decisions.
The first principle of economics must therefore be the point of departure in thinking about
the most efficient way of organizing service delivery. The first fundamental theorem of
welfare economics states that ‘if there is no externalities, both buyers and sellers have
symmetric information, there are no increasing returns to production, all buyers and sellers
take price as given (that is no one has any market power), and there are no transaction
costs’; then the competitive equilibrium is pareto-efficient. This result significantly
influenced early thinking on the delivery of services (FAO, 1998) which in turn drove the
policy for service delivery in many countries around the world in eighties and nineties.

Public Sector: Services that have a significant public good component such as compliance
monitoring, quarantine, quality control, planning for emergencies and reporting to
international bodies and neighboring countries, oversight of safety, import and export
inspection of inputs and certification according to international standards; regulation,
monitoring and support of other partners, accreditation of personnel, creation of enabling
environment for the private sector and general formulation of policy should remain the
responsibility of public sector to deliver the service (Ahuja and Redmond, 2001).

Private Sector: Pure private goods which do not involve any externalities or moral hazard
problems should be delivered by private firms.

Shared responsibilities: Services such as continuing education and training, research,

extension and advisory services should be provided by partnership.

19
2.6.1 Economic Impact of CAHWs Services

Contribution to HH livelihood
In Malawi the saving from increased livestock production in areas where CAHWs were
active was $57,000 in the year 1998-99. Farmers with CAHW services were more likely to
afford a tin roof, window glass, horse cart, plough and radio, than farmers without access
to CAHW services. Similar result was reported from Afghanistan where CAHW programs
reduced mortality by 5% in calves, 10% in lambs and 38% in kids, compared with control
areas without CAHWs. The benefits to farmers estimated to be $120,000 per district per
annum, while the costs of the program were $25,000 per district. In Kenya farmers without
access to CAHWs reported 70% more cattle deaths than those farmers who had access to
CAHWs. The decrease in mortality provided benefits worth $48 a year to each farmer
using CAHWs (Holden 1997 as cited in Leyland and Catley, 2002).

Considering CAHWs from an economic perspective, the issue of transaction costs is

paramount. The research in Senegal pointed out the comparative advantage of CAHWs in
many areas, that in the current economic climate, they appear to be the only economically
viable mechanism for delivering veterinary services. It also describes the emerging
institutional linkages between private veterinarians to CAHWs and a mechanism for
extending the ethical commitment of the veterinary profession into remote areas, and of
reducing the government’s transaction costs in coordinating CAHWs to provide public
goods. This shows CAHW systems are the most economically efficient way to provide
privatized veterinary services. Despite evidence of the impact of CAHWs, relatively few
countries have officially recognized this level of support to CAHWs systems through
appropriate policies and legislation.

Control and treatment of Disease

There are now more than 1500 government and NGO-trained CAHWs in Ethiopia
(Wolmer and Scoones, 2005). Despite improved communication and collaboration,
significant policy and institutional challenges remain. And, as Ethiopia’s privatized system
of CAHWs becomes more established, there will also be questions of affordability for
poorer users, the need to identify who is excluded, and how to reach them.

In the Afar Region of Ethiopia, (Pan African Rinderpest Campaign) PARC demonstrated
that CAHWs can carry out rinderpest vaccination rapidly, effectively and cheaply. In

20
1995, in neighboring districts of the Afar region, a CAHW project vaccinated 70,000
cattle using 22 CAHWs, 2 veterinary service staff, 1 vehicle and no cold chain. The
efficiency of vaccination was 84%. No outbreaks of rinderpest have been reported since
this campaign and the area has now been declared provisionally free from disease. The
conventional government vaccination teams vaccinated, concurrently, 140,000 cattle using
14 vehicles, 56 staff and a full cold chain. The efficiency of vaccination was 72%. In
Somaliland CAHWs achieved 95% vaccination efficiency using heat stable rinderpest
vaccine – the highest efficiency reported in Africa since the PARC began (Mariner et al.
1994 as cited in Leyland and Catley, 2002).

Reporting and Surveillance of Disease outbreak

In Ethiopia, in 1996 an unknown respiratory disease of camels was first reported by an
Afar CAHW to local PARC authorities. The disease subsequently spread to the Ogaden,
Somalia and northern Kenya. In the 1980s and early 1990s, Ethiopia received very few
reports of rinderpest from the Afar pastoral area due to the paucity of staff in the region
and limited contact between the veterinary services and the pastoral community.
Numerous reports of epidemic rinderpest were received from more sedentary communities
surrounding the Afar, who had more regular access to services. This information bias led
authorities to further focus rinderpest control resources around the Afar area but not in the
Afar. When it was realized, through active surveillance, that the Afar was the endemic
area, a CAHW system was introduced that resulted in appropriate surveillance and
vaccination control efforts. Rinderpest was eradicated from Afar and the surrounding
communities within 3 years (Mariner et al. 1994 as cited in Leyland and Catley , 2002).

CAHWs in pastoralist areas have good diagnostic skills. e.g. the 1998 rinderpest outbreak
information in S. Sudan rapidly went from Livestock owner ’ CAHWs ’ Supervisor ’
radio message to the UNICEF veterinary program. The outbreak was dealt with quickly
using CAHWs. A study of the activities of over 1000 CAHWs in Ghana found over half
were having good to excellent impact on animal health service delivery. CAHWs provide
a regular flow of information to veterinary professionals including reporting disease
outbreaks (anthrax and newcastle) and the referral of difficult cases. It is evident from
empirical evidence that CAHWs can not only provide valuable veterinary care, but also

21
act as reporters of disease outbreaks and contribute to disease surveillance systems other
such report include Leyland and Catley (2002) and Admassu et al (2005).

2.6.2 Market Efficiency and Access to Market Information

The market efficiency argument also rests on the assumption that both buyers and sellers
take prices as given which, in turn, is based on the assumption of many buyers and sellers
in the market. Most service markets in developing countries are likely to violate this
condition especially in poor remote areas. Whereas it is feasible to generate some
competition among the service providers in high potential high density areas, the effective
aggregate demand in poor marginal areas is often not adequate to support many providers
leading to monopoly situations. While competitive bidding at short intervals can dissipate
the monopoly advantage conferred by contracts (Ahuja and Redmond, 2001); this leads to
the role of state in establishing transparent processes and institutional structures to
facilitate efficient functioning of the market.

The first fundamental theorem requires that both buyers and sellers know and do not know
the same thing. But in developing countries where there is imperfect market, the service
providers have significantly more information advantage than the user and there are
incentives to exploit the rents to that information. This asymmetry of information leads to
two types of market failures-moral hazard, and adverse of selection. Although Umali and
Schwartz (1994) and others recognized the problem of moral hazard, according to them
this problem was likely to be limited to functions such as drug quality control in animal
health service. The problem of opportunistic behavior can be minimized through contract
design, administration and requires defining the quantity and quality of the service as well
as specifying the condition under which the service will be delivered.

2.6.3 The Equity Dimension of Privatized Service Delivery

The first fundamental theorem of welfare economics is a pure efficiency result than equity.
According to Ahuja and Redmond (2001), it completely side-steps the notions of fairness,
distribution and equity, and is obviously silent about the welfare of those who are
excluded from the market. Due to the importance of services in supporting the livelihoods
of poor farmers throughout the developing world, and the assumption that the market will

22
exclude poor due to poor paying capacity, the governments in a large number of countries
chose to build and heavily subsidize large systems and networks for delivering even those
services that could be most efficiently provided through the market. A large number of
African and Asian countries opted for that route to maintain equity.

2.7 Empirical Studies

A number of empirical studies have been conducted by different people and institutions on
agricultural supportive services worldwide. The studies are mainly concentrated on
describing the operation and effectiveness of the current government dominated service
delivery system, experience of transforming the public services, demand for private
service, and farmers’ willingness to pay for service. But studies conducted on private crop
protection spray service are minimal.

2.7.1 Privatization of Agricultural Services in Kenya

In its first phase, between 1994 and 1998, a consultative process initiated within the
Ministry but involving only a few external stakeholders. These services were then
classified according to whether the services were in the nature of public or private good as
a starting point. This was meant to assist in determining which of the services should
continue being rendered by the public sector and which ones should be privatized and
handed over to the private sector where the private sector was in a position to profitably,
effectively and sustainably deliver the services. In the case of those services that were of a
public good nature, it was recommended that they should continue being rendered by the
public sector but should be strengthened for greater effectiveness, efficiency and economy
of delivery. Most of these services are those that have to do with creating an enabling
environment for private sector development. There were, however, some services which,
though being of a private good nature could not be effectively delivered by the private
sector. This depended on the existence of a vibrant private sector establishment and the
capacity of the service recipients to pay for the services (GTZ, 1999).

2.7.2 Privatized Agricultural Extension service delivery in Uganda

Under the umbrella of the Neuchâtel Initiative, Uganda showed the first exemplary
advances in the decentralization and reform process in the African context. The country is

23
undergoing a rapid reform at present in the context of the Government’s four policy pillars
of decentralization, privatization, liberalization and democratization. Change is aimed at
bringing about poverty eradication and the overarching policy objective. It is widely
perceived that Uganda has made great advances in ameliorating the policy environment of
the agriculture sector (Ibid). On a macroeconomic level the government has taken
liberalization of the economy, decentralization and transfer of responsibility to Local
Governments, privatization of para-statals, Public Service Reform and the Land Act of
1998. Such measures have made Uganda the much- publicized darling of the donor
community in SSA.

2.7.3 Issues and challenges of Privatization of Agricultural Services in Africa

A very common problem with privatization is in many cases lacking clarity of policies and
strategies. In some cases privatization is seen as the corollary of the prevailing market
ideology, as the case in Peru and Uganda or models are simply copied and transferred
from one country or region to another one where the basic conditions are not yet in place
(GTZ , 1999). Rather than leaving the initiative to the market, the issue is or should be an
improved interplay between the state and civil society. In many developing countries,
especially in Sub-Saharan Africa, we encounter a prevalence of market failure problems.
The room for privatizing public agricultural services is very limited. In Ethiopia
subsistence orientated farming and diversity of areas, the ensuing small market sizes and
rural poverty are ubiquitous problems preventing the development of service markets.
There is a need to pursue an active policy of supporting private sectors.

2.8 Delivery Efficiency and Sustainability Issue

Long-term sustainability of demand-driven services requires continuous capacity building

of farmers, their organizations and providers. It is important to emphasize that the
sustainability of such systems requires that basic economic principles are respected; if
service delivery systems are to be sustained, costs must be recovered from the users. Cost
recovery through direct charges has several advantages. It provides the right incentives for
the providers to deliver the services that the farmers want, makes them accountable to the
farmers, and builds in a genuine quality control mechanism. It requires the existence of
backstopping institutions (Sanne, 2006). The main principles for demand driven service

24
delivery systems are: services shall be driven by user demand, accountable to the users and
should have a free choice of service providers.

2.9 Willingness and Ability to Pay for Private Services

Estimates of the Willingness to Pay (WTP) for services are often used to assess the
demand for those services which are not traded in the market. These estimates are derived
from either the direct survey methods such as contingent valuation or methods which are
based on the observed behavior of the buyers in related markets. These methodologies are
appropriate for cases in which farmers are not familiar with fees for private agricultural
services. Some authors have recently questioned the use of WTP estimates for policy
purposes on the grounds that it is the ability and not willingness which should form the
basis of social policy (Ahuja and Redmond, 2001). This is because the principles such as
willingness to pay may not take into account the problems connected with the ability to
pay. The majority of previous studies focus on the willingness to pay of services.
Conversely, the intention of the affordability parameter is to assess the ability of poor
households to pay for services.

2.10 The Conceptual Framework

In light of the changing environment in terms of privatization, an increased emphasis on

private delivery of services and a change of attitude towards institutional innovation helps
to see clients as capable of demanding the services they need, rather than being mere
beneficiaries (Sanne, 2006). Frameworks and strategies cannot be prescriptive and
universal as before, but must be flexible and adaptable to fit the diverse local realities
which people find them in. The framework put service provision to comprise three levels
of intervention, those that should not be addressed individually and in isolation but rather
be regarded as a system and seen as interdependent. Thus, the first and second levels must
be addressed simultaneously for the planning of interventions for improvement and change
of the system (Ehret et al., 2005). The policy level not only sets the rules and defines
mandates but creates an enabling environment which allows the system to function and –
it is hoped – that development will happen (Figure 1). The three levels are:

25
1. Thee local levell where peop
ple live, thee realities they find them
mselves in, and
a the needds
whhich they peerceive and prioritize
p to improve theeir livelihoodds referred as ‘Organizinng
thee demand’.
2. Th
he service prroviding org
ganizations and their responsivene
r ess to assistt and suppoort
peeople in theirr identified needs
n and referred as ‘Reesponding too the demandd’.
3. Thee wider supp
port mechannisms at pollitical and orrganizationaal levels, whhich allow fo
for
thee above to happen
h and creating
c enabbling climatee is called ‘S
Supporting th
he Responsee’.
Heence, the frramework heelped to strructure the analysis
a of possible intterventions to
t
im
mprove the syystem for innnovation andd impact.

Figuree 1. Concepttual Framew

work to analyyze Private Service
S Delivvery System:

Adaptted from: Eh
hret et al., 20005.

26
 3. METHODOLOGY

This section describes the approaches and methods employed for data collection and
analysis. The first sub-section of this chapter presents the description of the study area.
Then the details of methodology used to conduct the overall study were discussed in
subsequent sub-sections.

3.1 Description of the Study Area

Alaba district is one of the 13 zones and 8 special districts in SNNPR and located 315km
south of Addis Ababa and 85km southwest of the regional state capital, Hawassa (Figure
2). The woreda is geographically located 7017’N latitude and 38006’E longitude and is part
of the Southern Rift Valley of Ethiopia. It is located west of Oromiya region, north of
Hadiya (Sike), east of Kembata Tembaro, south east of Silte and Hadiya zones. It is a
special woreda in the region and has a special status where the administration directly
accountable to the regional state. There are 79 PAs and 2 sub cities and Alaba Kulito is the
capital of the district (IPMS, 2005; WoARD, 2008).

The total population of woreda is 232,241, of which 117,236 are male and 115,005 are
female, with area coverage 91,230ha and density 277.5 person/km2 (CSA, 2008). The total
number of rural HHs is 42,000. Of these, 75% are men and 25% are female-headed.
Agriculture is the mainstay of the district with two types of farming Systems: teff-haricot
bean and pepper-livestock farming system. Economically active population of the woreda
(15-55 years of age) are 44%, of which, 54% are male and 46% are female. Ethnically,
there are about 6 major groups in the woreda, but Alaba and Grarage are the dominant
constituting about 81 and 10% of the total population, respectively. The altitude in the
woreda ranges from 1700 to 2149masl.

Rainfall is a major limiting factor in agricultural production in the area that drought
observed recurrently affecting many HHs. The annual rainfall varies from 857 to 1085mm,
while the annual mean temperatures also vary from 17 to 25OC. Agro ecologically, the
woreda is dominantly classified as dry weina dega. The area receives a bimodal nature of
rainfall where the small raining season is between March and April while the main takes

27
July to September. As the reliability of the rain is low between March and April, farmers
usually raise pepper seedling to be transplanted during the main rainy season. Major crops
growing in the area, including maize, teff, wheat, pepper, haricot bean, sorghum and finger
millet (WoARD, 2008). Alaba is situated close to the four big market cities of Wolaita,
Hoseana, Shashemene and Hawassa at a distance of, respectively, 70, 64, 62 and 85km.

3.2 Research Design

This is a descriptive study of private service delivery in the Alaba special woreda of
Sothern Ethiopia. Group discussion with government experts and service providers and
HH survey with service users and non-users were used to determine the research design.
Qualitative methodology was the major tool to achieve the objectives with the advantage
of enhancing the quality of social assessment and contributes to a deeper insight of the
situation being studied. The interest of the respondents in survey work was an issue given
top priority. Farmers show little cooperation unless their concerns are taken care very
seriously. In this regard, chair-persons of the respective rural PAs were first approached

Figure 2. Map of the study area; Source: Own Design, 2010

28
farmers also informed that information related to HH and farm characteristics would be
kept confidential. As a result, a thorough identification and definition of the population of
the study were an important prerequisite for research sample. Once the target population
has defined, the next task were the task of taking in the right representative samples from
the population.

3.2.1 Sampling Techniques

Multi-stage sampling procedures were used to select the rural PAs and sample HHs. In the
district, the Research and Development Office of IPMS has identified potential PAs where
there are 11spray and 6 animal health services providers. Those HHs who used to visit
formal private service providers for purchase of service and those seldom or non-users
were chosen to be interviewed from reliable list in each surveyed PAs, with the help of
respective service providers and DAs, using systematic random sampling. The farmers
were categorized as user and non-user on the basis of frequency of using the intended
service. Secondly, since these PAs are large enough in number and different in proximity
to Kulito market, they were stratified into two: PAs closer to market (in the range less than
10km) and PAs far from market center (on average 18km). Five PAs where spraying
service is being practiced are near and six are far. Likewise 3 PAs where CAHWs service
being given are near to Kulito market and 3 are far. Thirdly, four PAs selected based on
service type: one closer and one distant PA for each services. This is because two private
services (spraying and CAHWs) do not exist in the same PA. Fourthly, the list of HHs
growing a particular crop for which spraying service is available and those HHs who own
cattle has compiled and then these HHs were classified into the service user and non user.
This classification further disaggregated of the beneficiaries into male and female headed
HHs of each service. Finally, the sample size of 120 farm HH heads were selected based
on the researcher time and resource availability by taking into account Probability
Proportional to Size (PPS) of the HHs in each of four selected PAs. As a result, the survey
administered and data were collected and analyzed on 120 respondents as the sample of
the study including 25 or 20.8% of female HHs.

29
3.2.2 Survey Instrument and Administration

Ten interviewers were trained to administer the interview instrument. Training for the
enumerators included a detailed explanation of the objective of the study, concept of
interview instrument and guidelines to be followed during the interviewing. Pre-testing
was done in Wanja PA on 10 HHs after which two questions were dropped for being short
of clarity. The interview schedule had 44 questions (15 close-ended with some being
likert-scale type, and 29 open-ended). The questions covered various relevant topics
(Appendix 12, 13 & 14). The questionnaires were administered in Amharic for those who
were literate and in the local language (Alabigna) for those with difficulties in the
Amharic language. The questionnaires were administered in December 2009 in order to
make use of free time of the respondents before congested with and distorting of
information for fear of the for-coming Fourth National Election agenda of the country. For
the group interview of experts, key informants and providers; the researcher was fully
involved in discussion whereas in HH survey the role of the researcher was facilitator and
moderator. Two types of group interviews (FGD and KIG) were used in order to grasp
information as much as possible. Group interview were developed for each group of
participants: government experts, formal and informal service providers. Fourthly, HH
structured interview (Appendix 12) were administered for service users and non-users.
Finally the data were crosschecked by triangulation of various aforementioned tools.
Interview to each HH took on average 2hr to administer. Content validity (appropriateness
of instrument for measuring what they are supposed to measure) and reliability of the
instruments were important considerations taken in determining the credibility of the
study. For this purpose, expert from ILRI-IPMS project and from Haramaya University,
Department of Rural Development and Agricultural Extension and the researcher were
reviewed the instrument.

3.3 Data Sources and Data Types

The study consumed both primary and secondary data. The primary qualitative data were
gathered from focused group discussion, key informant’s interviews, informal discussions
with individuals, case studies and personal observations. The primary quantitative data
were also generated through interviews with the sample HHs. In addition, relevant
secondary data were collected from available reports from Union, woreda Knowledge
Center and NGOs; records from providers, government polices and strategies documents

30
from WoARD, IPMS Alaba Pilot Learning Site survey, and internet websites. More
emphasis was given to the qualitative data to capture all relevant information required and
to have an in-depth insight of the problem under analysis and have the potential to cover
wide aspects of service delivery and are easy to use in questionnaires for farmers.

3.4 Method of Data Collection

A review of the instrument by the expertise preceded the data collection for ethical
soundness. Then each PA contacted with a translated version of the informed consent
letter prior to interview which describes the approximate amount of time that participation
in the study would require and no compensation for their participation. Of the total
population targeted for the study, 96% of the original population was interviewed due to
the fact that it was not possible to interview sick, displaced HHs. The primary data
collection were started through KIG discussion including Participatory Rural Appraisal
(PRA), HH survey by using pre-tested interview schedule, focus group discussion (FGD)
with checklists and finally case studies.

3.5 Methods of Data Analysis

Quantitative data collected from the HHs survey were analyzed using descriptive statistics
with the use of Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS). The responses to the raw
quantitative data were coded and stored using Microsoft Excel spreadsheet in order to
avoid respondent anonymity. These were imported into SPSS (version 13.0, Analytical
Software Inc., St. Paul, MN, USA) and summarized while qualitative responses were
tallied and finally prioritized in order to determine trends and patterns in the data and draw
conclusions. It were also described, analyzed and interpreted on the spot during data
collection to avoid missing of relevant information.

31
 4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

In this chapter, the results of qualitative and quantitative analysis that was conducted to
address specific objectives of the thesis are presented and discussed. The chapter has been
organized into five sections. Section 4.1 provides background information on
demographic, personal and socio-economic characteristics of the different wealth
categories of sampled HHs while sections 4.2 and 4.3 discuss, respectively, crop
production system of study PAs with special attention to challenges and opportunities
related to crop protection services, and providers’ capacity and use of private crop
protection services and its willingness to pay. Sections 4.4 and 4.5 deal with, respectively,
livestock production systems while focusing on the challenges and opportunities related to
livestock health services, and CAHWs’ capacity, use and coverage of services and
respective willingness to pay.

4.1. Characteristics of Sampled HHs

4.1.1 Local Wealth indicators and wealth categories

Farmers’ Perception to wealth category

First of all, key informant farmers group have tried to identify the terminologies for three
local level wealth categories and accordingly kabatamo, mererancho and butichoo are
terms for such category. The group suppose that the highest socio-economic class locally
called kabatamo which is equivalent as better-off; the next class termed as mererancho
and equivalent as middle economic class and finally the least economic class termed as
butichoo and equated as poor. Following the identification of socio-economic category,
the group moved to set local wealth ranking criteria. Accordingly, the local proxy
indicators of wealth are elaborated upon the agreed sound of the group.

Livestock ownership
Livestock is an important indicator of household's wealth position and is the farmers'
important source of food, draught power and more importantly a cash income for crop
cultivation for which the spray service is available. For example, a HH who own pair of
oxen have comparative advantage for timely preparation of crop land, hire labor for
exchange of oxen service, rent-in more land or enter in to sharecropping arrangement with
poor. Given the flat topography and cash crop dominated production in all study PAs,

32
horses for cart and donkeys for transportation play an important role for a HH to engage in
petty trade thus to build better livelihood. According to the group, the livestock products
such as butter, milk, calf, shoats and poultry selling is an important income source to
livestock owners to cover the health cost of large animal assets such as oxen and cows.
Hence, a household with large livestock holding can have good access for more income
and it is one of the main cash sources to purchase private services.

Land holding
Land with its all dimensions (size and fertility) is the single most important resource and a
base for any economic activity especially for rural HHs. For example, farm size influences
households' decision to cultivate cash, subsistence crops or rear animals for which there is
improved private service. Hence, land holding was hypothesized to have positive and
significant relationship with use rate of private services.

Housing, children Educated and Employed

The type of house with all its facet (type of roof and construction material) was a proxy
indicator for socio-economic status of a HH. The number of children who are educating or
employed was another indicator for wealth position and benefits from it like remittance is
considered as non-stopping income for the parents. In addition, the HH asset indices of
land holding and livestock ownership were used (Table 5 & 6) to strengthen the analysis
done by KIGs of farmers which is more of subjective. Debeso PA is with least value of
these both assets and which is further confirmed when the majority (80%) were
categorized as medium or less (Table 3a). Whereas, Lay Bedene PA is relatively richer
with 70% of its population were categorized as medium or better-off in contrast to Debeso
PA where the majority (53%) are poor. Having identified the three wealth classes, the key
informant farmers groups in each four study PAs sorted out the sample HHs list into three
wealth categories.
Table 3a.Wealth Category of sample HHs, by PAs
Wealth Equivalent Local % of HHs by study PAs Overall
Category term, (Alabigna) Asore L. Bedene H. Kuke Debeso
Better-off Kabatamu, 23.3 (7) 33.3 (10) 26.7 (8) 20 (6) 25.8
Medium Mereranchu 33.3 (10) 36.7 (11) 30 (9) 26.7 (8) 31.7
Poor Butichu 43.3 (13) 30 (9) 43.3 (13) 53.3 (16) 42.5
Source: KIGs Discussion Result, 2010; Numbers in parenthesis are frequencies

33
4.1.2 Demographic characteristics

As a good indicator of labor force endowment, family size (Table 3b) and age structure are
important parameters in differentiating rural HHs. The average family size of the sample
households was 6.1 persons with standard deviation of 2.4. The average family size of the
study area is relatively higher as compared to that of the district which is 6 persons per
HH. Interesting observation from Table 3b is the average adult family size shows that
better-offs and medium HHs have more adults than the poor.

Table 3b.Demographic Characteristics of sample HHs

Description of variables Better-off Medium Poor Overall
mean SD mean SD mean SD mean SD
Average family size 6.81 2.4 6.5 2.6 5.39 2.0 6.12 2.4
Average number of adults 2.58 .7 2.27 .88 1.94 .5 2.23 .7
Average No of children 4.65 2.1 4.53 2.2 3.67 1.9 4.2 2.1
Source: Own Computational Result, 2010; SD means Standard Deviations

4.1.3 Characteristics of HH Heads

Sex Differentiation of HH Head

Further, the survey data set was disaggregated by sex of heads of the HHs to scrutinize
whether the observed wealth differentiation follows sex line i.e. if there is any association
between wealth class and being female-headed or male-headed HH. The study was
conducted on 25 and 95 female and male-headed HHs, respectively. From 25 FHHHs in
the sample 56, 24 and 20% were, respectively, categorized as poor, medium and better-off
HHs (Figure 3). In contrast, 38.9, 33.7 and 27.4% of male-headed HHs were categorized
as poor, medium and better-off HHs respectively. This clearly depicts that FHHHs are
over represented in the lowest socio-economic stratum in terms of access and ownership of
human and non-human (land, water, farm implements and livestock) assets, however, the
latter is more constraining than the former in context of current population pressure. Sex
of sample HHs has important dimension as agricultural activities intensively use male
labor. Labor was considered a critical factor in rural differentiation, as particularly
expressed by the FHHHs. Most of the time, the poor in study PAs are the elderly, the sick
or the FHHH. Because of labor shortage, they usually rent-out their land or give to
sharecropping.

34
 Female-headed HHs Male-headed HHs

Better‐off
Better-
off

Poor

Poor

Mediu
Medium m

Figure 3. Wealth Categories by gender of HH Head; Source: Own Design, 2010

Education of HH Head
The educational status of HH head is key as it influencing ability to access and use
information to make informal decision in crop and livestock production and marketing.
The highest illiteracy rate (60%) was reported in one of far PA, Lay Bedene than Debeso
due to the fact that the latter is easily accessible to education on account of proximity to
main road to Addis. In addition, the education level of head revealed interesting
information that in near PAs (Asore and Hulegeba Kuke) where the majority, 60 and
56.7%, respectively, HHs have got at least non formal education perhaps on account of
their proximity to service center, Kulito and this clearly bolds how rural differentiation
based on distance affects access to education hence decision to or not to use private
services. Furthermore, own observation during data collection revealed that some sampled
HHs in study PAs face difficulties to express their service demands in a clear and
structured manner. This is specifically true for the underprivileged, the poor, the women
and the minorities. Under these conditions it is very difficult to come up with a service
delivery concept that takes only demand and can still be managed economically and
sustainably. The chi-square test of education shows significant variation among HHs at
less than 10% (Table 4). Hence, in order to develop demand-side of service market, rural
education for all subgroups of the clientele has to be promoted.

Farm Experience of the household Head

Farmers with higher experience in livestock and crop production appear to have often full
information and better knowledge and supposed to use private services (Rahmeto, 2007).
With respect to the respondents' farming experience, the most experienced farmer in the
sample had 45 years whereas the least experienced farmer had four years of experience in

35
farming. As expected, farming experience for medium and better-off classes were laying
above the mean years of sampled respondents, 20.3 years, where poor are with lower years
of experience in crop and livestock production.

Table 4.Characteristics of HH Heads

Attributes Better-off Medium Poor Overall t/χ2 -
significance
test#
Mean Age@ 38.2(11.4) 37.7(10.9) 36.7(9.4) 37.4(10.4) t=0.57(0 .207) ns
Mean Experience in
crop production 21.3(9.2) 22 (10.2) 18.51(8.4) 20.3(9.3) t=2.5(0.436) ns
(year)@
Sex, female 16.1 15.8 27.5 20.8 χ2 = 2.3(0.308) ns
Education, literate 67.7 50 53 55.8 χ2= 11.4(0.076) *
Participation in crop χ2 = 2(0.36) ns
25.8 36.8 23.5 28.3
extension, yes
Has been model χ2 = 15.69(0.000)
25.8 26.3 0 15 ***
farmer, yes
Cooperative member, χ2=7.3(0.025) **
32.3 10.5 11.8 16.7
yes
Food security task χ2 = 0.49(0.78) ns
9.7 5.3 7.8 7.5
force member, yes
PA development χ2 = 0.43(0.81) ns
54.8 57.9 51 54.2
group, yes
Remark: ***, **, and * statistically significant at 1%, 5%, and 10% probability level, respectively; ns- statistically not
significant NB: @=Numbers in parenthesis are standard deviations; #= Numbers in parenthesis are p-values
Source: Own analysis, 2010

Farmer Associations
There is one farmer union in the district, Mencheno, which is supplying various
agricultural inputs and purchasing agricultural produces from members when the price of
commodities falls in market. Even though there are 129 cooperatives (Appendix 3) in the
district, none is of private in nature and only 16.7% of sampled HHs are members of
cooperatives. Table 4 shows that cooperative membership for better-off is higher (32.3%)
than either of medium or poor classes. The chi-square test for cooperative membership
shows significant variation among HHs at less than 5%. In addition, the farmers
associations in every PA are not well organized to prioritize their needs. Whereas the
public sector is characterized by division due to political affiliations and favoritism and
bureaucratese are the major inhibitors for vibrant private sector development. There are
only 15% of sampled HHs were model farmers for demonstration with significant
variation at less than 1%.

36
4.1.4 Crop land holding and use

Crop land holding and Access

The better-off class own comparatively bigger, fertile and irrigated land with mean
holding of 1.6ha, though land in all PAs is flat (Table 5). These HHs are the one who rent-
in from or enter share cropping with poor who have no oxen or cash access.

Table 5.Crop land holding and access

Attributes Better-off Medium Poor Overall sig.
Average own land holding 1.6(.76) 1.3(.62) 1.23(.72) 1.39(.71)
Average rented-in land holding .21(.27) .23(.30) .20(.31) .21(.30)
% considering their cropland fertile 83.3 79 82 81.7
% of HHs having access to irrigation 3 2.6 2 2.5
Source: Own Survey Result, 2010; Numbers in parenthesis are Standard Deviations

4.1.5 Livestock Ownership

Livestock holding and oxen ownership

To assess the livestock ownership, TLU per HH was calculated and the sampled
household had an average of more than 3 TLU. Lay Bedene PA is endowed with mean
TLU of 4.6 (Table 23a). The majority (97%) of better-offs were having at least one ox
while the same holds third for the poor (Table 6). Thus, difference in the livestock
ownership between PAs had an important implication in the decision to use the private
services.

Table 6.Livestock holding and oxen ownership

Attributes Better-off Medium Poor Overall
Average cattle owned by HHs (Heads) 6.3 3.5 1.51 3.7
% of HH owning at least an ox/bull 97 84 33 71
Average shoats owned by HHs (Heads) 4.8 2.4 1.2 2.8
HHs owning at least a donkey, % 90 53 16 53
HHs average total TLU ownership 6.1 3.3 1.3 3.6
Source: Own survey result, 2010

37
In all account, better-offs were owned the largest share. For example, livestock ownership
of better-offs in TLU is almost five and two times higher than that of poor and medium
groups, respectively. Donkey ownership have greater importance among the community
particularly for transportation of water from distant and farm produce from crop field. In
line with this a 41-year-old- model farmer, Ato Rufael, from Asore PA, said that my two
donkeys are not less than my boys because they are always at my side in every plots of my
farm, in every market center, in every water points, in every woodlots and every
distribution sites. Moreover, shortage of grazing land may be forcing farmers to keep
donkeys rather than other pack animals as donkeys withstand hardship better such as
shortage of water in Debeso PA.

4.1.6 Access to Agricultural Knowledge and Information

The PA level DA and farmer-to-farmers discussion and observation, respectively 82.8 and
100%, are the two top most important sources of knowledge and information on
agricultural services to farmers in study PAs (Table 7). When there is frequent contact
with extension agent, the greater is the possibilities of HH head being influenced to use
quality private services. Whilst extension is supposed to have a direct influence on service
use rate, weak extension visit by DAs for diffusion of information and technology further
exacerbated the marginalization of female in private sector development. This clearly
bolds the existence of weak public extension system in the district that uses direct contact
only with a relatively small group of well-to-do model farmers. In a nutshell, the critical
observation of Table 7 reflects that the better-off class have by far more participation in
farmers’ field day and experience sharing visit to other areas.

Table 7. Main sources for improved agricultural knowledge and technology, % of HHs
Knowledge information sources Better-off Medium Poor Overall
Training 26.7
29 31.6 19.6
Farmer field day 20
38.7 15.8 5.9
Experience sharing visit 18.5
32 15.8 7.8
Farmer-to-Farmer knowledge sharing 100
100 100 100
Discussion with model farmer 44.8
61 50 23.5
On-farm trail 11.7
16 13.2 5.9
TV/Radio 60
83.9 55.3 41
Development Agents (DA) 82.8
96.8 94.7 57

38
Private input suppliers 22.9
29 26 13.7
Source: Field Survey Result, 2010

4.1.7 Access to credit

Where livestock, rather than cash, is preferred form of saving, access to credit from formal
financial institution, can make difference to sample HHs. The three wealth categories of
HHs differentiated in the purpose for which credit is needed, ability to access credit and
frequency of application to loan. The major purpose for need of loan among better-offs
who borrowed (32%) was to purchase draught oxen, livestock for fattening, improved
seed, fertilizer, rent-in more land and to open rural shops, which are more of an investment
(Table 8) whereas the poor use the small amount they borrow (4%) for consumption
purpose. Unlike for crop inputs where credit is relatively available for fertilizer and seed,
the use of credit for animal health were not observed for all sampled HHs. Most of those
HHs who did not show an interest in taking credit lacked awareness about the availability
of credit services and fear of risk of not being able to repay the credit. Lack of credit
supply and knowledge on credit management together with poorly developed retail
markets and so limited market access to retail outlet for service providers in far PAs, Lay
Bedene and Debeso, seemed to discourage competition and resulting in uncertainty and
risk to new entrants. Overall, the efficiency of credit service is weak as both CAHWs and
PCPS providers didn’t made any repayment of their loan from Mencheno Union
(Appendix 2).

Table 8.Access to credit, Proportion of responding HHs (%)

Attributes Better-off Medium Poor Overall
Needed loan 71 84 84 79.7
Borrowed from formal sources 32 15.8 3.9 17.2
Application for loan turned down 35.5 21 11.8 22.8
Source: HH Survey Result, 2010

39
4.2 Crop Production and Marketing Systems of the study PAs

This second section presents an overview of crop production system of the research PAs.
It explores whether there is any difference across the PAs with regard to land use patterns,
key challenges in crop production, access to inputs, services and market, and the degree of
participation in crop production for the market. These features are important as they may
influence the demand for and use of services, particularly private crop protection services.

Cereals are the most widely grown crop in all study PAs and produced by almost all HHs
and shares 62.3% of the total cropped land area (Figure 4), followed by pulses and spices
which together account for about 25% of the total cropped land area in study PAs and
elsewhere in the district. Table 9a shows the spatial variation of crop production pattern
across study PAs. Vegetables such as chat and potato are mainly produced in PAs near to
Kulito market, Hulegeba Kukie 14 and Asore 13.3%, and accounts 12.5% of total cropped
land area whereas cereals are dominantly produced in PAs far from Kulito, Debeso 66 and
Lay Bedene 65%. Hot pepper and chat (Catha edulis) are the major cash crops both in
terms of area covered and revenue generated in four PAs covered by the study. Producing
chat has thus become a viable and important alternative to ensure continued cash income.
Chat production has another advantage: it can be harvested at least twice a year under
rainfed agriculture and five times per year under irrigation. This implies that HHs have a
well-distributed flow of income. This improved income, in turn, maintains the effective
demand for private spray service to produce these cash crops. Chat is a perennial tree crop
mainly grown in Alaba thus majority of people chew young fresh leaves of chat as a
stimulant. However, chat is blamed for decreased productivity, as people wastes valuable
working time sitting and chewing it for hours.

HHs in the study PAs produce crops for different purposes, such as for food, feed, seed or
sale. Although, crop production for feed and seed is not common in the study area, about
70% of the cereal produced was used for direct HH food consumption and 25% is for
generating HH cash income. For example, maize being the major cereal produced in the
study area with mean area coverage of 0.5ha, accounting for 37.5% of total area allocated
to cereal, is the major crop for both HH consumption and cash generation. It is produced
by almost all households (99%), followed by teff, with 81.7% of teff grower. Haricot bean
is produced by 51.6% of sampled farmers and stands the first among the pulses and the

40
community call it “the poor man’s meat” due to its high protein content, which
compensates for the protein deficiency that could have occurred with low income HHs.

Table 9a. Crop Land Use Pattern of 2008/9, by PAs (Ha)

Crop coverage Asore L.Bedene H.Kuke Debeso Overall
Mean (SD) Mean (SD) Mean (SD) Mean (SD) Mean (SD)
Maize .57(.29) .58(.33) .44(.24) .57(.23) .54(.28)
Sorghum .30(.11) .29(.10) .21(.06) .31(.24) .28(.16)
Teff .33(.17) .36(.15) .28(.10) .37(.19) .34(.16)
Wheat .30(.12) .26(.06) .30(.11) .26(.10) .28(.10)
Cereal total coverage (%) 60 65 57.5 66 62.3
Haricot bean .23(.09) .21(.05) .26(.10) .22(.06) .23(.08)
Faya bean .17(.06) .25(0) .12(0) .12(00) .17(.06)
Finger millet .19(.06) .19(.06) .20(.06) .21(.05) .20(.06)
Hot pepper .27(.15) .19(.09) .26(.15) .26(.13) .25(.13)
Pulse/spices total (%) 26 23.6 28 22.5 25
Chat .17(.06) .15(.05) .16(.05) .16(.06) .16(.05)
Potato .23(.12) .20(.06) .21(.10) .34(.38) .24(.13)
Vegetable total (%) 13.3 11 14 11.3 12.5
Total cropped area (ha) 55.2 49.1 41.8 47 193.1
Distance from Kulito, km 7 15 5 14
Source: Own Survey Result, 2010; NB: numbers in parentheses are standard deviations

Teff is another important cash crop in the study area mainly produced for sale for 91% of
sampled HHs and is the primary crop for which modern crop protection service,
particularly herbicide, is available. However, maize is increasingly becoming the leading
staple crop for consumption of sample HHs. Both teff and maize are the leading cereal
crops but maize preferred to teff for its lower price of food for poor and feed, for instance,
higher nutrient value of stover for animal feed among the sample HHs either as dry or
green stover.

Own observation indicated an interesting crop sowing pattern in Debeso PA which is mid
crossed by main road to Addis, farmers deliberately sow some plot of maize land lately
than normal cropping season in order to fill the feed shortage gap for fattening oxen for
meskel holidays with young nutritive maize green stover. Due to the fact that sorghum is a
drought resistant crop, it is mainly produced in Debeso PA with mean area coverage of
0.31ha and its stover is an important feed in dry months as it is annual crop and crosses all
months of the year.

41
Figure 4. Proportion of Cropped land area allocated to different crop categories;
Source: Own Design, 2010

HHs in the study PAs traditionally practice crop rotation and inter-cropping in research
PAs for different purposes including soil fertility management, diversification, moisture
conservation and crop pest and disease control. For example, the growing of sunflower
with teff, haricot bean with finger millet, chat with local cabbage, teff with linseed, haricot
bean with maize is practiced as indigenous strategies to manage risks associated with
drought, disease and pests and efficient use of nutrient niches so that minimize crop failure
and is a crop protection practice. Chat is less affected by these risks and perfectly suited
for intercropping unlike, potato. Moreover, in PAs particularly those near to market center,
H.Kuke, homesteads tend to cover significant proportion of land relative to other PAs and
mainly covered with garden crops including chat and local cabbage and rarely with
enset/false banana.

4.2.1 Input use and management

Input use exhibits great variation over study PAs and crops produced. Despite its far
location from Kulito town, HHs in Debeso PA dominantly use inputs for subsistence crops
perhaps due to lack of irrigation access, farmers in Debeso opted to use all inputs for
subsistence than cash crops. While other near PAs substantially used improved inputs for
cash crops production. More than 39% of HHs in 2008/9 used inorganic fertilizer for any
type of crop in any one season (Table 9b). But the use of DAP is more common than urea

42
in Asore and Hulegeba Kuke PAs where 23% of HHs in each reported their land is poorly
fertile. Despite the extension efforts to increase fertilizer use in the district there is still a
considerable proportion of farmers who are not using it. Part of the reasons for less likely
use of fertilizer is its sky rocketed price, risk of drought as the response to fertilizer is very
much related to the amount of moisture in the soil, especially for urea, and it is usually
delivered late and in short supply. As the study PAs are in the Rift Valley of the country,
they receive low amount of rain affecting the use of fertilizer besides other factors.

Table 9b. Input use and overall yield trends for subsistence and cash crop (% responding)
Improved inputs use Asore L.Bedene H.Kuke Debeso Overall
Subsistence Crops
Improved seed 36.7 20 33 53 35.6
Inorganic fertilizer 26.7 30 33 66.7 39
Irrigation 0 0 0 0 0
Hired labor 73.7 81.8 80 81 79
Overall yield trend 73 66.7 60 70 67.5
increasing
Cash Crops
Improved seed 63.7 80 66.7 46.7 64
Inorganic fertilizer 60 63 60 26.7 52.5
Irrigation 13 0 10 0 5.8
Hired labor 15.8 9 20 9.5 13
Overall yield trend 93 100 73 70 84
increasing
Source: Own Survey Result, 2010

The heavy dependency of agriculture on rainfall and lack of labor saving technologies
forces female-headed HHs (20.8%) to put more labor in specific period to complete a
given agricultural activity. For example, transplanting and harvesting of pepper against
unusual rain in harvesting season needs to be conducted at one time with sufficient labor.
Due to this reason, they used to rent-out their land to those HHs who have more labor or
able to hire labor or have oxen. They make such linkage mechanism because majority of
farm activities such as hoeing and threshing of cereals need oxen. Another arrangement is
they opt to cultivate those crops which cannot be hoed but threshing performed in
exchange of threshed crop yield to labor. The survey clearly revealed the role of women in
performing most of the farm tasks ranging from weeding crop field to harvesting. It was
noted that if only weed infestation is high or a wife is pregnant or not physically strong,
HHs may participate in free reciprocal or hired labor exchange to complete the task more

43
quickly. Free labor exchange is hardily possible to FHHHs from the fact that they do not
have labor to reimburse for used. Women are usually growing horticultural crops such as
chat and local cabbage on small plots of land close to their home. In richer households,
farming activities may be performed wholly or partly (80%) by hired labour. However, in
the study area, only 8% of FHHHs were able to hire labor which were only for threshing
while their male headed counterparts hired for range of activities such as land preparation,
weeding and livestock husbandry. According to farmers FGD, most of the laborers come
from neighboring districts of Wolaita and Hadya.

As the main road to Addis crosses the district and its proximity and fortunately mid-
situated to main big cities of Wolaita Sodo (70km), Hossaena (64km), Shashemene
(62km) and Hawassa (85km), most of HHs are cosmopolite, agricultural productivity
depends by large on agricultural information and input utilization. Cash crop production is
intensive type in all accounts, for example, improved seed (64%) is basically used for cash
crop production than subsistence crops. In contrast, majority (79%) of labor hired by
sample HHs is allocated for subsistence than cash crops (Table 9b), while irrigation is
totally said to have not been practiced in study PAs except for Asore and Hulegeba Kuke
PAs which border Bilate River for short distance.

However, more than 67% of the respondents reported the increase in yield trend of either
crop. A lot of things are also contributing to this. Soil erosion, the main factor for nutrient
depletion, is not an issue of all HHs in study area as their land is fairly flat hence about
81.7% HHs considering their land is fertile (Table 5) and the inherent soil fertility and
moisture is maintained. For long period of time HHs in study PAs were known for and
content with exchange of local seed each other which is resistance to pests and disease and
yield is relatively better. The inter-cropping of legume with cereal crops and agro forestry
practices such as planting trees in the farm field for efficient utilization of nutrient niche is
mainly practiced by sample HHs. Use of crop residue and animal dung while animals are
kept on crop field after harvesting is also another on-farm input contributing soil fertility
thus improved crop yield. Another important input for subsistence crop yield increment is
having more than 66% HHs at least an ox. The price of cash crops has also been rising, for
example, chat enjoys a relatively stable domestic price, while cereals suffer from
fluctuating price. In the domestic market it is quite evident that chat chewing has became

44
a recreational activity in all study PAs and now also forms part of the culture of the urban
youth in Kulito.

4.2.2 Crop Production Opportunities and Challenges

For many HHs in the study PAs, crop yield signifies storing wealth, a cushion for food
shortages, and a source of fertilizer, fuel and cash. Despite the existence of possible
opportunities, the sector has not yet attained its full productive potential. The HH survey
summarized the top three opportunities with varying degree of importance for subsistence
and cash crops. These opportunities include the availability private crop protection
services, market demand and land, in order of importance, for subsistence crops, and the
availability of market demand, input and land for cash crops. The presence of formal and
informal crop protection service comes first because crop pests and disease are in all study
PAs. Market demand stands the second as the district is mid situated from big markets in
vicinity, and on account of topography every PAs are accessible, crop yields even bought
from field.

The major constraint for crop production in study PAs is environmental factor among
which drought, without spatial variation over PAs and type of crops, is the most important
and ranked the first though some crops such as sorghum is tolerant to drought. Rainfall has
been a major limiting factor in agricultural production in the area. Even worse, according
to key informant farmers, the district has experienced recurrent droughts every ten years,
while nationally every three to five years, probably attributed to uneven distribution and
erratic rainfall. Despite the recurrent drought, flood has also been a major problem in
Debeso PA where the latter induced as a result of dominantly flat topography in Debeso.
The second important challenge is pests and disease, while the third important constraint,
in order of importance, is lack of draught power as more than 43% of HHs in Hulegeba
Kuke and Debeso PAs have own no ox.

Due to the presence of private input shops, culture of local seed exchange mechanism and
seed multiplication trail, next to market demand, input availability is an opportunity to
cash crop producers in the study PAs. As a result of distance from service market and
relatively higher land size, land is comparatively better advantaged than input availability
for Lay Bedene PA. Likewise, drought, pests and disease and cost of inputs, in order of

45
importance, are the major challenges for cash crops. More than 20% of HHs (Table 9c) in
each PA reported the importance of pests and disease for cash crops such as hot pepper,
chat, potato and teff. Crop yield loss associated with pests and diseases is one of the major
constraints in all study PAs where the hot humid weather aggravates the growth and
propagation of these pests than elsewhere. An interesting observation is that input cost is a
problem for cash than subsistence crops. As HHs mainly used fertilizer for cash crops
(Table 9b), the high input cost and its short supply is ranked as the third major challenge
to cash crops highlighted in HH survey.

Table 9c. Opportunities and Challenges rankings, % of respondent

Asore L. Bedene H. Kuke Debeso Opportunities Ranking
overall the study in overall
Opportunities for Subsistence crops PAs study PAs
Market demand Land Private Service Private Service Private Service
1st
(43.3) availability(50) existence(33.3) existence (46.7) existence (30.8)
Private service Market Market demand Market demand Market demand
2nd
existence (30) demand (23.3) (30) (20) (29.2)
Land Private Service Land Land Land availability
3rd
availability(26.7) existence(13.3) availability(20) availability(16.7) (28.3)
Challenges for Subsistence Crops Challenges
overall study
PAs
Drought (40) Drought (40) Drought (36.7) Drought (33.3) Drought (37.5) 1st
Shortage of land Pests and Pests and Pests and Pests and
2nd
(30) Disease (20) Disease (26.7) Disease (23.3) Disease (24.2)
Pests and Shortage of Lack of draught Lack of draught Lack of drought
3rd
Disease (16.7) land (16.7) power (23.3) power (16.7) power (15.8)
Opportunities for Cash Crops
Market demand Availability of Market demand Market demand Market demand
1st
(40) land (30) (40) (56.7) (40)
Availability of Input Input Input availability Input availability
2nd
land (30) availability(30) availability(33.3) (23.3) (25.8)
Input availability Market Availability of Availability of Availability of
3rd
(16.7) demand (26.7) land (16.7) land (16.7) Land (23.3)
Challenges for Cash crops
Drought (36.7) Drought (56.7) Drought (60) Drought (46.7) Drought(50) 1st
Pests and disease Pests and Cost of input Pests and disease Pest and disease
2nd
(30) disease (23.3) (23.3) (20) (18.3)
cost of inputs Cost of inputs Lack of Cost of inputs Cost of inputs
(20) (23.3) improved inputs (16.7) (18.3) 3rd
(13.3)
Source: Own computation, 2010 NB: numbers in parentheses are % of HHs

In general, Table 9c has tried to describe the salient opportunities and challenges to crop
production with the intention to facilitate the detail examination of private service
development in the subsequent analysis. Among the constraints crop pests and disease
have been ranked the second and perceived as the major problem for both subsistence and
cash crops across study PAs.

46
 The HH survey has identified the major pests and diseases with varying level of
importance over study PAs and crop type as weed, stock borer and wollo cricket to
cereals and early and late blight to vegetables and spices are the major pests among the
group and others are listed in Table 9d. This is more justified when the importance of
herbicide ranked the first in response to first ranked weed infestation. In addition to
modern crop protection, majority of HHs who could not afford the cost of chemicals are
still preferred to use mechanical hand weeding and land management.

Table 9d. Major Pests and Disease problems & protection measures (% of reporting HHs)
Crops Study PAs Pests & Ranking in
affected diseases overall
overall study study PAs
Asore L.Bedene H.Kuke Debeso
PAs
Cereal / Pulses crops
Maize, teff, Weed (26.7) Weed (26.7) Weed (26.7) Wollo bush Weed (25.8) 1st
wheat, finger cricket(26.7)
millet Stem borer Stem bore Armyworm Weed (23.3) Stem 2nd
(23.3) (23.3) (23.3) borer(20)
Army worm Wollo bush Wollo bush Stem borer Wollo 3rd
(20) cricket (16.7) cricket(16.7) (20) cricket(17.5)
Spices / vegetable crops
Chat , Potato, Late blight Late blight Late blight Early blight Late blight 1st
Onion, carrot (33.3) (26.7) (30) (26.7) (29)
pepper, Early blight E. blight E.blight/23.3/ L.blight E.blight 2nd
tomato, sweet (33.3) (26.7) (26.7) (27.5)
potato, Downy Downy Aphid (20) Downy Downy 3rd
Cabbage mildew(23.3) mildew (16.7) mildew(23.7 mildew (20)
Traditional Crop Protection Measures
Mechanical Land mgt Mechanical Mechanical Mechanical 1st
(43.3) (46.7) (53.3) (46.7) (43.3)
All crops Land Mechanical / Land mgt Herbal Land mgt 2nd
management hand weeding (20) solution (30)
(33.3) (30) (23.3)
Herbal solution Herbal Herbal sol. Land mgt Herbal 3rd
(16.7) solution (20) (13.3) (20) solution (18)
Modern Protection Measure
Cereals/pulses Herbicide Herbicide Herbicide Herbicide Herbicide 1st
vegetative (56.7) (43.3) (46.7) (46.7) (48.3)
Vegetables/ Pesticide Pesticide Pesticide Pesticide Pesticide 2nd
spices (33.3) (36.7) (36.7) (33.3) (35)
grain (maize Post Harvest PHS (20) PHS (16.7) PHS (20) PHS (16) 3rd
& sorghum) Service, PHS/10
Source: Field survey result, 2010; NB: numbers in parentheses are % of HHs

In general, from pests of subsistence crops, army worm was reported only from Asore
while wollo cricket not reported from Asore only. Similarly for cash crops, aphid was only
mentioned in Hulegeba Kuke. The existence of higher family size and oxen ownership
(Table 23a) in Lay Bedene PA is further justified when land preparation comes the first
traditional crop protection practice.

47
4.3. Private Crop Protection Services and Uses

As the preceding section shows (Section 4.2.2), crop pests and diseases are among the
major production constraints in the study area. In the study PAs and elsewhere in the
country, the public sector is the main source of inputs and technical assistance for crop
pests and diseases control, especially when epidemic large outbreak would occur. In
addition, the farmers have their own indigenous crop protection measure and there are also
some farmers in the community who informally provide crop protection service using
purchased modern agro-chemicals. At one hand, traditional and informal crop protection
measure may not always effective, on the other hand the use of chemical inputs raises
issues relating to effectiveness, human health and its impact on the environment.

In response to this, Improving Productivity and Market Success (IPMS) project together
with Alaba WoARD has initiated the concept of community-based crop protection service
in workshop organized for input delivery and accepted in Alaba as one alternative of
providing spray service since three years and pilot-tested in the study area to assess its
feasibility for scaling. Hence, this section deals with both the supply and demand sides of
the private formal crop protection service. Qualitative and quantitative empirical evidence
are presented and discussed on both the supply capacity of the formal private providers
and the demand for the service, including the levels of satisfaction with the performance of
the service by farmers who are users or potential users†† and by other stakeholders like the
WoARD, IPMS and research centers. Therefore, in the context of private service delivery,
the current private spray providers are the role model to scrutinize their human, material,
technical and financial capacity and learn lessons.

4.3.1 Capacity of Crop Protection Service Providers

To provide private crop protection service which is effective, safe, environmentally sound
and financial profitable and sustainable, the providers need various capacity. The
capacities need for such service provision comprise of human, financial, and

††
The word ‘potential users’ here to cover cases where currently they are not using the service (e.g., because they do not perceive the
quality of services to justify using the service), but where reasonable analysis suggests that they able to use at a price that would cover
the providers’ full costs of supply yet still be low enough to permit profitable delivery by providers.

48
social/networking capacity of the providers for accessing knowledge/information,
finance/credit and inputs/material resources.

4.3.1.1 Human Capacity

The first, perhaps most important, component of capacity required for the service delivery
is human capacity, i.e., staffing, technical competence, practical and entrepreneurial skills
of each service providers. Personal capability of each of the service providers is, in turn, a
function of their sex, levels of education, prior relevant experience in the practice, service-
relevant formal skill-oriented training, and their extent of access and use for technical
backstopping and other relevant knowledge and information sources. Whilst skilled
staffing is one of the most important ingredients of human capacity, currently there are 11
formal providers who are all males and more than 36 years old.

The education levels of the service providers ranges from grade 1 to 10 and the average
level of education is grade six. Of the eleven service providers, 5, 3 and 3 have formal
education levels of, respectively, 1-4, 5-8 and 9-10 grades. Unlike CAHWs, the spray
service providers have ventured into formal service with relatively better prior experience
as informal crop protection service providers ranging from 2- 12 years; and 5, 3 and 3 of
the service providers had an average year of experience 7.2, 5.7 and 4, respectively. This
reflects the two study PAs under investigation, Debeso and Hulegeba Kuke, were
categorized into the first and second intervals, respectively. Table 10 reports that the
providers who have less education tend to have more experience which helped them to
compensate their lower education status.

Table 10.Educational Profile and Practical Experience of providers

Education level Average Education Average Frequency %
(Grade) (Grade) Experience (yr)
1-4 2.4 7.2 5 45.4
5-8 7 5.7 3 27.3
9-10 9.7 4 3 27.3
Overall 6 6 11 100
Source: Own Computation, 2010

In addition to staffing, education and practical experiences of providers, an acquisition of

knowledge through formal training is an important dimension of capacity. Since the
inception of the service provision, at least four formal trainings were organized for the

49
service providers: two weeks training on agronomy and crop protection principles
(organized by Melkassa Research center, WoARD and IPMS), one week training on
operation and maintenance of spraying equipment and proper handling and use of agro-
chemicals (delivered by WoARD and Adami Tulu Pesticide company), and refreshment
trainings on bio-pesticides and integrated pest management (organized by pesticide
company and IPMS), and pepper diseases control (organized by research center and IPMs)
were offered for 5 and 2 days, respectively. The training on basic agronomic and crop
protection principles was an inception training and attended by all providers while others
were delivered to the current 9 active providers.

The issue of environmental quality, crop disease calendar, traditional protection methods
and integrated pest management (IPM) were the central topics of training among many.
Particularly the training on bio-pesticide (Appendix 7) and IPM was undertaken with the
intension to introduce and capitalizing the habit of using of low cost and environmentally
friendly disease control practice among the communities. To this end, IPMS and WoARD
have shouldered the lion share to offer these trainings. According to the discussion made
with providers, however, the DAs based at FTCs in which this study was carried out were
not yet geared to perform any training to providers. The countable impact of the training to
providers was towards their competence and perception towards service delivery. For
example, so far they used to spray while chewing chat, but now they wear their safety
measures properly.

Further assessment of the perception providers about the skill-orientation and practical
usefulness of trainings revealed all providers (100%) have perceived the training on
operation and maintenance of knapsack sprayer and handling of agro-chemicals as the
most skill-oriented and practically very useful (Table 11). On the other hand, the training
on crop protection principles and agronomy practices was perceived as the most
theoretical-oriented.

However, according to discussion with providers, the selection process of training topics
didn’t include the providers, too short training duration and contents usually do not align
with the need for ever-changing and contextual skills. Moreover, there are missing wings
that the training program did not addressed, yet vital to better capacitate the providers
include post harvest, coffee berry disease and extension education services. Hence, it is
important to provide full package trainings to providers which also contests with the

50
finding of Ashworth (2005) who indicated that another area likely to emerge in the future
is a revolution of business entrepreneurship and professional training for private sector
development.

Table 11.Perception to practical skill-orientation of various trainings

Types of Trainings Rated value Max Freq. %
Basic training on crop protection principles and 2 4 44
agronomy practices
On-job training on operation and maintenance of 5 9 100
knapsack sprayer and handling of agro-chemicals
Refreshment trainings on Bio-pesticide and IPM 4 7 78
methods
Refreshment training on pepper disease 3 5 55.5
*1=highly theoretical, 2=slightly theoretical, 3=marginally practical, 4=practical, 5=highly practical oriented.

Source: Discussion with Spray Providers, 2010; N=9,

The result of an investigation about the major roots of knowledge and information about
sources of agrochemicals inputs revealed formal trainings, private input shops, providers-
to-providers information sharing network (market days and various public gatherings such
as safety net public works) as the main sources. Likewise, additional sources of
knowledge/information regarding handling and storage, application, disposal of containers
were prescription from input shops, directions and labeling on the containers and their life
time experiences from formal and informal practices. To this end, Adami Tulu Pesticide
Company and Melkassa Research Center are highly appreciated by providers for their
provision of user manuals which helped them to update their knowledge timely.

Another important issue with regard to quality and safety assurance is the technical
assistance, monitoring and supervision of the actual service delivery system. The
supervision and monitoring role is primarily the responsibility of the Alaba WoARD,
particularly, Crop Production and Protection Work Process. In addition, other
organizations such as IPMS and research centers provide technical backstopping. In regard
to this, the discussions held with the individual service providers, relevant experts of the
Alaba WoARD as well as organizations spearheading the initiative such as IPMS revealed
the absence of both professional and trade licenses for providers and weak enforcement
capacity of regulations which in turn affected their competition with informal providers
and limited their access and networking to reliable sources to chemical inputs and
equipment.

51
4.3.1.2 Storage and Handling of equipment/materials and chemicals

The availability of store and essential basic equipment and materials is another important
constituent of the capacity needed for safe and environmentally sound yet effective crop
protection service delivery. During bringing the spray providers into being, equipment kits
and chemicals were given on credit base through Menchon union, which had received
funds from the IPMS Credit Innovation fund. Unlike the CAHWs, the spray providers
were supplied with equipments and essential protective measures for appropriate handling
and application of chemicals (Appendix 8). This sounds good because it had impacted
positively. At one hand, it has absorbed start up shocks, on the other hand, it helped the
providers better perceived and trusted by the community for their safe and low risk of
service compared with informal providers’ service. This ignited the other informal
providers to follow the same path and make necessary care for their health and
environment.

The providers’ access to materials and other utilities assessment reported that they
frequently mentioned the difficulties they went through during launching the process of
accessing agrochemicals, equipments and technical supports. They frequently face the
shortage and even absence of chemical inputs in their vicinity. For example, the provider
in far PA, Debeso, was frequently reported the incidence of regular and sporadic coffee
disease and bring the diseased coffee sample to the WoARD crop protection desk (now
work process) but the response to respective chemical was none except dreary walk to
WoARD. On the other hand, the terms of access to chemicals varies following the pattern
of demand for various services (Figure 6). Providers do not store chemicals at their stock
due to lack of separate storage room and sufficient capital. Although the providers were
attached to Union and WoARD Input and Marketing Work Process, the supply of
chemicals is usually ad hoc and come very late after the disease or pest had caused
sizeable damage. Moreover, there is no retailer channel in rural far PAs where majority of
providers and users reside, disease incidence is more prevalent and outbreak report is
delaying. Yet, interviews with private input providers suggest that cash constraints, which
limit most traders’ ability to stock sufficient amount, would need to be addressed to
maintain supply.

The assessment of perception of providers regarding the timely availability, quality and
costliness of the chemical inputs is summarized in Table 12. The survey has identified the

52
three major sources of agrochemicals in the study area. Accordingly, the private input
shops (Appendix 1) ranked the first for their timely availability followed by the Mencheno
Union shop. This is because private shops are always open and chemicals available in kind
and quantity. Hence, the providers have reported their strong linkage with them to
maintain supply of chemicals. For quality of chemicals, providers selected Union shop as
the best of all because in public store chemicals usually stay more than two and three
months before dispatch but is not the case for the Union. The overall assessment of
chemical price also indicated that WoARD is preferred to others because the WoARD
absorbs all its transportation and personnel expenses and sells chemicals at reasonable
price unlike the private dealers where price is too costly as they transfer all costs to buyers.
This calls for trade and professionally licensing and ensuring regular renewal of license for
providers so that they can access chemicals and necessary equipment at reasonable price
from wholesalers and hence, maximize profit margins from their practice. The experts’
group also perceives the importance of licensing as the regulatory bodies have the power
to remove licenses from providers who contravene regulations and perform poor.
Nonetheless, the issue of certification and licensing has revealed a weak linkage and did
not get any attention.

Table 12.Providers’ Perception about supply of chemical inputs

Spray service Providers Rating, %
Scor Ran
Agro-chemicals Providers Very Goo Poo
Excellent Very Poor e k
good d r
Timely availability
WoARD Agr. Ext. Work
.00 .00 22 67 11 3
Process 211
Private input shops 56 22 11 11 0.00 423 1
410.
Mencheno Union input shop 33.3 44.4 22.2 .00 .00 2
7
Quality of chemicals
WoARD Agr. Ext. Work 410.
44.4 33.3 11 11 .00 2
Process 2
Private input shops .00 22 78 .00 .00 322 3
Mencheno Union input shop 56 22 22 .00 .00 434 1
Price of chemical inputs
WoARD Agr. Ext. Work
78 22 .00 .00 .00 1
Process 478
Private input shops .00 33 11 56 .00 277 3
Mencheno Union input shop 56 33 11 0.00 .00 445 2
NB: Score is calculated by assigning 5 for excellent, 4 for very good, 3 for good, 2 for poor and 1 for very poor. Then
multiply % of observation by the score and finally adding the total observation; N=9
Source: Own Computation from providers survey, 2010

53
The availability of means of transport is important to facilitate mobility and timely
response to the users’ demand and for easy access to reliable sources of chemical inputs.
As a result, all providers were supplied with bicycle for transport purpose which helped
the providers to cover wider area and timely respond to demand given the plain
topography of study PAs.

Finally, the survey as well as own observation about the disposal of used container and
expired chemicals were revealed an important finding. Although the sprayers were offered
professional training for proper handling of chemicals, it was observed while they are
selling and reusing containers for various purposes such as carrying gas/oil and water for
‘selat’. Further critical examination of the case also indicated the optimal ignorance of
some providers to store in separate shelf and wear safety measures properly. However, all
the providers responded that they do not have separate room for chemicals as 67% of
providers are living in grass thatched house which is not partitioned into classes. Apart
from use and handling of chemicals, the providers’ reflected their fear for the potential
health hazards as result of the cumulative effect of consuming chemically treated food as
time goes the risk it takes. Ato Asemo, a 39-year-old PCPS provider from Choroko PA,
reflected his worry as ‘how much it affects our health if it let the seed dormant for such
long time’. Nonetheless, still yet no rigorous environmental and health impact were
recorded except some light symptoms such as reduced appetite for food and skin irritation
on joints.

4.3.1.3 Finance or credit linkages

Finance and access to credit are also important to cover costs of initial investment on fixed
assets and to overcome liquidity constraints for acquired agro-chemical inputs. The survey
has revealed a vacuum of financial service market in Alaba. Though structures exist at
regional, zonal and district levels, it is functioning sub-optimally due to weak
institutionalization. The privatization agency in the region has a structure up to district
level and various financial institutions (Agricultural Rural Fund, MFI, Unions) are
operating in the sector. However, except Mencheno Union, others have not yet delivered
any financial and business management services to providers neither in the training nor in
practice.

54
Based on the typology of linkage, the providers made four types of linkage such as linkage
for input and material, regulation and certification, knowledge and information and
linkage for finance and credit (Figure 5). The first two were already discussed in section
4.3.1.1 and 4.3.1.2. The actors’ linkage analysis has revealed the very limited and ad hoc
knowledge linkage, usually a resource person for training. For example, research centers
were training on principles of crop protection and demonstrating crop protection practices
on farmers plot. However, the linkage for research and extension is missing. Despite the
existence of many NGOs actors, their interaction with private spray providers was often
absent. They interact occasionally with providers and their engagement in systematic and
continuous experimental social learning and scaling up/out successful experience is often
debatable. One exception is the partnership between IPMS in facilitating and latter
attaching the providers to unions and private input shops to sustain the access to
knowledge, credit and input services.

Credit and finance linkage also mainly focus on production inputs such as fertilizer and
improved seeds rather than on equipments, chemicals inputs and operating capital.
According to providers’ survey, they started business as formal private entity with credit

13
Community (users)
1
1 Research
WoARD Extension 1 centers, ESE
Work Process

8 9 1
7 1 PCPS Providers
1
2
6 Mencheno
Private Input shops, 3 Union
Mencheno Union 4
shop, Pesticide
companies
5
ILRI/IPMS Project

Figure 5. Actors Linkage Map showing access to Knowledge, Inputs and Finance to
PCPS Providers; Source: Own Design, 2010

55
Linkage Descriptions
K
or
e 1st Most important linkage 2nd most important 3rd most important 4th most important
y
1 Linkage for Knowledge and information i.e. training on bio- 8 Linkage for Regulation/certification:
pesticide and modern protection spraying, demonstrate on-farm train, monitor, supply chemicals,
trail facilitate linkage
2 Linkage for finance and credit: supply formal credit, agro- 9 Report disease outbreak to process
chemicals and equipment owner
3 Organize training, facilitating linkage with unions and research 10 Report disease/pest outbreak
centers, promotion of service 11 Deliver various crop protection services
4 Provide report of work, report disease outbreak 12 Request services, report pest outbreak
5 Training and facilitate technical support 13 Service linkage within poor and rich,
male and female-headed HHs
6 Provide chemicals & equipment, promote of new chemical 14 Supply chemicals
7 Regulate and monitor 15 Pest/disease outbreak, request chemical

from Mencheno Union. The Union has also made strong linkage for finance and
mobilized a total credit of birr 39,050 in kind. IPMS has been admired for its strong
linkage in facilitating to access to formal credit and knowledge sources. However, the
effectiveness of these linkages have been limited due to the neglect in addressing non-
technical hurdles related to institutions and market for improving service delivery.

Own attempt to observe and review the providers’ record keeping & its nature has
revealed how different the providers are. IPMS together with WoARD had developed
recording formats of achievements. Accordingly, the provider in Hulegeba Kuke who has
relatively better recording system and separate format for revenue and expenditure for
most of specific services may be due to his better education level than the provider in
Debeso PA who had very low education has revealed poor recording system of cases even
not differentiated into type and amount of users and extent of hectare covered has created
difficulties to trace its success rate. This is also coupled with the very weak follow up of
focal persons to handle the system informative. Hence, the information is not often timely
reported to decision makers and shared with the end users and lacks backward and forward
linkage.

Since launching the service, the providers have accumulated various assets in the form of
fixed and working capital. The current asset value has increased for majority of the
providers (Table 13). Having cell phone (56%), purchase of additional knapsack sprayer
(44%) and outstanding loan are particularly intended to expand service delivery.

56
 Table 13.Current Assets and Capital of the PCPS providers, (% of yes)
Indicators Frequency (N=9) %
Owned cell phone 5 55.5
Bought additional knapsack 4 44
Money in cash at hand 8 89
Outstanding loan 4 44
Source: Spray Service Providers survey, 2010

Overall, PCPS providers are relatively better capacitated for most of the indicators
assessed, despite the weak supply-side to chemical inputs and enforcement capacity of
regulations.

4.3.1.4 Perception of Providers’ about Opportunities & Challenges to their Capacity

Understanding the perception of providers, with respect to challenges and opportunities

they currently posses to perform their role help learn their capacity to deliver full and
effective services. In line with this, the following favorable motivating conditions
(opportunities) about their capacity were summarized.
• Technical and material assistance and the devotion of some NGOs to support providers
are highly motivating conditions.
• They perceive themselves as a physician to crop as veterinarians to animals that they
are proud of their profession when they put on all their safety measures.
• The benefit (in form of profit & work experience) from practice further strengthening
their capacity.
• Existence of private input shops for chemical inputs and unions for credit access and
mediating role of IPMS is also an important opportunity.
• While delivering the service meanwhile they are developing social capital within the
society.

It is also imperative to assess the potential supply constraints of providers. Based on

discussion with providers on the constraints facing their day-to-day practice, the top 3
constraints with regard to their capacity were discussed as follows.

57
Table 1.Constraints Perceived by PCPS Providers: rank order (1=first most important)
Providers Perceived Constraints Freq. % Ranking
Lack of incentives from the government 5 55.5 4th
Lack of commercial production to support private practice 4 44 5th
Lack of training in practice management 6 66.7 3rd
Competition with informals who are likely to undercut price 9 100 1st
Weak enforcement mechanism to deal with informals 7 78 2nd
Source: Service Providers Survey, 2010, (N=9)

All providers (100%) perceived the competition with informal providers is discouraging
their morale and ranked it as the most important constraint (Table 14). Informal providers
are local elites who have better financial capacity to supply service on long credit base and
cover a significant number of poor clients in remote areas thus eventually may drain all the
users as their customer. This is basically attributed to absence of license to control the
strategic behavior and interest-of-conflict with informal providers. Their strategic behavior
can be expressed by adulteration and undercutting prices. The very reason forwarded for
adulteration, in FGD with informal providers, was because the public has absorbed a large
proportion of the delivery cost (including equipment and loans) for formal providers; this
resulted in unfair competition in price between formal and informal providers working in
private capacity. This overlap of roles between the formal & informal providers breeding
unfair competition and ineffectiveness or if the roles are clear then there is a weak
implementation of the laid down regulatory rules & legislation regarding licensing and
policing. Unlike CAHWs services, PCPS is quite new, lacks service standards and
guidelines. Lack of appropriate capacity building and timely updating of acquired
knowledge leading to inefficiency at work. About 66.7% of providers’ reported
inadequacy of regular refresher trainings.

Weak enforcement of regulatory framework had exerted significant negative impact on

the system. The providers were reported as many of the chemicals supplied never had
labels other than the name of the product and its manufacturer. Own observation and
informal discussion with district experts indicated that products that are supplied without
enough information about their intended use. These have brought various localized impact
on the environment. The providers also recounted the most resistant to herbicide and

58
aggressive weed, parthenium, which was supposed to be introduced as result of weakly
quarantined improved seed.

4.3.2 Crop Protection Service Coverage and Use

4.3.2.1 Crop Protection Methods and Services

Modern crop spray service in the district is delivered by different partners including
public, formal and informal private providers while traditional service provided by
individual farmer on his own farm. Currently, formal and informal private spray services
are dominant among them. However, the public takes the part only when there is a
significant witness for crop loss. For example, epidemic army worm infestation (Table
15), which has the potential to threat food security at HH and district level.

In addition to modern crop protection measures, the sample HHs also use various
indigenous crop protection measures. The use of bio-pesticide and cultural agronomic
practices are the dominant methods among the HHs for termite pest (Table 15). In post-
harvest services, on account of its availability and affordability, the use of traditional
methods overweighs the others. However, these practices lack formal and regular
documentation for promotion and scaling while in the meantime strengthening and
integrating with modern methods.

Table 2. Major Crop protection methods and services

Services Crops Common Pests & Specific control methods by source
Category affected Diseases Traditional Public Private Private
informal formal
Cereal & Weed Mechanical weeding - Herbicide Herbicide
pulses Termite Bio-pesticides, - - -
cultural
Army worm Bio-pesticides Pesticide Pesticide Pesticide
Stem-borer crop sowing calendar - Pesticide Pesticide
Pre- Wallo bush Bio-pesticides, sowing - Pesticide Pesticide
harvest cricket calendar, cultural
Vegetable Early & late Bio-pesticides, - Pesticide Pesticide
and spies blight, down cultural practices
mildew, aphid
Cereal & Rodents, Fungi Bio-pesticides, - Fungicide, Fungicide,
Post- pulses Weevils capturing rodents rodenticide rodenticide
harvest mechanically,
harvesting calendar
Source: Survey Result , 2010

59
Another important observation is that the community are using pre-harvest services both
for subsistence and cash crops whereas post-harvest services only for subsistence cereal
crops indicating lack of post harvest service for cash crops despite the latter is easily
perishable than the former.

Service charge
The charging rate for crop protection services shows variation within and between
services. Within the service, the charging of both pesticide and herbicide now frequently
fluctuating in response to price of chemical inputs (i.e. responding to market forces).
Viability is a function of charging and demand for services. Between the services,
charging for pesticide is higher than that of herbicide. As cereal crops are the major crops
in study area, the demand for herbicide is also higher than that of pesticide. As a result, the
viability of pesticide is governed by charging rate whereas that of herbicide governed by
demand for service. This tells us where the balance is to maintain the service delivery
within poor society. For a given service, the charging rate of formal providers is
incomparable as this service is not common by the public sector but higher than that of
informal providers. Because services for latter have the characteristics of low dose,
ineffective, poor quality usually expired and adulterated with excess water, pepsi and
coffee which also creating a problem of adverse of selection to users.

Seasonality of service demand

Because of the seasonal nature of disease incidence, the service demand also follows the
same pattern (Figure 6). Post Harvesting Service (PHT) mostly demanded in months
February to May because Alaba falls in Rift Valley and these are months of hot humid
weather inducing high weevil infestation. Herbicide is highly demanded from mid-April to
mid-September where most crops are at vegetative growth. The seasonality nature of

Figure 6. Seasonal Calendar for demand of crop protection service;

Source: Own Design, 2010

60
demand for services has its own impact on delivery efficiency. As a result, some providers
switch on-and-off to other options of businesses like cattle and/or pepper trading leading
to difficulty in maintaining the service in remote PAs.

4.3.2.2 Service Coverage and Uses

The herbicide coverage (110ha) with its focus to cereals and pulses is wider than that of
pesticide (35ha) which is more confined to cash crops (spices, vegetables and chat) and
rarely to others (Table 16). Based on service category, pre harvest service coverage which
encompasses herbicide and pesticide is wider than that of post harvest services which only
takes fungicide for weevil. This locates where the gap is in order to strengthen both supply
and demand-side. Regarding to provider, the service provider in H.Kuke has covered
wider area perhaps due to relatively better education level (Appendix 9), own mobile cell
phone to serve on call basis whenever there is peak demand particularly for herbicide and
physically young strong to travel by bicycle than that of Debeso PA who lacks these
qualities.
Table 3.Crop Spray Service coverage in Hectare, by Provider
Specific Commonly used Average coverage in Ha, by Provider Overa
Services chemical H.Kuke Debeso ll
Herbicide 2-4-D, gran star 124 96 110
Pesticide Malathine, Redomill, 46 24 35
Mancozeb, Diazol
Fungicide / Rodenticides (DDT 12.3@ na na
Rodenticide phosfide), Fungicide
Source: Recordings of Providers, 2010; na=data not available; @ is % of HHs from H.Kuke PA using service

Out of the total 23 PAs covered by the providers, the coverage of extended PAs accounts
for 52.2% (beyond the PAs they were originally assigned). In the district, the total PAs
covered by formal providers is only 29% (Appendix 9) despite the presence of informal
providers in every PA (Figure 7).

61
Figure 7. Private Crop Protection Service Coverage in PAs; Source: Own Design, 2010

The use rate of spray service shows certain variation over PAs and wealth categories
(Table 17). In both PAs the better-off HHs rarely use spray services (at most 37.5%) than
poor and medium classes due to the fact that majority of better-offs having their own
knapsack sprayer. This is because the equipment is available in Union and shops and the
cost is affordable to them. Regarding to service category, the use rate of herbicide is more
than that of pesticide, which is also more than fungicide use thus confirming similar
finding of providers recording in Table 17. This herbicide dominance than pesticide
further contests with where lack of commercialized production to support private practice
mentioned as important constraint in Table 14 and indicating staple crops dominated
production than cash crops which need pesticide. The poor in both PAs are not using
fungicide because they do not have grain stock.

Table 17. Service Use rate by different wealth categories, by PA (% of user HHs)
HHs Specific services
PA Category Herbicide Pesticide Fungicide / Rodenticide Overall
Better-off 50 37.5 25 37.5
Debeso Middle 77.8 66.7 66.7 70.4
Poor 61.5 46 0 53.8
Total user 53.3
Better-off 33.3 33.3 33.3 33.3
H.Kuke Middle 100 87.5 75 87.5
Poor 56.2 43.7 0 50
Total user 56.7
Source: Survey Result, 2010

62
4.3.3 Financial viability of Spray Service

Among the various crop protection services being delivered, only herbicide is analyzed as
a showcase of commercial viability on account of its demand by majority of HHs. The
data that was subjected to Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA) include cash inflows, outflows,
area covered and treatment and labor charging. The cash benefits and the costs of the
business were obtained from the providers’ cash flow reports for the year 2008/9 for
which relatively sufficient data was found and the analysis for possible financial
relationship between income and expenditure is summarized in Box 2.

Box 2. Cost Benefit Analysis for PCPS

CBA was based on information that the service provided on seasonal base and the number
of service days are limited, the data is actual and obtained from providers recording.
Given Data: Chemical cost is to be covered by user; business started with formal credit of
400Br at 7% interest rate, the chemical used is herbicide (2-4-D); average service days
=110days/year i.e. 5 peak months with average of 22 working days per month;
depreciation cost of equips is ignored; Take 1 Ha=4timad.
Charging: 1 knapsack (15 L or 1container) = 5Br/Timad (includes labor & chemical
cost)…………1
Case 1==Field with low weed density needs = 2 container/timad.
Case 2==Field with high weed density needs = 4 container/timad.
Thus, on average one timad consumes= 3 containers of herbicide………...… 2
On average a given service provider serves 1ha/day. Labor cost = 2Br/container….…. 3
Given these information: Thus, for a hectare = 4timad * 3 (from 2 above) = 12
containers required. The user customer pays 12*5Br (from 1 above) = 60 Br.
Gross income: 1) The provider gains 60Br/ha/day and, annual income is 110*60=6,600Br
2) credit from union=400Br, 3) overall= 6600+400=7000Br
Expenditure: There are 20 knapsack containers can be prepared from 1L of 2-4-D
chemical. In 110 days in a year, 110ha require 66L of 2-4-D.
1) On average 1L of 2-4-D costs 30Br. Total cost is 66L*30Br = 1,980Br.
2) Maintenance cost for knapsack sprayer and nozzle (accessories)=1000Br
3) Labor cost of 2Br per container gives= 2640Br per year (from 3 above).
4) Loan pay to loaning institution=400+(400*0.07)*12=400+336=736Br

63
 5) Overall=1980+1000+2640+736=6356Br
Average net income from the service per year for individual provider = 7,000 - 6,356 =
644Br/year or the B/C= 7000/6356=1.10 i.e. B/C ≥ 1. This indicates that, if the current
service delivery trend continues, the spray service would remain financially viable even if
the current costs of chemical inputs increased by 10%.
Source: Own Computation, 2010

4.3.4 Perception of User and Potential user Farmers

Table 18 shows the variation of perception of HHs within and between PAs. HHs in
H.Kuke PA (71%) were better satisfied with the service due to better performance of the
provider than HHs in Debeso PA (63%) where HHs feel some shading of dissatisfaction.
In both H.Kuke and Debeso PAs better-offs were better perceived an increase in crop
yield, 87.5 and 83.3%, respectively, than middle and poor classes because they had
comparative advantage to use service from different sources (from private and their own
spray services with normal dosage and recommended frequency). The same reason holds
true for effectiveness. In general, the better-off and middle class HHs in both PAs were
better perceived for all indicators under investigation than the poor who mostly use the
service with poor quality and lower frequency from informal providers.

Table 4.Perception about the use of spray service, by user/potential user farmers
Perception about spray services Service users, %
H.Kuke PA Better-off Middle Poor Overall
Service effective, yes 87.5 88.9 42.8 73
Overall crop yield, increased 87.5 66.7 57 70.4
Satisfaction to service, satisfied 87.5 83.3 42.8 71
Debeso PA
Service effective, yes 83.3 75.7 50 69.7
Overall crop yield, increased 83.3 71 62.5 72
Satisfaction to service, satisfied 66.7 71 50 62.6
Source: Own Survey Result, 2010

Overall, the coverage of PCPS is herbicide dominated, sufficiently satisfied the nearby
PAs particularly the better-offs and middle class users.

64
4.3.4.1 Comparison of Crop Protection Methods as Perceived by Farmers

The service users more positively perceived traditional practice for its availability,
timeliness and environmental safety and used by majority of poor but criticized for its
affordability as it consumes more labor than others (Table 19). Nonetheless, in the worst
scenario when pest and diseases have the potential to threaten food security, it is advisable
to use chemicals in economic way (Save the children, 2001). On account of their quantity
and access to chemicals from black market, private informal are better perceived for
timeliness, affordability and availability than formal providers. However, as an output of
formal trainings and presence of safety measures, in contrast, private formal are better
perceived for environmental and human health than informal providers. In general, the
service is better for its accessibility for all providers. However, improvement in other
indicators and progress monitoring that involves users in defining the performance criteria
to be monitored would contribute more positively.

Table 19.Ranking of different providers for various indicators, by user/potential user

farmers
Indicators HHs ranking of Spray service providers
Traditional Private informal Private formal
Accessible /available 5 4 4
Cost affordable 2 5 4
Timeliness/responsive to demand 5 5 3
Human health, safe 3 2 5
Environmentally, safe 5 2 5
Source: HH Survey Result, 2010; *Rating: 1=very poor, 2=poor, 3=moderate, 4=very good, 5=excellent

4.3.4.2 SWOT Analysis for Private Crop Protection Service

When services are delivered in remote rural PAs, it is notoriously difficult to evaluate.
Because they take place within challenging and rapidly changing milieu, where
information is usually scarce, unreliable and difficult to collect. The priorities of providers,
understandably, are often been output rather than impact and learning. Thus, thorough and
valid assessment is usually impractical. However, without credible evaluation it’s difficult
to show that services delivered in remote PAs met objectives or made a worthwhile

65
impact. Recognizing the importance, hence, the SWOT analysis for private crop protection
service (Table 20) conducted jointly by WoARD experts and key informants from IPMS.

Table 20.SWOT analysis of PCPS

Strengths and benefits of delivery system Weaknesses of delivery system
• Provision of quality service to users in • Limited availability of services and
short and long term credit modality insufficient integration of indigenous with
• High ability to identify localized pests, modern practices
diseases and respective chemicals for • Providers are highly profit-oriented than
protection client-orientation
• Recording of achievements • The system didn’t include women as
• An endeavors to promote bio-pesticides provider;
use • Lack of practical oriented capacity building
• Provision of startup materials & later program to providers
attachment of providers to unions to • Weak coordination and information
sustain the system; exchange between service providers and
• Market promotions on market day to WoARD
inform the existence of service and its • Weak public regulation and supervision
providers
Opportunities for sustainability & expansion Threats for expansion and sustainability
• Presence of the district existing extension • Ever increasing cost of chemicals and
service equipments may reduce WTP of poor
• Existence of private input shops address farmers in remote PAs
constraints to availability of agrochemicals • Due to under dose use of chemicals by
• The existence of Mencheno union and informal providers, minor pests becoming
MFI for credit service delivery resistant and major pest this eventually
• Close cooperation between community might increase pests community in the
and providers while living with & to- environment
community help internalize the problem as • Farmers may be reluctance to use private
if their own services due to both production and price
• An increasing demand for services risks.
• Direct charges provides the right • Poor economic status of HHs in remote
incentives for the providers to deliver the areas might hinder users’ ability to pay

66
 services • Seasonal nature of demand for service may
• Mutual benefit for providers (gain from dissolve sustainability of service
service fee) & users (reduction in yield • Lack of both professional and trade
loss) licenses
• given the existing market-led policy, the • Incomplete or partial implementation and
public sector initiative to support private the near-reversal of policy reforms
sector • Institutional instability expressed by
• The existence of providers help as a real frequent restructuring and high staff
model for others to enter turnover and low commitment and
• Existence of various NGOs & 46 DAs in motivation of staff in public sector
the field based in FTCs witnesses strong
support
Source: WoARD Experts and Key informants Discussion, 2010

For the future expansion and sustainability of service delivery, it is important that the
system should focus on these strengths. The provision of startup kits & later attachment of
providers to unions and introduction of bio-pesticides use showed up as an important
strength of the system. So, the system has to keep on it and build at their good reputation
in the community. Especially linkages with private input shops, Union and WoARD and
IPMS are important, as these maintain supply of essential resources and need to be
cultivated. Absence of female providers perhaps due to cultural burrier was highlighted as
an important weakness. But they are more efficient even more than the professional
provider if given adequate and relevant trainings. This will increase their knowledge on
farming activities, give them an opportunity to income, and enhance their status within the
HH and the community as a whole. On the other hand, the seasonal nature of demand for
service and lack of both professional and trade licenses for providers are important threats
that may dissolve the sustainability of the system. Hence, this finding has significant
implications for determining where the crop protection service delivery system in study
PAs and elsewhere in the district and should focus its effort.

Lessons learnt
In general the following lessons were learnt from the existing PCPS practices:

67
• PCP service can easily affected by any shocks because they directly deal with the most
vulnerable group in the communities whose livelihoods are purely smallholder
subsistence farming.
• The crop sprayer operated single person enterprises have been expanding to hire two
or more labor to share load during peak time while the CAHWs has remained single
person enterprise.
• The farmers are willing to pay for various crop protection services if the services
would improve their income as farmers and empower them financially.

4.3.5 Willingness and Ability to Pay for Private Crop Protection Services

Crop protection services in the study area are already being paid for by the users. Payment
has been started for the services that bring an immediate benefit to the users and
substantial profit for providers, such as pesticide and herbicide services. As far as output
of the service is considered, reports from providers were encouraging as it reduced yield
loss (Section 4.2.1). However, private service delivery has the potential to exclude poor
and marginalized groups who are unable to pay. Thus, alongside the potential merits of
privatization, it is imperative to recognize the perceptions of the affected groups, the poor,
while the extenuating factors peculiar to crop protection service users and non-users may
be critical and will be discussed in this section.

Willingness to pay for the service was gauged on the basis of the assessment of service fee
and perceptions of users/potential users on the prevailing charging rates for specific
services. Majority (51.7%) of the current herbicide users and non-users perceive the
prevailing charge is reasonable though the users overweigh the proportion (Table 21). On
the other hand, about 63.3% of pesticide users perceive the current charging is higher to
them in fact non-users outweigh in contrast. Majority of non-users perceive the current
charge is higher (45% for herbicide and 77% for pesticide) and are not using the service.
In both services very few proportion of HHs (13% for herbicide and 11.7% for pesticide)
perceived the current fee is lower and prepared to pay a little higher fee for quality
services i.e. 6.25 and 11.86 Br for herbicide and pesticide respectively (Table 22).

68
Table 5. Perception to crop protection services Charging
Crop protection Services Lower Reasonable Higher
Perception to the current prevailing charge rate for herbicide, %
User 12.5 62.5 25
Non-user 14.3 40.6 45.1
Overall 13.3 51.7 35
Perception to the current prevailing charge rate for pesticide, %
User 12.5 37.5 50
Non-user 10.7 12.5 76.8
Overall 11.7 25 63.3
Source: HH Survey Result, 2010

Data presented in Table 22 presents descriptive results related to mean willingness to pay.
The survey revealed that the respondents are willing to pay for quality services despite the
difference in amount of fee for various services. The reason pointed out by HHs (35% for
herbicide and 63.3% for pesticide) were they couldn’t afford the current charge but could
pay if the service charges could be reduced. This group of respondents is willing to pay for
herbicide 2.99 and for pesticide 5.00Br, with standard deviation 1.1 and 1.49, respectively,
due to the reason that they can’t afford more than the stated fee.

Table 22. Proportion of HHs willing to pay (WTP) for different spray service chargings
Service Perception to current prevailing Mean WTP (Br) % of willing
type charging respondents
Herbicide Current charging is higher 2.99 (1.10) 35
Current charging is Reasonable 5.00 (00) 51.7
Current charging is lower 6.25 (0.50) 13.3
Pesticide Current charging is higher 5.01(1.49) 63.3
Current charging is Reasonable 10 (.00) 25
Current charging is lower 11.86 (0.56) 11.7
Source: HH Survey Result, 2010; NB: Numbers in parenthesis are standard deviations

69
4.4 Livestock Production and Marketing Systems in study area
Cattle are the dominant livestock type in the study area accounting for about 87% of
TLU‡‡ (Appendix 11) and owned by about 92% of the households. The average number of
cattle owned by households is 2.8 TLU ranging from 2.1 in Debeso to 3.8 in Lay Bedene
PA. About 66% of the households have at least one ox and similarly about 80% of the
households have at least one cow/heifer, pointing to the importance of both oxen and cows
in the household economy (Table 23a). The average number of oxen and cows owned by
households is 1.13 and 1.52, with standard deviation 1 and 1.3, respectively.

Table 23a. Livestock ownership pattern, % of owners

Livestock species Asore L.Bedene H.Kuke Debeso Overall
Proportion owning at least an ox/bull 60 90 56.7 56.7 65.8
Proportion owning at least a cow/heifer 80 90 76.7 73.3 80
Goats or sheep ownership 66.7 93.3 76.7 46.7 70.8
Donkey ownership 36.7 70 43.3 36.7 46.7
Mean TLU 3 4.6 2.6 2.4 3.17
HHs selling butter, >55% 80 83.3 90 76.7 85
HHs engaged in cattle fattening 16.7 16.7 23.3 40 24.2
Source: Own Survey Result, 2010

On account of proximity to main road to Addis and big market cities, livestock fattening
and marketing in Debeso and Hulegeba Kuke PAs is important source of cash income.
This is more envisaged when low proportion of HHs, nearly 57% in each PA, own draught
oxen. The low TLU in these PAs further justifies that these HHs have opted to marketing
of livestock than storing as wealth. Due to nearness to Kulito market and having more
improved breeds (Table 23b), about 90% of HHs in Hulegeba Kuke PA sale more than
55% of butter while consuming the remaining proportion in house. As a rule of culture,
milk is not sold at all in any interviewed HHs in any PAs. Population of equines is very
low particularly those used for transportation of human such as horses and none of the
HHs owned mule. This is because all study PAs are topographically fairly flat thus 56.7%
of HHs own bicycle for transportation perhaps due to lack of feed and high cost to
purchase mule. From 48.3% of HHs who owned equines, in 46.7% HHs, the equines
reported are only donkeys pointing the dominance of donkeys as pack animals.

‡‡
1 Tropical Livestock Units (TLU)= 250 kg live weight

70
4.4.1 Livestock Input use and yield trends

As farming in all study PAs is mainly subsistence oriented and mixed crop–livestock
production system and open grazing is more common and stall feeding is almost non-
existent, HH survey was attempted to consider only some inputs as real inputs. Crop
protection like weeding of crop fields also yields feed. As discussion to key informant
farmers, use of communal grazing was common usually right after collection of crops
from the field and the average grazing hours in the study PAs is 7 hours/day during
harvesting, and in dry season when there is no pasture, the time of grazing on communal
fields is increased to 10hours/day. On-farm improved fodder production is not common,
only 7.5% of sampled HHs, except for Asore and Lay Bedene PAs where the IPMS
introduced male goat breeds for mating. For part of this reason and where 23 and 17% of
model farmers were found in Asore and Lay Bedene respectively, in general, these PAs
are more intensive in livestock input use. These PAs are also with relatively better access
to animal health service when Asore on its proximity to public health center and presence
of CAHW, and Lay Bedene with an active and competent CAHW. This finding further
confirms the impact of CAHWs service on animal husbandry in changing farmers’ attitude
to use more livestock input than other PAs. In sum, more than 86% of HHs in these PAs
reported that overall cattle yield is increasing for which improved livestock health services
had positive contribution.
Table 23b. Livestock input use and over all yield trends, % of respondents
Improved inputs Study PAs Overall
For cattle Asore L.Bedene H.Kuke Debeso
Improved breed 16.7 16.7 20 6.7 15
AI service 13.3 16.7 20 6.7 14.2
On-farm improved fodder 10 6.7 10 3.3 7.5
production
Purchase feed 13.3 16.7 6.7 6.7 10.8
Hired labor 10.5 9.1 0 9.5 7.3
Overall yields trend increasing 86.7 93.3 86.7 86.7 88.3
Small ruminants
Improved breed 13.3 6.7 0 0 5
On-farm improved fodder 6.7 3.3 0 0 2.5
production
Overall yields trend increasing 60 76.7 66.7 70 68.4
Source: Own Survey, 2010
Most farmers use crop residues as stubble as they do not collect and feed their animals in
the field. Collected crop residues are usually used when there is shortage of natural pasture

71
and stubble. Purchased feed is not common for rural HHs. With the expansion of cropland,
which has reduced the availability of natural pasture, crop residues are becoming
increasingly important in all study PAs. In each PAs only few (14%) model farmers who
are using AI service on their account of targeting improved breeds by WoARD (Table
23b). Only in few PAs farmers were using watering trough for livestock, otherwise,
livestock are mainly watered in community ponds and few use Bilate River. Herding and
watering are the major activities that require labor in livestock management. Out of 64.2%
HHs hired labor for various agricultural activities, only 7.8% goes to livestock
management while the rest allocated to other agricultural activities. FHHHs rely heavily
on family labor for milking and barn cleaning than hired labor. In general, improved input
use trend shows relatively greater amount allocated to large cattle than small ruminant
animals.

4.4.2 Opportunities and Challenges for Livestock production

Among opportunities to the development of livestock sector, sampled HHs put animal
health care and its coverage at the top of the list and they were listened recommending the
necessity of improving its delivery. Nearly 41% of livestock owners reported the
availability of livestock market as the second most important opportunity, ranging from
7% of farmers in Asore to 17% in Debeso PA.

Table 23c.Livestock production Opportunities and Challenges ranking, (% of respondents)

Ranking in every study PAs Opportunities & Ranking
Asore L.Bedene H.Kuke Debeso challenges overall
overall study PAs study PAs
Opportunities
CAHWs CAHWs presence Market availability Market CAHWs 1st
presence(86.7) (83.3) (66.7) availability(76.7) presence(50.8)
Market Market Public Health Public Health Market 2nd
availability availability(13.3) Service Service availability(41)
(6.7) presence/16 presence/17
Constraints
Feed shortage Feed shortage Feed shortage Feed shortage Feed shortage 1st
(66.7) (53.3) (56.7) (66.7) (60.8)
Disease (20) Disease (20) Disease (13.3) Water shortage Disease (16.7) 2nd
(16.7)
Water Water shortage Water shortage Disease (13.3) Water shortage 3rd
shortage (6.7) (13.3) (10) (11.7)
Source: Survey Result, 2010

72
Lack of feed has been considered the most important challenge to all livestock owners in
every study PAs. The second important constraint is disease, which on average was
reported by about 17% of the households (Table 23c).

Table 23d. Major livestock parasites & diseases & treatment measures
Study PAs (% of responding HHs) Parasites & Ranking
Asore L.Bedene H.Kuke Debeso Diseases overall overall
study PAs study PAs
For cattle
Anthrax (40) Anthrax (40) Anthrax Anthrax (56.7) Anthrax (43.3) 1st
(36.7)
Internal parasite Internal Internal Internal Internal 2nd
(23) parasite parasite (30) parasite (16.7) parasite (25.8)
(33.3)
Bottle-jaw Bottle-jaw Bottle-jaw Bottle- Bottle-jaw/15.8 3rd
(16.7) (13.3) (20) jaw/13.3
Small ruminants
Pasteurollosi Fassiollosis Fassiollosis Fassiollosis/40/ Fassiollosis/40/ 1st
(30) (40) (56)
Fassiollosis Lung worm Pasteurollosi Pasteurollosi Pasteurollosi 2nd
(Liver fluke) (internal (23.3) (33.3) (25.8)
(26.7) parasite)(16.7
Lung worm/ Pasteurollosi Lung worm / Lung worm/ Lung worm/ 3rd
parasite (26.7) (16.7) parasite (10) parasite (20) parasite (18.3)
Improved treatment measures Treatment Ranking
measures over overall
study PAs study PAs
Oxy treatment Oxy Oxy Oxy treatment Oxy treatment 1st
(63.3) treatment treatment (56.7) (53.3)
(46.7) (46.7)
Tablet service Tablet service Tablet Tablet service Tablet service 2nd
(26.7) (43.3) service(33.3) (23.3) (31.7)
Castration Castration Tick control Tick control Tick control 3rd
service (10) service (6.7) (10) (20) (8.3)
Source: Own Computational Result, 2010

However, the problem is more serious in Asore and Lay Bedene where many farmers,
20% in each, reported the problem and specific diseases are summarized in Table 23d.
Due to the risk associated with livestock production as result of recurrent drought and
disease outbreaks that incur high social and economic disasters in study area, communities
in Asore and Debeso PAs have established coping mechanisms for HHs through
traditional livestock insurance mechanisms by raising money to affected HHs. Own
observation and historical analysis of HH profile in study PAs shows where crop loss due
to diseases, pests and natural calamities have been compensated through food and cash aid
indicating support to agrarian communities seldom considered feed aid and compensation
to losses of livestock in all sampled HHs. The next problem, in order of importance, is

73
serious shortage of water where majority of HHs watering in ponds of poor quality water
and which is further justified by the communities ranking of internal parasite as the second
most important animal health problem. The temporary indigenous response to shortage of
water is to move their animals to the neighboring PAs where there is perennial river and to
highland PAs within and outside the district. The second option is to sell animals to
decreasing their animal population. Sale of animals is starting from the gestate cows with
the intension to make easy transport of animals for long distance in search for water and
feed and to minimize the competitions for feed among animals.

Despite the seasonal pattern of improved animal health service delivery, 53% of HHs
perceived antibiotic oxytetracycline treatment as the first among improved animal health
care measures in response to the first ranked anthrax animal disease.

74
4.5 Community Animal Health Workers’ (CAHWs) Services and Uses

As reported in the previous section (Section 4.4.2), disease is one of the major constraints
of livestock production in the study area. The public sector is the main provider of animal
health diagnostic and treatment service and periodic vaccination against large scale
outbreak of animal diseases. The livestock keepers also have their own indigenous
knowledge of dealing with animal health problems and can access service from private
sources, particularly veterinary drugs. However, publicly provide animal health service are
not easily accessible on time, its coverage is limited and often the essential vet drugs are
not sufficiently available, On the other hand, traditional methods of treating animal disease
may not always effective, and the purchase and use of vet drugs from market, often from
informal suppliers raises concerns relating to effectiveness, human health safety and
environmental impact.

The Improving Productivity and Market Success (IPMS) project had conducted
participatory assessment on the challenges and potential for improving animal health
service in selected PAs. Subsequently, IPMS in collaboration with an Italian NGO (LVIA)
and Alaba WoARD initiated the concept of community-based primary animal health
service delivery through trained Community Animal Health Workers’ (CAHWs) and at
experimental level in selected PAs including the study area. This section deals with both
the supply and demand sides of the service that has been provided by the CAHWs since
three years or so ago. Qualitative and quantitative evidence are presented and discussed on
both the capacity of CAHWs for primary animal health service delivery and the demand of
users for the service. The results of the assessment are scrutinized on the levels of
satisfaction with the performance of the service by farmers who are users or potential
users as well as by the other key stakeholders such as Alaba WoARD, IPMS and LVIA.

4.5.1 Capacity of CAHWs

Like crop protection service, the provision of primary animal health service by CAHWs,
which is effective, safe, environmentally sound and financial profitable and sustainable,
requires capacity. The capacity need for such service provision comprise human or
personal capacity of the service providers, financial capacity, and network and linkage of
CAHWs for accessing essential knowledge/information, finance/credit, material/inputs.

75
4.5.1.1 Human Capacity

Like the case of private delivery of formal crop protection service discussed in the
preceding section (Section 4.3), the capacity, i.e., technical, practical and entrepreneurial
skills of each of the CAHWs is crucial. Personal capabilities of the service providers is, in
turn, a function of their levels of education, prior relevant experience, relevant formal
skill-oriented training, and their extent of access to technical backstopping and other
relevant knowledge/information sources.

There are only four CAHWs in the study area, who are over 40 years old and all males.
The age and sex composition of the CAHWs in the PAs are different from the experiences
of many developed countries where females and relatively younger (between 30 and 40
years) reported to serve as CAHWs in countries like South Africa (Odendaal, 1994 as
cited in Sen and Chander, 2003). Currently the CAHWs are engaged in the service on part-
time base as a non-farm activity.

The education levels of the CAHWs ranges from grade 1 to 8 and the average level of
education is grade six (Table 24). Of the 4 CAHWs, 1 (CAHW operating in Asore) and 3
(CAHWs operating in the remaining PAs) have formal education levels of, respectively, 1-
4 and 5-8 grades. The education levels of all the four CAHWs is less than 8th grade and
none of them reported prior experience relevant to the service. In contrast, in countries
with well-established similar service provision, CAHWs were reported to have several
years of experience as informal service provider. According to Sen and Chander (2003), in
the USA CAHWs had 13 years of prior experience although their education level was also
less than 8th grade.

Table 6.Educational Profile and Practical Experience of CAHWs

Education interval (Grade) Average Education (Grade) Frequency %
1-4 3 1 25
5-8 7 3 75
Overall 6 4 100
Source: Own Computation, 2010

In addition to experience and formal education, access to relevant trainings by CAHWs is

important. The ever changing environment and emerging animal diseases call for

76
continuous upgrading of capacity and skills of the CAHWs, which go beyond the technical
training. Table 25 provides the summary of different formal trainings conducted to build
the capacities of the CAHWs. Since the initiation of the service three years ago, at least 7
formal trainings were organized and conducted to build the capacities of the CAHWs:
basics of animal health service (organized by LVIA for 3 weeks); practical demonstration
of animal anatomy (organized by IPMS and WoARD for 3 weeks); the role of CAHWs
(organized by Alaba WoARD for 1 week); pregnancy diagnosis (conducted by Southern
Region Agricultural Research Institute for a week); and 3 refreshment trainings
(conducted by WoARD and IPMs). LVIA took the first initiative and contributed a lion’s
share in offering inception trainings. Training on basics of animal health service was
attended by all CAHWs while others were delivered to the current 4 active CAHWs.

Table 25.Perception to practical skill-orientation of various trainings

Types of Trainings Rated value frequency %
Basic technical training on Animal Health service delivery 3 4 100
On-the-job training on role of CAHWs 3 3 75
Practical training on pregnancy diagnosis in cattle 5 3 75
Demonstration of animal Anatomy and field trip 5 4 100
Refreshment trainings 3 4 100
*1=highly theoretical, 2=slightly theoretical, 3=marginally practical, 4=practical, 5=highly practical oriented.

Source: Discussion with CAHWs, 2010: N=4

The specific topics covered by the trainings include topics such as use and handling of
drugs including issue of environmental and human health, operation and maintenance of
equipments, disease calendars and ethno-veterinary practices both on practical and
theoretical sessions. Unlike crop spray providers, CAHWs have been provided with
certificates that enable them to formally provide the service, though not licensed. The
result of the assessment on the perceptions of the CAHWs about the skill-orientation of
the trainings they attended revealed that only two of seven trainings were rated 5 (highly
skill-oriented) and found practically useful. The CAHWs also felt that there were
important gaps still needed to be addressed such as skill for the provision of animal
vaccination and extension education related to animal health.

An investigation result about the major sources of knowledge and information regarding
recommended drugs and equipment shows, in order of importance, formal training,

77
CAHWs-to-CAHWs knowledge sharing and information from animal health assistances
(AHAs) based at FTC as the main sources. In similar fashion, the sources for knowledge
and information regarding drugs handling and storage and use, disposal of
unutilized/expired drugs and container were found formal trainings organized by LVIA,
IPMS, regional BoARD, research institutions, labeling by drug suppliers on the containers
and advice by drug vendors.

Regarding quality and safety assurance, supervision and monitoring is done primarily by
the WoARD, Animal Health and Production Work Process. Other institutions such as
IPMS and Farm Africa are providing technical backstopping. However, the discussion
with CAHWs and other key informants revealed lack of professional license from
WoARD and trade licenses from trade and industry office and weak recognition and
supervision of public sector to ensure quality CAHWs service. The weak attention given
by process owner to supervise CAHWs in this case was reported to be due to a
combination of low motivation and transport constraint in public sector which is further
manifested when CAHWs lack clear professional and geographic delineation about their
roles and responsibilities. For example, the CAHW in Gerema PA conducting minor
operations, while that of Rokenen PA is not reporting at all.

4.5.1.2 Storage and Handling of equipment/materials and drugs

Material and equipment capacity in terms of store and essential basic facilities for
transportation and communication is another component to capacity of CAHWs. During
inception, LVIA has provided various materials and equipments, and start up drugs
channeling through WoARD. However, the provision was not complete and lacking
appropriate safety measures, shelves and separate rooms for safe storage of drugs which
was clearly manifested when CAHWs using plastic sheet as a hood for abdominal
examination, and storing drugs in boxes of clothes. A CAHW from Asore PA also
reported lack of cattle crush and the injure from cattle and equines in the course of
castration and examination. Whilst this is the fact, yet, CAHWs are delivering substantial
services closer to the rural community with missing safety facilities and equipment.

The assessment on CAHWs access to materials and other utilities reported the difficulties
they went to access and use adequate and reliable sources of drugs, equipments and
technical supports. They frequently face the shortage and even absence of drugs in near

78
reach. The terms of access to drugs varies following the pattern of disease incidence and
respective demand for services (Figure 9). All CAHWs do not have a habit of storing
drugs at their stock for time of short supply perhaps in fear of expiration, lack of separate
storage room and sufficient capital. The access to drug from WoARD is occasional and
usually come very late after the disease caused significant damage. Moreover, there is no
drug retailer channel in rural far PAs to maintain reliable supply where majority of
livestock keepers reside and disease incidence is more prevalent.

It is also imperative to assess the perception of CAHWs with regard to the timely
availability, quality and costliness of the drugs purchased from different sources and the
comparison is presented in Table 26. Currently there are three potential sources of drugs
in the study area. Accordingly, CAHWs ranked the private vet drug vendors first for its
timely availability followed by the Mencheno Union input shop. This is because private
vet drug vendors are always open and drugs are available in kind and quantity. For case of
quality of drugs considering expiry date, chemical composition and prescription and
direction for use CAHWs selected WoARD as the best than others because public sector
purchase drugs from well known source and supply with careful handling and perfect
direction to use. The CAHWs discussion further evaluated the costliness of drugs and
preferred WoARD to others because drugs purchased at reasonable price since it absorbed
all its transportation and personnel expenses unlike the private vendors where they transfer
all costs to buyers. But in all cases CAHWs are taking the third and fourth prices and
cannot purchase from wholesalers at factory gate price due to lack of trade license.

Table 26. CAHWs Perception about supply of drugs

CAHWs Rating, %
Drug sources Score Rank
Excellent Very good Good Poor Very Poor
Timely availability
Mencheno input shop .00 50 50 .00 .00 350 2
Private vet drug vendors 50 25 25 .00 .00 425 1
WoARD .00 25 50 25 .00 300 3
Quality of chemicals
Mencheno input shop 50 25 25 .00 .00 425 2
Private vet drug vendor .00 25 50 25 .00 300 3
WoARD 50 50 .00 .00 .00 450 1
Costliness
Mencheno input shop 25 50 25 .00 .00 400 2
Private vet drug vendor .00 .00 75 25 .00 275 3
WoARD 75 25 .00 .00 .00 475 1
NB: Score is calculated by assigning 5 for excellent, 4 for very good, 3 for good, 2 for poor and 1 for very poor. Then multiply % of
observation by the score and finally adding the total observation; N=4
Source: Own Computation, 2010

79
Thus, CAHWs require being trade and professionally licensed in order to access drugs and
necessary equipments at reasonable price from reliable sources so that maximize their
profit margins from their practice.

The availability of means of transport is important to facilitate mobility and timely

response to acute animal disease and for easy access to reliable sources of drugs. CAHWs
in their discussion also pointed the problem with having mule for transport as its cost of
purchase is very high and supply of feed is difficult, hence, all CAHWs, except the one in
Gerema PA who has bicycle, render the service on foot. The discussion has also proven
the importance of communication facility, however, only the CAHW in Asore PA having
cell phone and serving on call basis. As a result, advice or help often arrived too late for
CAHWs in far PAs. Overall, lack of transportation and communication capacity has
exerted particular impact on reporting and referring system.

Own personal observation and informal discussion with experts about the use of drug
containers and expired drugs disposal indicated that all CAHWs are either reusing
(syringes and needles) or selling the containers for handling water and oil/gas for local
kuraz. The CAHWs did not report the availability of expired drugs as they do not store
drugs for long period. But some of the effects pointed out in the discussion were the death
of bees and poultry as they drunk the washed out water of containers, morbidity to other
animals when calcite (tick control) contact with grass if applied while the animal is in the
grazing field.

4.5.1.3 Finance or credit linkages

Access to credit and soft loans defined as low-interest loans with less-stringent conditions,
plus supplementing income from horn and hoof trimming service (Appendix 10), were
perceived as paramount important for CAHWs. One plausible explanation for this is that
CAHWs perceived access to credit and soft loans as critical because of the high start-up
costs, which according to Talib (CAHWs focal person in WoARD) were as high as 740
USD (in December 2009) for CAHWs service delivery in study PAs. However, the
current agricultural credit service in the study PAs and elsewhere in the district is
promising in promoting access to private sources of credit through farmer unions such as
Mencheno. This was reduced the transaction costs for CAHWs at start up of the service.

80
Based on the typology, the CAHWs made four types of linkage viz-a-viz linkage for
knowledge and information, input and material, regulation and certification, and linkage
for finance and credit were presented in generic linkage map (Figure 8). During inception
CAHWs were made strong linkage for knowledge and information with LVIA (now
phased out). But IPMS soon take over the responsibility and supporting with the relevant
information. Other organizations in this regard include Mencheno Union and retailers in
vendor shop providing knowledge on use and handling of drugs; WoARD, Farm Africa
and Awassa/Melkassa research centers on training and demonstrations. The networking of
CAHWs for input and material is also another wing need due attention. In this regard
LVIA has shouldered a lot of share with provision of startup kits and equipment and later
IPMS and WoARD were continued in facilitating and supporting the necessary materials.
Though CAHWs are professionally certified the linkage for regulation and licensing also
weak. Linkage for finance and credit is the central issue to cover initial investment and
operating costs. Even though CAHWs do have a reasonable knowledge and resource
linkages with actors they are rarely seen as important clients by rural financial institutions,
Omo microfinance and agricultural rural fund, except Mencheno Union which has played
substantial role as the sole source of formal credit for startup of service.

Research centers
Research centers
10
Mencheno
10
Community 16
Mencheno
Community 15 16 union
union
(Rural PAs)
(Rural PAs) 15 1
14
13 1
12 14
13
12 11 CAHWs
CAHWs 2
11
3 2
7

7 4 3 Public veterinary
4 Public veterinary
Projects: LVIA, 5
service
service (WoARD)
(WoARD)
Projects: LVIA, IPMS,
IPMSFarmFarm Africa
Africa 9 8 5
Private vet vendors 6

Private vet vendors 6

(Siyane
(Siyane, ZalanZalan
vendors)

Figure 8. Actors Linkage Map showing access to knowledge, inputs and finance to
CAHWs; Source: Own Design, 2010

81
Linkage Descriptions
Ke or
y 1st Most important linkage 2nd most important 3rd most important 4th most important
1 Supply drugs, equipments 9 Facilitate links with stakeholders
2 Report disease outbreak, report monthly work 10 Farmers-to-farmers input & knowledge linkage
3 Supply drugs, facilitate & monitor, technical support 11 Provision of startup kits, train, facilitate
4 Authorize and regulate 12 Assist in M&E
5 Authorize and regulate 13 Provide information
6 Report disease outbreak, submit monthly report 14 Select trainees, report disease outbreak
7 Supply drugs 15 Treat important animal diseases
8 Report disease outbreak 16 Training, knowledge & information linkage

But the linkage for research and extension is particularly weak. Hence, recognizing the
gap, IPMS project in the district has been facilitating relevant credit support and also
conducting research on ways of strengthening the CAHWs role in services provision. In
addition, CAHWs had reported having discussion with each other to share experiences,
and reciprocated and borrowed drugs and equipment in some cases. Furthermore, they are
seeking new linkage with CAHWs in neighboring Shashigo district to share knowledge
and information on financial management, and with newly phased-in NGOs like Farm
Africa for technical support, and WoARD for promotion and regulation of service since
still informal providers are jeopardizing the service delivery market. Hence, this study
stresses a better definition of linkage strategies as a fundamental approach in improving
the performance of interaction among these actors.

An assessment conducted to look at record keeping of treatment, achievements, revenues

and expenditures and reporting and referral of cases has revealed various features on
progress of the service delivery system. The CAHW in Lay Bedene PA who is relatively
better educated has adopted better record keeping practice, recording events in separate
formats given by WoARD than CAHW in Asore although latter reported to have a good
practice of referring animal disease cases when he felt difficult to treat. However, the
latter is facing a lot of complains from his customers about his competence and untimely
response to demand may be due to his lower education level and tightened with a lot of
political affairs and having better capital. Overall, observation regarding the record
keeping system indicates a lot remains to be improved, for example, even quantitative
such as types of service users, animal treated, cases referred, response to treatment, etc.
However, in nearby PAs, Asore where the public supports the development of basic

82
infrastructure influence interaction with experts, the speed of advice from experts and
referring of serious cases was enhanced.

As far as the current asset value accumulated is considered, since the inception of the
service, CAHWs have accumulated various assets for service delivery in form of fixed and
working capital. The survey showed an increase in current asset for some of CAHWs
(Table 27). Purchase of additional equipment, construction of separate house for drugs
(most recent) and outstanding loan are rather an investment asset for service delivery
system. Whereas bicycle and cell phone are part of operating capital help further expand
the service territory.

Table 7. Current Assets and Capital of CAHWs for Service Delivery, (% of yes)
Indicators Frequency (N=4) %
Construction of separate house for drugs storage 1 25
Transport facility, bicycle 1 25
Owned cell phone 1 25
Bought additional equipment 1 25
Outstanding loan 3 75
Source: CAHWs survey, 2010

4.5.1.4 Perception of CAHWs about Opportunities and Challenges to their Capacity

The perceptions of CAHWs regarding their motivating factors to continue and expand the
delivery scope were assessed and hence all CAHWs share similar perceptions on course of
service delivery. Here, the following perceived opportunities of CAHWs regarding their
capacity were summarized.
• The existence of private sector and the district existing extension service is an
opportunity to support the service delivery
• Existence of private input shops address constraints to availability of drugs to some
extent
• Existence of Mencheno Union for credit service delivery is an opportunity to be
exploited.
• The IPMS and WoARD effort for facilitation and training
• Huge public investment in deploying 48DAs, 13AHAs and 5vets in animal health
field, judicious use of 30 FTCs in the district are another niche to be utilized.

83
• The emerging NGOs such as Farm Africa supporting animal health service delivery
system
• The current government investment in public goods (roads, telex and rural
electrification) has numerous opportunities for communication and transportation
facility.
Based on CAHWs group discussion on supply constraints (Table 28) facing the delivery
practice, the following constraints were identified, ranked and the top 3 were discussed in
detail.

Table 8. Constraints Perceived by CAHWs: rank order (1=first most important)

Constraints Freq. % Ranking
High operating costs (drugs, equipments, etc.) 2 50 4th
Lack of capital, input or credit services 3 75 3rd
Too few providers in private practice to show its viability 2 50 4th
Lack of training in practice management 4 100 1st
Weak enforcement mechanism to deal with competition from
illegal’s 4 100 1st
Source: CAHWs Discussion, 2010, (N=4)

Lack of a clear mandate for process owner in the district associated with lack of resource
to supervise the work of CAHWs in the field and weak enforcement capacity was
considered as a major constraint needing due attention. CAHWs usually lack supervision,
monitoring and evaluation services from the public sector to control strategic behavior of
individuals. On account of nature of service complexity, CAHWs are the one who usually
face lack of technical knowledge and resource. However, others such as drug suppliers
were not immune to this. CAHWs in near PAs, on the other hand, were the ones who felt
the importance of lack of training in CAHWs practice management probably due to the
clients’ ability to differentiate specific quality services in vicinity of Kulito. Thus,
effective training including business management skill is another dimension to build
capacity of CAHWs as a result some two CAHWs quite dropped-out the system. Capital
limitation was identified by the CAHWs discussion as an important challenge for the
viability and expansion of services. Another important challenge that CAHWs faced was
shortage and even absence of drugs in near reach. Moreover, when the CAHWs come to
public clinic to buy drugs, the staffs are often absent, on meeting, or no drug at all thus

84
forced to buy from retailers at exorbitant price thereby extra costs are passed to the users.
Except some treatment equipment and castration tool for cattle, CAHWs lack equipment
for horn and hoof trimming services. One of the major roles of CAHWs is referring
difficult cases needing specialized diagnostic and treatment service a public attention.
However, this is quite limited, due to communication problems and high operating
(transport and communication capacity) costs for CAHWs bordering Shashigo and Shone
districts. These hinder reporting of cases and timely information (backward and forward)
flow. Too few CAHWs could not witness the profitability in order the others to venture
the system, and unable to follow-up of distant cases.

In a nutshell, in all indicators assessed for capacity of CAHWs, they are lacking the
minimum critical facilities and inputs for proper primary animal health care service
provision.

4.5.2 CAHW Service Coverage and Uses

4.5.2.1 CAHWs Service Type and Coverage

Animal health service in the study PAs delivered by public, formal CAHWs and informal
CAHWs while traditional service provided by individual livestock keepers on his own
animal. However, the first two take the lion share in animal health service delivery. Unlike
the spray service, the role of public sector (39%) is very visible (Tables 29&30). This
indicates the right positive alignment of public sector to animal health care where there are
only few CAHWs than crop protection service sector where the suppliers are relatively
saturated. Large share of traditional service coverage (12.5%) is additional witness for
shortage of CAHWs (Tables 29&30, Appendix 6).

Table 9. Sources of Animal Health diagnostic and treatment Services of sample HHs
Sources % of responding HHs
Public 39.2
Formal CAHWs 43.3
Informal CAHWs 5.0
Traditional 12.5
Source: HH Survey, 2010

85
 Table 30 displays types of specific animal health treatment services which are in the study
PAs by various providers. It shows the service delivery is cattle dominated than other
animal species such as equines and poultry. According to the respondents, tick control
service is not given to equines because anatomical nature of their skin is very hard to
attach ticks (capitulum/gnathosoma). In addition, CAHWs delivering services like
cutting/trimming horns and hoofs by using local materials (e.g. sickle) showing us
CAHWs are lacking the necessary equipment for this service which need special attention.
The horn and hoof trimming service might have considered important avenues for
supplementing income for CAHWs since as these services do not incur any cost though it
is constrained by lack of relevant equipment. This may be instead of accepted practice of
marking up drug prices to earn extra income necessary to augment low income from few
service users. Even though CAHWs are not giving vaccination service, HHs seemed to
have developed a good knowledge on the importance of disease prevention through
immunization. Another observation from Table 30 is that both drug dealers (forest
doctors) and CAHWs are delivering the same type of service except in their dosage and
quality (Informal Discussion with WoARD Expert). Private drug dealers are only selling
tablets and potential sources for both the communities and CAHWs.

Table 30. Major types of Animal Health services delivered

Specific Livestock Common Specific treatment methods, by source
Services spp. Diseases Public Drug CAHWs Private Traditional methods
affected dealers drug
(black vendors
market)
Antibiotic Cattle, Anthrax, Oxy short Oxy short Oxy short - Herbal soln of roots,
treatments equines, Pasteurol 10% and oxy 10% and 10% and leaves and salt.
shoats losi, long 20%, oxy long oxy long Pepper is crushed
wound penstrep, 20%-all for 20%, and dissolved in
infection diminal, cattle penstrep- water and given per
multivitamin all for nostrils; soln from
, ivermectine cattle rotten egg for
equines
Tablet Shoats, Internal Fenbendazol Fenbendaz Fenbendaz Fenbendaz drinking local areke
selling equines, parasite, 20% for ol 20% for ol 20% for ol 20% for to de-worm internal
cattle Fassiollo equine, equine, equine, equine, parasite for cattle
sis/ liver bollus & bollus for bollus for bollus for
fluke tetraclozan cattle cattle cattle
for cattle
Tick Cattle External calcite malathion malathion Selling Painting tobacco
control parasite malathion solution on external
skin of cattle
Castration Cattle - tool - castration - Using local material
shoats, tool
equines
Source: Survey Result , 2010

86
Service charge
Initially in 2007, the team stemmed from WoARD, IPMS, PA leaders, CAHWs and users
made discussion to set charge of the CAHWs service (Appendix 4), to delineate their
mandate, ethics and their roles in order to control their strategic behavior. Only for a few
months, CAHWs started selling services in stated prices; however, prices for CAHWs
delivered with various modes of payment depending on type of service and distance from
the CAHW and fluctuating in response to market forces. For example, in 2007, prices for
20cc oxytetracycline ranged from birr 7.60 to 15 birr (Appendix 5). As CAHWs are not
yet licensed to purchase drugs from wholesalers, tablet selling is the most easily
jeopardized service by informal dealers. Overall, the demand trend for CAHWs services
has increased substantially despite poor response of the supply-side.

Seasonality of service demand

Like PCPS, the demand for CAHWs service follows a seasonal pattern (Figure 9). In line
with this, March, April and May are months in which disease outbreaks are more observed
and characterized by serious scarcity of animal feeds thus animals lose their immunity.
These are followed by June to August where the summer moisture becomes dominant over
the dry months which are suitable for microbial growth and risk of contamination of the
pastureland and water points with high effluents of micro organisms. Following this,
services are delivered in off-farm base where some CAHWs are switch on-and-off to other
businesses like cattle and pepper trading indicating the difficulty in maintaining the
service in study PAs and elsewhere in the district. The CAHWs discussion has identified
the seasons why castration service is highly demanded in September to October because
these are off-seasons for plowing bulls and a season of sufficient feed.

Figure 9. Seasonal Calendar of CAHWs service demand; Source: Own Design, 2010

Similarly, tablet selling for de-worming is highly demanded by the users through July to
September as it is the period for fattening oxen for Meskel holiday sell (date of true Cross

87
found). Antibiotic treatment service is highly demanded from January to June because it is
onset of belg rain which gives rise to the emergence of soil born disease and pathogens are
being active.

4.5.2.2 CAHWs Service coverage and Use

CAHWs covering on average radius of 13km (in case of Asore PA for which public clinic
is near covered 7PAs in 2 districts) on foot from their homes, with exception of one
CAHW of Gerema PA who had his own bicycle covered up to 23km and 17PAs in 3
bordering districts (Appendix 10). In contrast, public vet coverage depending on means of
transport or not; they cover a radius of 40 km on daily basis on motorbikes compared to
when they are on foot (in wet season) they could cover only a radius of 6km. Table 31
shows CAHW in far PA, Lay Bedene, is covering large livestock indicating increased use
of community due to lack of other animal health service option than community in Asore
who has public clinic in a very near reach. In all listed services, cattle are the dominant
users of the service indicating strengthening the missing services to other species such as
poultry and equines. In general, the service area coverage of the CAHWs depends on their
mode of transport, the demand to the service, health condition of CAHW, and levels of
practice diversification.

Table 31. CAHWs livestock and Service specific coverage, by PAs

Livestock, head/month
PA Specific services Drug used Overall
Cattle Equines* Shoats
Penstrep, oxy,
Treatment 25 6 17
procaine penicillin 48
Tablet Selling Bollus/Albendazol 50 0 56 106
Asore Castration Only equipment 12 0 10 22
Cutting of hoof/
Only equipment 2 1 0
horn 3
External parasite Malathion 10 0 0 10
Penstrep, oxy,
Treatment 36 10 20
procaine penicillin 66
Lay Tablet Selling Bollus/Albendazol 92 18 30 140
Beden Castration Only equipment 10 0 22 32
e Cutting of hoof/
Only equipment 6 1 0
horn 7
External parasite Malathion 16 3 0 19
Averag
e 130 20 78
NA= Not Applicable; *Equines are usually the donkeys and horses for cart

Source: Computation of CAHWs Recordings, 2010

88
Currently, existing CAHWs covering both targeted and extended PAs of a total of 36 PAs
in 5 districts (27 from Alaba, 4 from Shashigo, 3 from Damboya, 1 from Shone, 1 from
Silte) where Alaba takes the lion share (Appendix 10). Figure 10 shows that CAHWS are
covering the extended PAs in Alaba and neighboring districts accounting 71.2% and PAs
where they originally assigned. This indicates the demand of the service beyond the
intended district and stimulating new entrants to join the service delivery system. But this
requires regularly licensing and policing the CAHWs to serve their assigned and extended
PAs.

Figure 10. CAHWs Service Coverage; Source: Own Design, 2010

Moreover, most animal diseases are transboundary in nature, it needs an integrated effort
in all these adjacent districts if the objective is to deliver improved animal health services.
One of the plausible solutions to this is for public to encourage and support the
participation of more service users / livestock keepers themselves and promoting existing
informal providers in the delivery of the service

The service use rate based on HHs wealth group shows certain variation over PAs (Table
32), HHs and specific types of services. All the better-off class in Lay Bedene PA was
service users of any type at anyone season where it is only 85.7% for Asore due to the
nearness to public animal health service with better quality and their ability to cover the
transaction costs to use public service. Even though tablet purchase is requested by all
users, it is the only service dominantly used by poor in both PAs as due to its lower price
of charging than other services. In case of other services which have higher charging, they
opted to use traditional castration and local medicines instead.

89
Table 32. CAHWs Service Use rate by different wealth groups, % user HHs
Sample HHs Type of animal health specific services Overall
category
Asore PA Antibiotics Tablet Tick Castration
selling control
Better-off 85.7 85.7 100 71.5 85.7
Middle 90 80 70 80 80
Poor 0 15.4 0 0 15.4
Total user 53.3
L.Bedene PA
Better-off 100 100 100 100 100
Middle 91 81.8 72.8 81.8 81.8
Poor 0 22.2 0 0 22.2
Total user 70
Source: Own Survey Result , 2010

Overall, the CAHWs service covered relatively wider PAs and cattle dominated than other
animal species such as equines and poultry and different across PAs depending on their
mode of transport and seasonal pattern of demand for service.

4.5.3 Financial Viability of CAHWs Service

In conventional service delivery system, many attempts have failed to address important
technical, social and financial sustainability. Financial viability refers to the degree in
which CAHWs manage to minimize the costs of service delivery and maximize revenue
from the practice and the better for CAHWs (Kaberia, 2002) and presented in Box 3.
Varieties of service are currently delivered by formal CAHWs in study PAs. However,
only antibiotic treatment selling was used to analyze CBA for commercial viability of the
service. This is because both demand and supply of this service is relatively better than
others and used as a showcase to see financial viability of services being delivered. The
data were obtained from CAHWs recording of the year 2008/9 for which relatively
sufficient data was found.

Box 3. Cost Benefit Analysis of CAHWs service

CBA was based on information that the service is being delivered in off-farm base and the
number of service days and hours are limited, the data is actual and obtained from
CAHWs recording.
Given the following data: Service charge is to be covered by user; business started with

90
formal credit of 300Br at 7% interest rate and this is revolving capital over months,
Service being delivered = Antibiotic i.e. oxytetracycline 20% (long acting) selling;
average service required =20 head/month i.e. 240head/year; depreciation cost of equip and
labor cost ignored; personal and transaction expenses were also ignored.
1 bottle of antibiotic contains = 100cc and dosage is 20cc/Cow, thus 1 bottle can treat= 5
Cows, average antibiotic service charge=15 Br/20cc/cow
Total Expenditure: 1 bottle antibiotic purchase = 60Br, total number of bottles required
per month for average of 20 head is 4, this gives 4*60Br=240Br/month i.e. 12mon*240Br
=2880Br/yr; Credit is 300Br, interest at 7% = 21br/month, thus Total =300+(21*12) =
552Br/yr
Gross Income: Credit=300Br, income from a sell of antibiotics= 5*15=75Br/Bottle,
Sell of 4 bottles in a month=4*75=300Br, in a year=12*300=3600Br
Gross Profit: Gross income - Gross expenditure = (300+3600) – (2880+552) = 3900-
3432= 468 Br/yr, or B/C = 3900/3432= 1.14 i.e. B/C ≥ 1, indicating, if the current profit
trend continues, CAHWs service would be financially viable or would remain financially
viable even if the current costs of drugs increased by 14%.
Source: Own Computations , 2010

The service fulfill the condition that the BCR must be equal to or greater than one,
however, it looks for that financing of the practices and revision of their profit margins
needs to be done to maximize the profit. Because CAHWs service is risky and susceptible
as detrimental external factors such as drought and financial crises are likely to shake it
easily.

4.5.4 Perception of User and Potential-user Farmers

Currently, little is formally documented as to the perceptions of service users towards the
quality, satisfaction and effectiveness of CAHWs services and about the implications of
envisioned service delivery market in the study PAs. Table 33 shows the variation of HH
perceptions across HHs and between PAs categories. The better-off HHs in Asore PA
were not satisfied with the effectiveness of service which may be due to poor competence
of the CAHW for which users’ ability to differentiate the quality of specific services and
use of public service in near reach contributed a lot. On contrast, the majority of better-off
HHs (92%) in Lay Bedene PA reported the satisfaction with effectiveness with the service.

91
This confirms with Table 32 where only 85.7% of better-offs were users in Asore where it
accounts 100% for Lay Bedene. Majority (86.3%) were satisfied with CAHWs service in
Lay Bedene than Asore (67%) where there is some shading of dissatisfaction particularly
for better-offs perhaps due to untimely response to acute cases which need immediate
response.

Table 33. Perception about CAHWs services by different categories of HHs (%), by PAs
PAs Perception about CAHWs Service users
services Better-off Middle Poor Overall
Asore Service effective, yes 66 91 93 83
CAHWs service quality,
improved 57 80 85 74
Satisfaction to service, satisfied 57 80 64 67
Lay Service effective 92 90 88 90
Bedene CAHWs service quality, 100 100 100 100
improved
Satisfaction to service, satisfied 90 80 89 86.3
Source: Survey Result, 2010

4.5.4.1 Comparison of Animal Health Service Providers Perceived by Farmers

Performance is one function of service delivery system, and can be expressed in terms of
key indicators like accessibility, affordability, timeliness and human health safety and
soundness to environmental aspects (Table 34). Since perception of the respondents to
various providers assessed with regard to its performance, it could be used as a fair
assessment of the state of services delivery system in rural remote areas. Service users
were better satisfied and assessed the performance of CAHWs more positively for
availability, timeliness and quality of services next to traditional methods. In addition to
this, traditional method was also selected by majority of HH for its affordability indicating
the HHs inability to access modern animal health inputs but strongly blamed for its quality
and damage to human health. Overall, in the indicators assessed for performance, the
public service and the traditional methods have got extreme position (when one stands
first, the other takes last) by respondents.

92
Table 34. Ranking of various animal health service providers, by user/potential user
farmers
Animal health service HHs Rating, %
Score Rank
Providers Excellent Very good Good Poor Very Poor
Service Accessible /available
Public 22 38 23 10 8 354 5
Drug dealers (informal) 48 9 17 17 10 368 3
CAHWs 50 28 13 .00 8 412 2
Private drug vendors 33 25 19 13 9 360 4
Traditional methods 58 22 3 8 8 413 1
Cost affordable
Public 30 34 23 12 1 381 5
Drug dealers (informal) 53 17 22 8 .00 415 2
CAHWs 45 28 22 5 .00 413 3
Private drug vendors 50 18 22 10 .00 408 4
Traditional methods 59 19 13 8 .00 429 1
Timeliness/ responsive to demand
Public 45 23 10 14 8 382 5
Drug dealers (informal) 54 24 14 8 .00 425 4
CAHWs 65 18 9 6 2 439 2
Private drug vendors 70 15 7 .00 8 438 3
Traditional methods 63 21 14 2 .00 446 1
Quality
Public 80 18 2 .00 .00 478 1
Drug dealers (informal) 46 39 2 13 .00 418 4
CAHWs 78 22 1 .00 .00 477 2
Private drug vendors 54 30 14 2 .00 437 3
Traditional methods 38 33 22 8 .00 399 5
Human and Environmentally health
Public 84 8 8 .00 .00 477 1
Drug dealers (informal) 55 31 8 6 .00 435 4
CAHWs 62 23 13 2 .00 445 3
Private drug vendors 73 26 2 .00 .00 471 2
Traditional methods 39 33 21 8 .00 403 5
NB: Score is calculated by assigning 5 for excellent, 4 for very good, 3 for good, 2 for poor and 1 for very poor. Then
multiply % of observation by the score and finally adding the total observation; N=120
Source: HH Survey Result , 2010

4.5.4.2 SWOT Analysis for CAHWs service delivery

A very useful tool for evaluating service delivery system which also incorporates district
experts and key informants from Farm Africa and IPMS is the SWOT analysis.
Accordingly it analyzed the CAHWs service delivery system from the external appraisal
of opportunities and threats, and an internal appraisal of strengths and weakness and
summarized in Table 35.

Table 35. SWOT Analysis of CAHWs Service

93
 Strengths and benefits of service delivery Weaknesses of service delivery system
• Coverage of vast area with a limited • CAHWs are highly profit-oriented than
capacity client-orientation
• Recording of achievements • Poor integration of modern and traditional
• The users endeavors to promote traditional practices tested on ethno-vet laboratory
medicines • The system didn’t include women as
• The CAHWs service stared with baseline CAHW
survey of animal disease in the area • Lack of practical oriented capacity
(Mulugeta, 2006); building program to CAHWs
• Provision of startup materials/inputs and • Not harnessing the full potential of
later attachment to unions to sustain the CAHWs: like for vaccination and AI
system; services delivery
• Market promotions on market day of the • Weak linkage, regulation, exchange of
week showing the existence of service and information between CAHWs and
CAHWs stakeholders
• Capacity building of CAHWs for diversity • Institutional instability expressed by
and complexity of diseases frequent restructuring and high staff
• Existence of process-owner, turnover and generally low commitment
• Linking CAHWs with Research centers, and motivation of staff in public sector;
Union & WoARD for knowledge sharing
Opportunities for expansion &sustainability Threats for expansion and sustainability
• The public existing extension service is an • Ever increasing cost of drugs may reduce
opportunity to promote the service delivery ability to pay of poor farmers
• Close cooperation with community help • Willingness of CAHWs to work in remote
CAHWs internalize problem as if their situations where private practice is not
own viable due to rising economies of scale.
• A good business prospect due to increasing • The seasonal nature of both supply and
demand for services demand-side may dissolve sustainability
• The current direct charge provides the right • Animals with different disease come to
incentives for CAHWs to discharge the farm yard of the CAHWs, where wastes
services are not managed well thus transmission of
• Mutual benefit for CAHWs and customers disease from infected to healthy animal

94
• given the existing market-led development • Lack of licenses (professional and trade),
policy, the public initiative to support PSD can limit expansion and sustainability
• The existence of CAHWs help as a real • Incomplete or partial implementation of
model for others to enter policy reforms, and the near-reversal of
• Professional confidence as they perceive policy reforms
themselves as a physician to animal
Source: Experts and Key informants discussion, 2010

In order CAHWs to remain a viable player in animal health service delivery system, all
stakeholders must become increasingly more nimble, more strategic-thinking, and well
attuned to changes in their delivery and constantly adapting their institutional structure and
culture in order to capitalize and utilize existing opportunities that are a good fit to their
strengths, mitigate their weaknesses and reduce their vulnerability to external threats to
their continued survival and relevance.

Lessons learnt
In general the following lessons were learnt from the existing CAHWs practices:
• Seasonality of demand to CAHWs services, where the pattern is regular, can be
capitalized on by stocking necessary drugs during such periods to maximize the
profits.
• Provision of transportation, communication and credit facility is quite important to
CAHWs if the objective is to make the system effective.
• Diversification of services to CAHWs reduces vulnerability & spreads overheads over
number of services
• Lack of business skills on the part of CAHWs has been the major constraints on
maximization of profits.
• Unlike the crop protection service, the role of public in animal health service delivery
is very visible indicating us the right positive alignment of public to the segment where
the providers are only few than where the suppliers are relatively saturated.

4.5.5 Willingness and Ability to Pay for CAHWs Service

CAHWs services are already being paid for services like antibiotic treatment. All the
respondents were subjected to survey of the current service charge and found that the large

95
proportion of antibiotic service users (46%) perceive the current fee is reasonable, whereas
majority (42.5%) of non-users complaining that the prevailing service charge rate was
higher (Table 36) perhaps owing to their low economic status. Almost two fold of
respondents (i.e. 21%, Table 36) than either of spray services users (at most 13.3%, Table
21) perceived antibiotic service charge is lower. This implies these users might have
satisfied based on their understanding of the benefits they derived from. The 39% of non-
users still believe that the price is reasonable but cannot afford service charging thus
indicating price revision in order to bring them into users group.

Table 10. Perception of community for various CAHWs services charging

Services Perception to the prevailing charge rate for antibiotics, % Overall
Lower Reasonable Higher
User 24.3 45.9 29.7 61.7
Non-user 17.4 39.1 43.5 38.3
Overall 20.9 42.5 36.6 100
Source: HH Survey Result, 2010

Table 37 shows the differently perceived mean willing to pay for antibiotic service. The
survey revealed the majority of respondents (37%) perceive current charging is higher and
willing to pay the mean amount of 14.15Br. Those also who perceived the current charge
is lower willing to pay 16.54Br for antibiotic due to the reason that they can’t afford more
than the stated fee whereas 42.5% agreed that the current fee is reasonable to continue the
service use which particularly outweighs for users (Table 36). This implies the existing
CAHWs are few in number and not filling the demand which is clearly inferred when
relatively larger proportion of CAHWs service users (21.7%) than either of spray services
were still willing to pay a higher fee than the current charge.

Table 11. Proportion of HHs willing to pay (WTP) for different CAHWs service charging
Service type Perception to current Mean amount WTP % of willing
prevailing charging (Br) respondents
Antibiotics Current charging is higher 14.15 (0.64) 35
treatment Current charging is 15.00 (00) 43.3
Reasonable
Current charging is lower 16.54 (0.70) 21.7
Source: HH Survey Result, 2010; NB: Numbers in parenthesis are Standard Deviations

96
Some authors have recently questioned the use of WTP estimates for policy purposes on
the grounds that it is the ability and not willingness which should form the basis of social
policy (Ahuja and Redmond, 2001). This is because the principles such as willingness to
pay may not take into account the problems connected with the ability to pay. The
respondent’s assessment of their ability to pay is presented in Table 38. The data show that
74.3% rated themselves as just able to pay, while 17% rated themselves as well able to pay
the said price. This is a very important finding because these farmers could be further
strengthened to be able to pay for quality services. This opportunity could be used in
promoting the interest for participation of farmers in financing the current fiscal
constrained public service delivery.

Table 12. Proportion of HHs According to self-description related to payment for services
Variables relating to Ability to pay % of respondents
Self rating of ability to pay for services
Not able 8.7
Able 74.3
Well able 17.0
Potential users Preferred mode of payment
Personally 57.4
in group with other farmers 33.6
into their respective cooperatives 10
Conditions that will enhance payment a
Relevance of Spray service delivery 53.9
Effectiveness and efficiency of service providers 42.2
Improvement in production output and market 73.7
Improved income from crop and animal production 82.4
Source: HH Survey Result, 2010, a=multiple response possible

Currently the respondents in study PAs have already paying for various private services.
Nonetheless, they indicated the preferred modes of payment in response to a question on
how they would be willing to pay for future. About 33.6% would like to pay in group with
other farmers those willing to pay personally to the service providers constitute 57.4%.
This implies the absence of farmer’s cooperatives in rural PAs as result majority of the
respondents are not members of it and opted to pay personally due to fear of credit at any
other time later. But this direct pay in person would expected as important incentive to
encourage the providers. The conditions which could make farmers pay without complaint
in which the majority (82.4%) agreed was improved income from crop and animal
production. This finding corroborates with that of Van den Ban (2000) indicating that

97
potential users are willing to pay for private services if the various private services would
improve their income as farmers and empower them financially. This is because, though
currently they are paying for services, their improved income would suggest availability of
funds from which they could conveniently pay for the services whenever the fees higher
than the current rate may introduced. This needs the service delivery system should go
beyond mere increase in yields to include good marketing services for guaranteed income
increase to pay for services. This is an important condition attached to WTP for private
services by farmers.

Subsidized private services could, therefore, be a viable another option here, which may
be explored in the provision of effective and sustainable services particularly to poor HHs.
This is because there are cases where subsidized service delivery performs better than
public service delivery on the principle of free of charge. This would have has three-fold
benefit: at one hand, due to lower services charge the current non-users come to be a user.
On the other hand, the service providers maintain the delivery of essential services
because it is financially viable as higher demand arise as result of some of the cost is
covered by the public. Thirdly, it is advantageous for the public since subsidy is relatively
better than free supply of services to resolve the current fiscal constraint. Thus, here it
needs the involvement of public sector to support the service delivery by subsidizing the
service fee thus the non-users became users when the public share the charge up to the
point which is feasible to the service provider, yet affordable to poor. But this should only
be considered, according to experts discussants, when service use is economically
profitable i.e., when there is a strong crop and livestock response that service use remains
profitable. Otherwise the discussants agreed that the correct way to subsidize services
under the current strategy of agricultural-led market development of Ethiopia may be
indirectly through improvements in institutional setup, infrastructure and marketing rather
than directly through price subsidies.

98
5. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The study was conducted to investigate the opportunities and challenges of existing
private crop protection and community animal health workers service development in
Alaba district with the aim of exploring ways of developing demand-driven service
delivery system in the sector to support the envisaged smallholder transformation. The
specific objectives of the research were to assess: i) the perceptions of service providers
about the opportunities and challenges to enter and expand the service; ii) service coverage
and commercial viability; iii) the perceptions and level of satisfaction of service users and
potential users; and iv) the farmers’ ability and willingness to pay for both private crop
protection and CAHWs services. The primary data was collected from 120 randomly
selected farm households from four PAs representing the near and far PAs in reference to
Kulito market. This was supplemented by information from participatory rapid appraisal
and review of government policies and strategy documents. Qualitative and quantitative
methods were deployed to analyze the collected data. Descriptive statistics was used to
measure the mean willingness to pay in the future.

5.1 Private Crop Protection Service

5.1.1 Summary of key findings and Conclusions

In the study PAs and elsewhere in the country, the public sector was found to be the main
source of inputs and technical assistance for crop pests and diseases control. In addition,
the farmers have their own traditional methods and there are also formal and informal
private providers by using purchased agro-chemicals. Both traditional and informal
providers were questioned for issues such as effectiveness, human health and its impact on
the environment. Recognizing the issue, since three years ago, the formal providers were
introduced as one alternative of providing demand-driven service. In response, the survey
has assessed their supply capacity and found that these providers are different in their
capacity. Accordingly the survey has revealed that all providers are male over 36 years old
where their educational level ranges from grade 1 to 10 with average of grade six. In
addition the providers were supplied with various credit, equipment and essential
protective measures for appropriate handling and application of chemicals which was
further backed by technical assistance, monitoring and supervision services from public
and private actors in the system.

99
Private crop protection service providers in Alaba perceived three major opportunities
about their capacity: technical and material assistance and the devotion of some NGOs to
support providers in capacity building, the benefit in terms of profit & work experience
from the service provision, and the existence of private input shops to acquire the
necessary chemicals. The perceived supply-side constraints include: unfair competition
with informal providers who are likely to undercut price, the public sector (WoARD)
weak chemical use regulation enforcement mechanism to deal with informal providers,
and limited access to training in technical and financial business management. Hence,
overcoming the perceived constraints and seizing the opportunities call for specific
technical, policy and institutional interventions.

The main private formal crop protection service in the research area is herbicide spraying
primarily focusing on the major cereal and pulse crops; and pesticide application is limited
to cash crops. The pre harvest service coverage encompasses more clients than that of post
harvest services. The latter is often requested by better-off households who produce cash
crops. Unlike the poor and medium classes, the better-off households rarely use private
spray services. This is due to the fact that the majority of better-off housed own knapsack
for crop spraying. The service coverage also varies across the PAs. For instance, the
coverage of private formal crop protection service in H.Kuke PA is wider than that of
Debeso PA. This is attributed to the summative of two factors: performance of provider
expressed as better educated and young personality to respond timely and travel by
bicycle, and the relatively higher demand from better-off HHs for cash crops in H.Huke
than Debeso. In this thesis, among the various crop protection services being delivered,
only herbicide is considered in service financial viability analysis as it represents the main
service provided privately. The result indicates that private herbicide service provision is
financially viable even if the current costs of chemical inputs increased by 10%.

Both service user and potential user farmers have favorable perceptions for traditional
crop pests and diseases control methods for its availability, timeliness and environmental
safety, and thus currently practiced by the majority of poor. The traditional crop protection
methods are often labor-intensive hence poor households with abundant labor and less
capital tend to prefer traditional crop protection methods to the modern, chemical options.
Private informal providers were perceived better for timeliness, affordability and

100
availability than formal providers. However, as a result of formal trainings and presence of
safety measures, in contrast, private formal providers were perceived better for
environmental and human health than informal providers. Regarding individual service
users, the HHs in H.Kuke PA were better satisfied with the service due to better
performance of the provider than HHs in Debeso PA where they feel some shading of
dissatisfaction. Overall, the better-off and middle class HHs in both PAs were better
perceived for all indicators under investigation than the poor who mostly use the service
with poor quality and lower frequency from informal providers

The assessment of willingness to pay for the service about service fee and perceptions of
users/potential users on the prevailing charging rates for specific services has revealed that
majority (51.7%) of the current herbicide users/potential users perceived the prevailing
charge is reasonable whereas about 63.3% of pesticide users perceived the current
charging is higher. The survey regarding mean willingness to pay for quality services has
revealed 35 and 63.3% of users/potential users for herbicide and for pesticide,
respectively, were willing to pay if the service charges could be reduced.

5.1.2 Recommendations

• It is revealed that the training selection program lack qualities of involving providers in
selection of topics, too short/long training duration and contents usually do not align
with skill and context dynamism and missing aspects of knowledge domain. Hence, it is
important to provide full package trainings to capacitate providers to enable them
competitive, vibrant and responsive to demand. This has to be also backed by linking the
providers with various actors, while strongly focusing on non-technical hurdles related
to institutions and market, so that they can access and use the opportunity that resides in
other actors.

• For the future of the providers, it is important that they have to seize the existing
opportunities at their hand. In order to avoid unfair competition between the formal &
informal providers and the associated ineffectiveness in service delivery, it is imperative
to enforce legislation with particular emphasis to licensing. Unlike CAHWs services,
PCPS is quite new, needs service standards and guidelines. Establishment of regional
chemical input quality control can increase farmers’ confidence in providers and protect
adulterated service and formal service providers against competitors.

101
• Systematic monitoring and documenting the existing private crop protection initiatives
while paying attention to the effect of these initiatives would increase the role of the
private sector in supply of services as well as reducing the role of public in the delivery
of services is crucial. This needs scaling best practices, seizing opportunities, and
addressing the challenges to financial viability, safety and environmental sustainability
of private service delivery in innovative ways. The gradual retreat of public sector in
PCPS than CAHWs is an indicator to this while shifting its focus to services which are
non-delegable and not viable to private sector. Relieving the public from the service
delivery would lessen the burden of woreda expertise to focus more on information and
knowledge broker, and in facilitating linkages of providers with institutional services.
But the re-treat of the public sector has to be complemented by measures to improve the
framework conditions for service markets.

• It is undisputed that the stakeholders should give special consideration to remote and
low potential far PAs where the service coverage is low and that are not attractive to the
profit oriented providers. The government should clearly define tasks division between
the various actors (private formal and informal) in the system bearing in mind that in far
remote PAs some flexibility may be required in the privatization exercise such as
intervention through price subsidy so that the current non-user poor FHHHs and
marginalized groups would become user.

• Although the respondents batter perceived all crop pest and disease control methods for
their accessibility/availability, the improvement in other indicators and progress
monitoring that involves users in defining the performance criteria to be monitored
would contribute more positively.

• It is revealed that majority of users in the study PAs were willing to pay for private
services if it will improve their income as farmers and empower them financially. This is
logical because improved income would suggest availability of capacity to
users/potential users from which they could able to pay for the services whenever the
fees higher than the current rate may introduced. Therefore, the service delivery should
go beyond mere increase in yields to include good marketing facilities and other income
generating schemes for sustainable income increase as desired by the users and this is an
important condition that should be attached to WTP for private services by users.

102
5.2 CAHWs Service

5.2.1 Summary of key findings and Conclusions

The key lesson for the study PAs, and indeed the whole of district, from the existing
initiative is the fact that CAHWs involvement in primary animal health service provision
is encouraged to solve the problem of the current budgetary constraint of public sector.
However, the assessment result of their capacity revealed the current CAHWs are lacking
the minimum critical facilities and inputs for proper primary animal health care service
provision. Although all CAHWs are males, they vary in their age and level of education.
Overall, they lack the public supportive services such as technical backstopping and
supervision, business training, protective safety measures, transport and communication
facilities and trade license despite the presence of professional certificate. Lack of
transportation and communication facilities was found to be the major factors hindering
reporting of cases and timely information (backward and forward) flow as result some two
CAHWs were quite dropped-out of the system. They are also poorly linked with
respective actors in the system, except that of linkage with Mencheno Union for financing
and IPMS for knowledge and information, other wings reveal weak linkage.

The demand-side is particularly weak where farmers are not well organized to be able to
analyze their real needs and demand quality services. From perspective of supply-side, the
pluralism aspect is absent that CAHWs interact occasionally with other actors, working as
non-farm business and hence prefer profit-orientation to client-orientation, and the process
owners are not performing to their effectiveness. CAHWs are also not yet organized into
cooperatives to capitalize their experiences and to influence policy at higher level. On the
policy-side, it was analyzed that policies are not converging towards a common and shared
agenda to enforce regulatory frameworks.

In the study area, numerous opportunities were identified to promote CAHWs services in
alternative ways include: the existence of district extension service, existence of private
input shops address constraints to availability of drugs, and the current government
investment in public goods (roads, telex and rural electrification) has numerous
opportunities for communication and transportation facility. Likewise, weak enforcement
mechanism to deal with competition from informal providers, lack of training in technical

103
and business management, and lack of capital and input services were the main constraints
faced CAHWs. But many of them were found to be non-technical, but lie in realm of
policies and institutional challenges over range of CAHWs services.

The service coverage varies over PAs with the domination of public and formal CAHWs.
Unlike the spray service, the role of public sector is very substantial indicating us the right
positive alignment of public sector to the sector where there are only few providers than
where the suppliers are relatively saturated. Like PCPS, the demand for CAHWs service
follows a seasonal pattern and service charging varies overtime in response to price of
drugs. Overall, the CAHWs service covered relatively wider PAs and cattle dominated
than other animal species. It also varies over PAs depending on their mode of transport,
distance from Kulito market, performance of CAHW as function of his formal education
and physical strength to travel by bicycle and timely respond to demand. All the better-off
class in Lay Bedene PA was service users of any type at anyone season where it is only
85.7% for Asore with comparative advantage of public animal health service in near reach.
Among services, tablet selling is mostly requested by poor since its price is lower to them.
Among the services, antibiotic treatment selling was subjected to analysis of its
commercial viability to CAHWs and revealed it is financially viable even if the current
costs of drugs increased by 14%.

The assessment of perception of user and potential user farmers about the service depicted
that better-off HHs in Asore PA were perceived the service is ineffective which is
attributed to users’ ability to differentiate the quality of specific services and compare with
public service in near reach than that of Lay Bedene. Service users were perceived the
performance of CAHWs more positively for availability, timeliness and quality of services
whereas traditional method was also appreciated by majority of HH for its affordability.

The survey of WTP were revealed that large proportion of service users/potential users
(46%) perceived the current fee is reasonable, whereas nearly 44% of the current non-
users reported that the prevailing service charge rate was higher perhaps owing to their
inability to pay. WTP estimates are currently questioned for policy purposes on the
grounds that it is the ability and not willingness which should form the basis of social
policy. In this regard, the assessment of their ability to pay (ATP) has revealed that 74.3%
rated themselves as just able to pay the said price. The conditions which could make these

104
farmers pay without complaint in which the majority agreed was if the various private
services would improve their income as farmers and empower them financially

The recent efforts of Alaba WoARD, LVIA and IPMS to promote private service delivery
in study PAs and lessons learned from the existing CAHWs delivery system lead to
conclude that government have a very important role to play in promoting the expansion
of CAHWs service delivery beyond the current territory. This entails provision of various
capacity building services to CAHWs and services that will stimulate users to demand
various quality services. This is because until there is serious commitment to provide these
basic public services, any public supportive services are unlikely to have any lasting
impact on CAHWs service delivery.

5.2.2 Recommendations

• There is room for more direct contribution of communities in building the capacity of
CAHWs to ensure that a minimum level of service delivery can be maintained in PAs
such as Debeso and HKuke where this service would simply not be available. This is
because, if affordable services are accessible and available for individuals, the services
of CAHWs contribute to increased income at HH level. In this case, the service delivery
would go beyond a pure economic client to customer orientation. The public support
that train CAHWs on financial management and to evaluate their profitability over
time, taking into account ever increasing drugs price, can improve their decision-
making concerning on business management.

• Without a well organized demand-side, service delivery will remain ineffective and
depend on the good will of CAHWs losing the quality of being demand-driven.
Likewise, without strong supply capacity of CAHWs who are capable of responding
effectively to the demand aired by users, the system will be ineffective too. This in turn
needs continuous capacity building scheme while analyzing the different levels and
developing them together to manage change within these and across.

• It would be good if CAHWs would get involved in new linkages. Examples are
linkages with drug wholesalers and factories. Until now, these linkages are missing, but
they could form a partly solution for shortage of drugs that CAHWs currently facing.

105
 Hence, a better definition of linkage strategies is a fundamental approach in improving
the performance of interaction among these actors.

• It was recommended that the CAHWs service delivery system should control its
perceived weaknesses and cultivate the opportunities at hand. On the other hand, it
should respond to the threats to get the most out of its strengths and pave the way for
new entrants and expansion of services.

• In order to fill the gap of current shortage of CAHWs where service coverage is poor,
involving more livestock keepers themselves and informal providers in primary animal
health service delivery is another option. But this need to be supported with appropriate
legislative and policy frameworks. To this regard, issues as far ranging as standards and
certification, policy and institutional issues are increasingly vital.

• As sustainability is linked with commercial viability; financial aspects and income

opportunities for CAHWs in study PAs are even more important. Even though the
CAHWs service is financial viable it should look that revision of their profit margins
needs to be done to maximize the profit. Private businesses are risky and susceptible as
detrimental external factors are likely to shake it easily.

• The paper recognized one important issue for consideration when CAHWs service is
being initiated - the perceptions of the affected groups. Although respondents may share
similar perceptions, extenuating factors peculiar to specific service may be critical and
will have to be considered. This is because sustaining a privatized service delivery will
depend not on the benefit derived alone, nor on the perception of or ability of the
recipient to pay, but also on the cumulative purchasing power of both user and potential
user groups. This needs designing the service delivery system which is targeted and
context-specific

106
 6. REFERENCES

Admassu, B., Nega, S., Haile, T., Abera, B., Hussein, A. and Catley, A., 2005. Impact
assessment of a community-based animal health project in Dollo Ado and Dollo Bay
districts, southern Ethiopia. Tropical Animal Health and Production, 37(1), 33-48

Ahuja, V., 2004. The Economic Rationale of Public and Private Sector Roles in the
Provision of Animal Health Services. Centre for Management in Agriculture, Indian
Institute of Management, Ahmedabad, India.

Ahuja, V. and Redmond, E., 2001. Economic and Policy Issues in Livestock service
Delivery to the poor: Pro-poor livestock policy Initiative, Rome

Ashworth V., 2005. The Challenges of Change for Agricultural Extension in Ethiopia.
Discussion paper, March 2005. A joint Government of Zambia and World Bank Study.

ADB (Asia Development Bank), 2000. Private Sector Development Strategy: Promoting
the Private Sector to support Growth and Reduce Poverty, Private Sector Group, Manila,
Philippines

Azage Tegegne, Berhanu Gebremedhin and Hoekstra, D., 2006. Input supply system and
services for Market oriented Livestock Production in Ethiopia. Pp 1-19. Proceeding of the
14th annual conference of the Ethiopian Society for Annual Production (ESAP) held in
Addis Ababa Ethiopia, September 5-7, 2006. Part I: Plenary Session

Carlsson, F., Kohlin, G., Mekonnen, A. and Yesuf, M., 2005. Are Agricultural Extension
Packages: What Ethiopian Farmers Want? A stated Preference Analysis, Working Papers
in Economics No.172, Department of Economics, Goteborg University

CSA (Central Statistical Authority), 2008. Summary and Statistical Report of the 2007:
Population and Housing Census Results, Federal Democratic Ethiopia Population Census
Commission, UNFPA, Addis Ababa

DVM (Department of Veterinary Medicine), 2001. Animal Health Service Delivery in

Pastoralist Areas: A Workshop Held in Eneku Training Village Soroti, Uganda, 4th – 6th
September, 2001, Makerere University

Ehret, W., Braun, M. and Hagmann, J., 2005. Conceptual Framework for Rural Service
Reform Processes: A Guide for Planning, Aligning, Implementing and Monitoring.
Anglophone Africa Work in Progress, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische
Zusammenarbeit (GTZ), Eschborn

FAO (Food and Agricultural Organization), 1998. Principles for Rational Delivery of
Public and Private Veterinary Services with reference to Africa, Rome

107
FDRE (Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia), 2002. Proclamation No. 267/2002:
Animal Diseases Prevention and Control. Federal Negarit Gazeta, Addis Ababa

Getahun, D., 2004. Assessment of Factors Affecting Adoption of Wheat Technologies

and Its Impact: The Case of Hula Woreda, Ethiopia. M.Sc. Thesis (Unpublished)
Presented To School of Graduate Studies of Alemaya University

Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ), 1999. Services for Rural

development: Newsletter of the emerging platform on services within Division “Rural
Development”, Issue No. 3 December, 1999

IPMS (Improving Productivity and Market Success), 2005. Alaba Pilot Learning Woreda
Diagnosis and Program Design

Kaberia, K., 2002. Effectiveness and Financial Viability of Privatized Animal Health
Delivery System. Primary animal health care in the 21st century: Shaping the Rules,
Policies and Institutions, FARM Africa, Nairobi, Kenya

Kurokawa, K., Tembo, F. and Dirk,W., 2008. Donor Support to Private Sector
Development in Sub-Saharan Africa: Understanding the Japanese OVOP program, JICA-
ODI Working Paper 290. Tokyo, Japan

Leyland, T. and Catley A., 2002. CAHWs Service Delivery Systems: Improving the
Quality of Veterinary Service Delivery. Community-based Animal Health and
Participatory Epidemiology (CAPE) Unit of the Pan African Program for the Control of
Epizootics (PACE), Nairobi, Kenya, pp 2-3

Mulugeta Hagos, 2006. Animal Disease Baseline Survey in Shashego and Alaba Wereda,
LVIA Project Area, Awassa, (Unpublished)

Odendaal, J.S.J., 1994. Biographical profile of practicing veterinarians in South Africa. In:
Sen, A. and Chander M., 2003a. Perceived constraints to private veterinary practice in
India. Centre for Management in Agriculture, Indian Institute of Management,
Ahmedabad 380015, Gujarat, India, pp 147

Puskur, R. and Hagmann, J., 2006. Synthesis Report- Workshop on Alternative Service
Delivery Systems, IPMS, Addis Ababa

Rahmeto Negash, 2007. Determinants of Adoption of Improved Haricot Bean Production

Package in Alaba Special Woreda, Southern Ethiopia. Thesis submitted to Haramaya
University

108
Rivera, M., Qamar, K. and Crowder, V., 2001. Agricultural and rural extension
worldwide: Options for institutional reform in the developing countries. FAO, Rome, Italy
Rivera, M. and Qamar, K., 2003. Agricultural Extension, Rural Development and the Food
Security Challenge. FAO, Rome, Italy

Sanne, C., 2006. Demand-Driven Agricultural Advisory Services. NEUCHÂTEL

GROUP, London.

Save the children UK, 2001. Integrated Pest management (IPM) - Farmers Field School
Project (FFS), Amharic version, Addis Ababa

Sen, A. and Chander M., 2003. Perceived constraints to private veterinary practice in
India. Centre for Management in Agriculture, Indian Institute of Management,
Ahmedabad 380015, Gujarat, India

SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Science), 2009. SPSS version 13.00, Analytical
Software Inc., St. Paul, MN, USA

Storck, H. Emana, B., Andew, B., Borowiecki, A. and W/Hawariat, S. 1991. Systems and
farm management practices of the small holders in the hararghe High lands: A baseline
survey. Farming systems and resource economics in tropics. Vol. 11. Wessenschaftsverlag
Vauk: Kiel, FRG.

Umali, L. and Schwartz, L., 1994. Public and private agricultural Extension: Beyond
traditional frontiers. World Bank Discussion Paper 236. The World Bank, Washington
D.C, USA

Van den Ban, W., 2000. Different Ways of Financing Agricultural Extension. The
Overseas Development Institute, AgREN Network Paper No. 106b, London, UK

Woreda Office of Agricultural and Rural Development (WoARD), 2008. Alaba Special
District WoARD Annual Amharic Report, Plan and program department, Kulito

Wolmer, W. and Scoones, I., 2005. Changing Animal Health Policies. LEISA Magazine,
Institute of Development Studies. Sussex, U.K.

World Bank, 2002. Extension and Rural Development: A Convergence of Views on

Institutional Approaches, International Workshop, Nov. 12–14. The World Bank,
Washington, D.C.

World Bank, 2005. World Development Report 2005. http://siteresources.worldbank.org,

Dec. 17, 2009.

109
7. APPENDICES

110
Appendix 1. General agrochemical/drugs retailers in and around Alaba

Name Location/town Remark

Mencheno Union shop Kulito
Kulito farm inputs shop Kulito Alaba
Zalan vet drug Kulito
Alaba Garden pest control and selected seeds shop Kulito
Siyane Vet drug Kulito
Adami Tulu Pesticides Processing share Company Ziway 132km from Alaba
Source: Survey Result, 2010

Appendix 2.Credit Mobilized from Mencheno Union to Private sectors in Alaba

Private sectors Sex Down Outstandin Total to be paid

M F T payment g credit
Apiculture Wanja Galeto 17 - 17 0 51,170 53,167.73
Farmers Union
CAHWs 6 - 6 0 15,000 15,955.5
Forage shop and Private 1 - 1 0 10,000 10,624.66
nurseries
Input shops 0 100,000 50,000 paid &
50,000 remaining
PCPS Providers 11 - 11 0 38,500 39, 050
Multi-thresher 1 - 1 4,000 6,675
Animal feed supplier 2 - 2 0 6000 6724
Drip Irrigation 10 - 10 3,000 3,350
Source: Mencheno Union, 2010

111
Appendix 3. Cooperatives in Alaba Special Woreda
Name of the Cooperative # of Coops in district Remark
General farmers coops 14
Farmers saving and credit coops 29
Youths package 65
Fruits coops 3 Two are established in 2002
Irrigation users coops 3 One established in 2002
Handcrafts coops 1
Honey production coops 1
Crop marketing coops 2
Weavers coops 2 One in 2000 & one in 2001
Shoats fattening coops 1 Established In 2001
Mines producers coops 3
Seed multipliers coops 3 All established in 2002
Kulito town general coops 2 One in 1996 & one in 2001
Total 129
Source: WoARD , 2010
NB: There are total of 10,270 members in all 29 coops and a capital of 669,068.95 ETB. All these cooperatives were borrowed money from
Rural Development Fund and didn’t take any loan from Omo Microfinance.

Appendix 4. Initial* CAHWs charging rate based on Community Consultation in 6

PAs of Alaba, 2006
Drug name Unit Buying price Serves for Selling price
Albaendazole Bollus Bovine (50) 60 Br 50 cattle 75 Br 1.50 /tablet
2500gm/bollus Cents/tablet
Shoats 300mg 55 shoats
Tetraclozal Bollus (40) 85 Br 40 Cattle 100 Br, 2.5Br/cattle
Sheep Bollus (55) 30 Br 55 Shoats 45 Br: 0.85 cents/tablet
Tetraclozal
Antibiotic Long of 20 % Bottle 23Br 20cc/cow 38 Br: 7.6 Br/cow
(Oxy) Short of 10 % Bottle 23Br 20cc/cow 38 Br, 7.6 Br/cow
Penstrip Bottle 40 Br 8/Pack animals 6 Br/pack animal
Castration Boine 3 br/bull
Caprine 1.5 br/shoats
Source: WoARD, 2006: * Market governs the service rate

112
Appendix 5. Treatment charging rate of drugs in Alaba Public Animal Health clinic

Medicine Unit Unit selling price (Br) Remark

Penestrep ml 7.80/cow
Oxytetracycline 20% ml 6.50/cow
Oxytetracycline 10% ml 5.30/cow
Multivitamin ml 0.32
Ivermectine ml 2.70
Albendazol 2500mg Tablet for cattle 1.27
Albendazol 300mg Tablet for shoats 0.30
Tetralozan 3400mg Tablet for cattle 2.44
Tetralozan 900mg Tablet for shoats 0.86
Fenbendazol sapet 13 For equines
Intramammary infusion 14 Applied on breast
Diminal 2.25
Calcium borogluconate ml or cc 60
Castration For bulls 3
For shoats 2
For equines 3
Source: WoARD, 2010

Appendix 6. Traditional Animal Health Practices in the study area

Local Amharic English Species Common traditional Practices

Name Name Name Affected
Tereje Aba Anthrax Cattle, Root of Kelalla, Gzawa, Lallo and leaf of Truman, fluid
(Arae senga shoats, of Embuay and Bisana, salt, Hot peper is crushed and
Tizenat) equine dissolved in water and given per nostrils; solution from
rotten egg for equines
Habuss a Aba Blackleg Cattle, shoats Root of Kelalla, Gzawa, Lallo and leaf of Truman, fluid
gorba of Embuay and Bisana, salt, Hot peper is crushed and
dissolved in water and given per nostrils;
Gororsa - Pasteurellos Cattle, sheep, -The fluid content of Embuay + Leaf of Bisana +Root of
is and goat Lallo+ salt+ Hot peper is crush together, dissolve in water
and given per os)
- Branding of the throat region with hot iron
Losha - Fasciollosis Cattle, sheep, Root of Kelalla, Gzawa, Lallo and Leaf of Truman, fluid
(Lugo in (Liver and goat of Embuay and Bisana, salt, Hot peper is crushed and
shoats) Fluke) dissolved in water and given per nostrils
Afte-egir - FMD Cattle, sheep, Fluid content of Embuay + Leaf of Bisana +Root of
and goat Lallo+ salt+ Hot peper is crush together, dissolve in water
and given per os and nostrils)
- Mixture of pepper and garlic is delivered for foot and
mouth disease
Koyechu - Actinobacill Cattle, and
-Rubbing with maize straw
osis shoats
Painting with tobacco solution on external skin of cattle
zeree Tick control Cattle
Mezger for purpose of tick control etc.
azizebulu De- drinking local areke to de-worm internal parasite for
Cattle, shoats
ta Tilatil worming cattle,
Source: KIG Survey Result, 2010

113
Appendix 7. Bio-pesticides and Natural Pest Control Methods
Bio-pesticide Effective For Result Health Preparation
from Hazard
Red onion Aphids, rats and mice, Protects fungi , Burning of Chopped stem of
Powdery mildew, Early and insects do eyes onion stored for 4-7
Blight, Late blight, not approach to days before
Downy mildew & Asher: the applied crop application
caused by virus, bacteria
and fungus
Pepper For all insect pests, Mosaic solution If highly From pepper seed and
(Capssicum fungus, bacteria, virus from pepper concentrated, fruit, soap. After 1 day
Frotescens and protects and kills it can affect apply on roots of crop
Annum,) insect pests leaves
Tea/Camellia Termite, Aphid spp, snail Kills insect pests - Powder of leaves &
Sinesis seed of tea mixed with
water and applied in
crop roots
Papaya Aphids , Army worm , Anti-fungus, - Seed and green leaf
(Carica root rot (Fusarium anti-nematode , grinded and filtered,
papaya) Oxysporium), termite, kills insect pests soap, thus the solution
coffee leaf burner kills cutworm and
termites
Tomato Aphids, Army worm, Kills and makes Leaves are Grinded leaf applied
(Lycopersicon grasshopper , cut worms, Insect pests poisonous to in solution, soap,
esculentum) ant-fungus dormant/inactive human applied every 2 days
; anti bacteria
Melia Army worm, stalk borer, Kills insect Not commonly
azadarch grasshopper, weevil, pests, in touch, practiced
prison lilac mites, fungus anti-fungus,
Nicotiana Aphids, bilharzia, snail, Kills pests in Nicotine Leaf, soap, or use
Tabacum, sickle, termite, rusts, touch, anti- affects human powder after dry
(tobacco) spider mites, slugs fungus, anti- for any touch,
insect pests, don’t apply
makes pests tomato,
growth dormant potato
Black jacks Ants, aphids, cut worm Protects and If highly Seed boiled for 10 hrs
(Bidenspilosa) termite, rusts, spider makes insect concentrated, mixed with soap and
mites, slugs pests dormant affects flower filtered solution
applied,
Candelabra Aphids, mosquito fly, Antifungal, Milky s/n Mulching/ burring
(Euphojrbia termite, mites, protects insect affects eye, grinded leaves around
Tirutalli) pests skin the root of crop
Agave Kills pests in store, Protects and kills Not known Grinded plant mixed
Americana termite and pests in the pests yet with water and applied
(America aloe) field
Garlic All Aphids spp., army Kills insect pests Should not be 100gm garlic, ½ L
worm, rust, an protects applied in water, 10gm soap, 2
disease fertilized soil spoon oil, pepper
Wood ash Beetles spp. of pumpkin, Antifunfal, kills -- ½ cup ash, ½ cup soil ,
fungus, rusts beetles 4L water, applied
twice a week
Cattle urine Mite, caterpillar, aphids, Kills flying flies, -- Urine stayed for 2
cut worm, milibag, tripas protects diseases weeks, boiled by sun
heat. Then urine and
water mixed ratio of
1:6 applied
Source: Document Review and discussion with Providers, 2010

114
Appendix 8. Common types of Pesticides used and handling
Type of Trade Common Mixture Application WHO Rate per ha Stays Effective for
crop Name Name type class Liter Kg after
protection * spray
chemical
Pesticide DDT Didmack Solution Mixed with 2 2 3 wks Army worm,
water Stem borer,
Powder Applied as 2 8- 3 wks Red Teff
powder 10 worm, weevil
Powder Applied as 2 15- 3 wks Aphid, mites
powder 20 grasshopper,
Wollo bush
cricket
Malathine Sitayone / Solution Mixed with 3 2 10days Army worm,
insectcide water Stem borer,
Solution Applied as 3 1 10 Red Teff
it is days worm,
Powder Applied as 3 15- 1 grasshopper,
is 20 week Wollo bush
cricket ,
Aphid, Weevil
Ethiozinon Diazinon Solution Mixed with 2 2 10 Termite, Army
60%EC water days worm, Stem
borer, Red
Teff worm,
Aphid,
grasshopper,
Wollo bush
cricket
Carbaryle sivin both Mixed with 3 1.5 1 Termite, Army
85% water week worm, Stem
powder borer, Red
Teff worm,
Aphid
,grasshopper,
Wollo bush
cricket
Herbicide 2-4-D U-46-D Solution Mixed with 2 1- 3 weed
(weed water 1.5 weeks
killer)
Fungicide Thiram Fungal
diseases on
potato
Mancozeb, Antifungal
delan
Rodenticide Zinc 2 NA NA NA rat
phospdide
warfarin 1 NA NA NA rat
Source: The Manual developed by WoARD for PCPS providers
*1= highly hazardous (1-50 LD50mg/kg), 2=moderately hazardous (50-100 LD50mg/kg), 3=slightly hazardous (100-500 LD50mg/kg), 4=no
hazard in normal use (500-1000 LD50mg/kg), 5=no effect at all (>1000 LD50mg/kg)

115
Appendix 9. Private Crop Protection Service Providers

Name PAs PAs Education Contact Experience (years)

originally covered Level Address informal formal
assigned
Jemal H/Osuman 1st Choroko 3 3rd 0916045517 12 2
Aman Mohamed Alemtena 3 8th - 5 2
Kedir Abiye Debeso 3 1st 10 2
Abdulaziz Beshir Gedeba 3 10th 0916057734 2 2
Abdella Osuman Galeto 2 10th - 5 2
Asemo H/Mohamed 2nd Choroko 1 3rd 0916284002 5 2
Nuredin Shifa Wanja 4 9th - 5 2
Muhe Ibrahim Hulegeba 4 5th 0916304121 7 2
Mundino Kusamo 1st Mekala 3 8th 5 2
Nuriye Hassen Gubasheroro 3 2nd 0913173620 3 2
Waou Bamud Kufe 3 3rd - 6 2
Total 23 55 18
Average 2.5 6 2
1. PA covered by Jemal H/Osuman 4. PA covered by Abdulaziz Beshir 8. PA covered by
a) 1st choroko a) Gedeba§§ Muhe Ibrahim
b) Muda Mayafa b) Lay Lenda a) Hulegeba Kuke
c) Chambulla c) 2nd choroko* b) Gedeba*
2. PA covered by Aman Mohamed 5. PA covered by Abdella Osuman c) Asore*
a) Alemtena a) Galeto d) Hulegeba zato
3. PA covered by Kedir Abiye b) 2nd Mekala* 9. PA covered by
a) Debeso 6. PA covered by Asemo Mundino Kusamo
b) Gurara Bucho H/mohamed a) 1st Mekala
c) Kunchena Yaye a) 2nd Choroko* 10. PA covered by
7. PA covered by Nuredin Shifa Nuriye Hassen
Shifa a) Guba sherero
a) Sheka tena b) Falka
b) Asore c) Bitena senkele
c) Misrak Gortancho 11. PA covered by
d) Wanja Waou Bamud
a) Kufe
b) Tach Lenda
c) 2nd Mekala*

Source: PCPS providers recording

*
PAs covered by more than one sprayer

116
Appendix 10. CAHWs Service Providers

Name PAs Education Service Contact Coverage based on Specific

assigned Level Experience Years Address Services
In In PAs HHs Woreda
informal formal
service service
Jemal Lay 8th 0 3 - 7 309 3 Castration, Tablet
Hussen Bedene selling, Advisory
service
Cutting
horn/hoof,
External parasite,
Infectious disease
/anthrax
Hussien Asore 3rd 0 3 09 10 7 128 2 >>
Awol 115573
Abdella Gerema 8th 0 3 - 17 557 3 >>
Abire
Bediru Rekonen 5th 0 3 - 5 119 2 >>
Dubela Teffo
PAs coverd by Jemal Hussien PAs covered by Hussien Awol PAs covered by Abdella Abire
1. Lay Bedenea = 64HH 1. Asorea =135HH 1. Gerema a = 87HH
2. Tach Bedene a =23HH 2. 1st Ashokaa =56HH 2. Chambulla a = 48HH
3. Habibo Forena a =5HH 3. 2nd Ashokaa =36HH 3. Muda Mayafa a = 60HH
4. Sorge Dorgosa a =8HH 4. Sheke tenaa =15HH 4. Illolaka a=45HH
5. *Hulegeba Kuke a =10HH 5. 1st Mekala a =20HH 5. Wushamo a = 67HH
6. Reginab =8HH 6. 2nd Mekalaa =10HH 6. Misrak gortancho a =30HH
7. Tach Gimbichoc=10HH 7. Keransod =37HH 7. Mearab gortancho a =10HH
8. *Hulegeba Kuke a =29HH
9. Lay Arsho a =25HH
10. Tach Arsho a =20HH
11. Dinkosa a =35HH
12. Shemesina mise c =10HH
13. Wayawa c =6HH
14. Jamaya c =7HH
15. Gindellae= 47HH
16. Gotmanea e =21HH
17. Megarie=10HH
Where:
a=Alaba PAs; b=Silte Woreda PAs; c=Shashigo Woreda PAs; d=Shone Woreda PAs; *PA covered by two
Formal CAHWs; e=Damboya Worweda PAs

Source: CAHWs survey, 2010

117
Appendix 11. Conversion Factors used for Computation of Tropical Livestock Unit
Animal category Livestock unit
Calf 0.25
Heifer 0.75
Cow/ox 1
Horse 1.1
Donkey (adult) 0.7
Donkey (young) 0.35
Camel 1.25
Sheep / goat (adult) 0.13
Sheep / goat (young) 0.06
Chicken 0.013
Source: Storck et al., 1991:188

Appendix 12. HH Survey Interview Schedule

General Information: Serial No. of the questionnaire ____________

Name of the PA________________________
Name of the village _____________________
Date of interview _______________________
Interviewee name (include grandfather)______
Interviewer name _______________________

A. HOUSEHOLD CHARACTERISTICS
1. Household Demography
Age group No Education Currently going Health status
@ to school yes/no healthy/sick*
Male > 50 years old
Female >50 years old
Adult female (17 – 50 yrs old)
Adult male (17 – 50 years old)
Young male (14 – 16)
Young female (14 - 16)
Children < 14 years
@ Education level: 0 = cannot read and write, 1 = Able to read and write, but no formal Schooling, 2 = Primary school, 3 = Secondary
school

2. CHARACTERISTICS OF HOUSEHOLD HEAD

Attributes Description
Age
Sex 1.Male 2.Female
Religion

118
 Marital status (single, married, widow/ widower, divorce)
Education level (codes the same as above)
Experience in farming (yrs)
How long s/he participated in crop extension (yrs)
How long s/he participated in livestock extension (yrs)
How long s/he participated in other household package other than
crop and livestock such as adult education, health & nutrition, non-
farm, etc (specify)
Have you ever been a model farmer?

B. FARM RESOURCES AND ACCESS

Access to non-family labour
1. Do you use hired labour (√)? 1.Yes 2.No
2. If your answer is yes, please indicate:
2.1 The number of days hired labour is used in a season ---------------------------------
2.2 Purpose for which hired labour is used ------------------
2.3 Cash or/and in kind of payment for a per/day /person -----------------------------
3. Do you receive labour assistance from relatives or neighbours when such assistance is
needed? 1. Yes 2. No
C. Livestock ownership
Livestock Ownership
Category Number owned Main purpose of keeping*
(heads) current
Cows/heifer (> 2 yrs)*
Oxen/bulls (> 2 yrs)
Calves (< 2 yrs)
Horse (adult)
Horse <2yrs
Donkey (adult)
Donkey(young)
Sheep & goat*
Sheep and goat (young)
Bee colony
* 1=breading stalk, 2=beef/fattening, 3=milk production,4= draft power, 5=renting , 6=transportation,7=others

1. Did you face shortage of oxen during this crop season? 1. Yes 2. No
2. If yes, how did you overcome it?

D. Access to land and land use

1. When did the household acquire the land ________________yr

119
2. How did you acquire the land (encircle)?
1=Land distribution, 2=Inheritance , 3=Purchase, 4=other (specify)
3. What is the current total holding size in timad ___________________
4. What is the current size of irrigated/irrigable land in timad _____________
5. Please give reasons if there has been change in your land holding
size._________________
6. Is your land sufficient to meet your need? 1. Yes 2. No
7. Can you get more land to cultivate if you feel necessary? If yes, how?
8. Land use (past cropping season), quality and tenure status

Description of land use type

Size in Crop/ tree Irrigated Fertility: Topography Tenure:
timad on the (Yes/ 1=poor, 1=plain, 1=secured,
land (Q) No) 2=medium, 2=steeply 2=not
3=good
Plot one
Plot two

E. Participation and position in formal and traditional group/organizations

LIVELIHOOD OPTION AND CHOICES

1. List of the main livelihood options for the household including cereal, vegetables,
fruits, chat; livestock- dairy, cattle fattening, sheep/goats, beekeeping, poultry, off/non-
farm, etc.
2. The three main crop options (in the order of importance), division of labour, and
amount sold
Main options Option 1# Option 2# Option 3#
How much is sold
commercially@
Responsibility* (production)
Responsibility* (post-harvest)
Responsibility* (marketing)
Make spending decisions*
@: 0=no or little amount, 1= if it is ≤ 25%, 2=if it is between 25% & 33%, 3= if it is between 33% & 50%, 4= if it is between 50 % & 75
%, 5= for 75- 100%; *: 1 =mainly husband, 2=mainly wife, 3 =both, 4 =son, 5=daughter

3. Yields and prices trends for the three main cropping option(cereals, vegetables,
horticulture)
Options (in the Yields Contributing Price Contributing Rank#

120
 order) trend$ factors trend$ factors
$ rate on scale 1=very reduced, 2=reduced 3=moderately reduced, 4=increased, 5=increased substantially

4. The three main livestock options (dairy, cattle fattening, sheep/goats, beekeeping,
poultry) in the order of importance, division of labour, and amount sold
Option 1# Option 2# Option 3#
Main livestock options
How much is sold commercially@
Responsibility* (production)
Responsibility* (post-harvest)
Responsibility* (marketing)
Make spending decisions*
@: 0=no or little amount, 1= if it is ≤ 25%, 2=if it is between 25% & 33%, 3= if it is between 33% & 50%, 4= if it is between 50 % & 75
%, 5= for 75- 100%; *: 1 =mainly husband, 2=mainly wife, 3 =both, 4 =son, 5=daughter

5. Yields and prices trends for the three main livestock options (dairy, cattle fattening,
sheep/goats, beekeeping, poultry)
Options yield Contributing Price Contributing factors Rank#
in order trend$ factors trend$
$ rate on scale 1=very reduced, 2=reduced 3=moderately reduced, 4=increased, 5=increased substantially

6. What are your main production constraints in the order of importance:

7.1. in your priority crop options 1. 2. 3.
7.2. in your priority livestock options 1. 2. 3.
F. ACCESS TO CREDIT
1. Access to credit
Items Yes (√) Purpose
Do you need loan for your agricultural activities?
Do you need loan for activities other than agriculture (off/non-
farm)
Did you borrow from formal source in last 12 months?
Have you ever faced a situation where your application for
formal loan turned down?
Other (specify)
2. In your view, what are the 3 main constraints in accessing finance/credit for your
priority livelihood options? 1. 2. 3.
D. Access to Inputs and Supportive Services for Priority Crop and Livestock Options

I. Access to inputs and services for priority crop options

1. Do you have access to improved seeds for your priority crop option? 1. Yes 2. No

121
2. What are you main sources (in the order of importance) and constraints (accessibility,
utilization) of seeds? 1. 2. 3.
3. Do you have access to inorganic fertilizers for your priority crop option? 1. Yes 2. No
4. What are you main sources (in the order of importance) and constraints (accessibility,
utilization) of inorganic fertilizers? 1. 2. 3.
5. Do you have access to irrigation and/or moisture conservation such as rainwater
harvesting technology for your priority crop option? 1. Yes 2. No
6. Do you have access to crop protection measures (pesticide, herbicide, PHT) for your
priority crops? 1. Yes 2. No
7. What are your main sources (in the order of importance) and constraints (accessibility,
utilization) of crop protection measures for your priority crop option? 1. 2. 3.
II. Access to inputs and veterinary service for priority livestock option
1. Do you have access to improved breeds or breeding (AI) service for your priority
livestock option (dairy, cattle fattening, shoats, apiculture, and poultry)? 1.yes 2. No
2. What are your main sources (in the order of importance) and constraints (accessibility,
utilization) of improved breeds or breeding (AI) service for your priority livestock
option? 1. 2. 3.
3. In your view, what are the 3 main accessibility (availability & affordability) and
utilization (technical appropriateness) constraints of improved breeds or breeding service
for your priority livestock option? 1. 2. 3.
4. Do you have access to improved planting material and/or feeds for your priority
livestock option? 1. Yes 2. No
5. What are your main sources (in the order of importance) and constraints (accessibility,
utilization) of improved planting material and/or feeds? 1. 2. 3.
6. Do you have access to veterinary service for your priority livestock option? 1.Yes 2. No
7. What are your main sources (in the order of importance) and constraints (accessibility,
utilization) of veterinary service? 1. 2. 3.

III. ACCESS TO MARKET

1.Please list where the household members often go to buy & sell things
Markets Distance Things often Frequency of visit (daily, weekly,
visited (km) bought/sold monthly, quarterly etc)

122
2. In your view, what are the 3 main product handling and marketing constraints in your
priority crop options? 1. 2. 3.
3. In your view, what are the 3 main product handling and marketing constraints in your
priority livestock options? 1. 2. 3.

IV. ACCESS TO EXTENSION /ADVISORY SERVICE

I. Access to and sources of knowledge
1.What are your main sources (in the order of importance) of knowledge & information
for your priority livelihood options?
Access
Knowledge & information on: Yes /No
Improved livestock breed & breeding practices, and services
Improved livestock parasites & disease control measures, and services
Health & environmental effects of unwise vet drug use, and drug
handling & disposal practice
Improved crop pests & diseases control measure, and services
Health & environmental effects of unwise pesticide use, and pesticide
handling & disposal practice
Other specify

2. Participation in other extension activities in the last 12 months

Learning events Yes Who took Please specify Practical**
(√) part* the subject usefulness
Managing demonstration /on-
farm trial
Farmer field day
Experience sharing visit
Farmer-to-farmer knowledge
sharing
Discussion with model farmer
FRG /FFS
Other (specify)
** Rate on scale from 1=not useful, 2=slightly useful, 3=moderately useful, 4=useful, 5=highly useful
* 1 =husband, 2=wife, 3=both, 4 =son, 5=daughter

2. Frequency of contact with DAs during last cropping season:__________

1. None 2. Quarterly 3. Weekly 4.Daily

V. Private crop protection and animal health service use

a. Reason for use/non use
Perception Yes/no
When and from who did you heard about the service? specify
Have you ever tried it and/or participate in on-farm demonstration/testing? 1=Yes, =No

123
Do you think that if you use, it will reduce crop loss and/or increase 1=Yes, =No
quality?
Will you purchase through credit if you can’t afford the payment? 1=Yes, =No
Have you ever applied pesticides and/or administered drug to your animals? 1=Yes, =No
Do you have training or experience in proper application of pesticides 1=Yes, =No
and/or administration of vet drug?
Do you have training or experience in proper storage and disposal of 1=Yes, =No
pesticides and/or vet drug?
What other traditional crop protection and/or animal health measures do specify
you often use?
How do you assess the performance of traditional crop protection and/or specify
animal health measures often used relative to the introduced ones (inferior,
just the same, superior)?

2. How do you assess alternative sources of crop protection and/or animal health service?
Pair-wise ranking of main service options and eliciting criteria the farmer uses for
comparison
Formal- public Formal- private Informal-private
Formal- public
Formal- private
Informal-private

b. Application and effect of formal private crop protection and/or animal health services
1. For how many seasons have you used private crop protection and/or animal health
services? PRIVATE CROP PROTECTION PRIVATE ANIMAL HEALTH
1. 2. 3. 1. 2. 3.
2. The use of private crop protection and/or animal health services in the last 12 months
2.1. Crop protection service
Size in Crop in Pesticide Amount Source Service
timad field (Q) type used (L) charge, Br
Plot one
Plot two
Plot three

2.2. Animal health service

Type of animal Parasite & Charge per Frequency Service Remark
treated disease treated service (Br) of service use provider

3. What factors do you consider (in the order of importance) while making decision on the
use and extent of use of crop protection service in a given season? 1.-- 2.—3.--

124
4. What is your level of satisfaction with the performance of the private crop protection
and/or animal health service?
Private crop protection service ----------- private animal health service -----------------
Rating: 1=very dissatisfied, 2= dissatisfied, 3= fair, 4=satisfied, 5=very satisfied

5. What are the actual results / your view about the likely results of the use of the service?
5.1. Private crop protection: 1= reduced crop loss-------Q, 2=increased product quality.
Please get the farmer’s estimate of incremental benefit as a result of reduced crop
loss and/or improved grain quality.
5.2. Private animal health service- 1. Reduced mortality, 2. Improved productivity (e.g.
weight gain, milk production, etc). Please get the farmer’s estimate of incremental
benefit as a result of private animal health service availability & use.

VI. Sustainability of the private crop protection and/or animal health service use
Description Reasons
Which element of the private protection service do you wish to continue
with?
Which specific private protection service do you not wish to continue with?
Which specific private animal health service do you wish to continue with?
Which specific private animal health service do you not wish to continue
with?
7) Have you ever encountered any symptom(s) of health impairments resulting from
pesticide application? 1. Yes 2. No: 1. eye irritation 2= skin irritation, 3= nausea, 4=
headache, 5= vomiting
8) Have you observed any change in biodiversity such as decrease/increase in
weeds/invasive plant species, insect pests, mosquitoes, beneficial insects, mammals
and birds, etc)? Please provide details.

VII. Willingness to pay for private crop protection and veterinary services
delivery
Description: Scenario 1 or 2 (which will be randomly administered to 120 HH)

Scenario 1: This is specifically designed to discourse strategic behavior

As you know in your area, the cost of providing crop protection and veterinary service to
the farmers has mostly been financed by the government and provided free of charge.
However, lack of funds, cost ineffectiveness and lack of impact is now becoming a major
obstacle in providing these services. In view of this, private crop spray providers and

125
CAHWs have initiated to introduce cost recovery mechanism to the farmers through some
user charges of birr X to ensure financial sustainability of service delivery and to build
genuine quality control mechanism. We want to know your response with the existing
payment and your willingness to pay per hectare spray/de-worming (if you are not
satisfied with the existing payment) so that high quality services can be provided. Your
answer cannot change the plan that the government has to delivery these services in the
future.

Scenario 2: This is designed to capture any strategic behavior by the respondent in

answering willingness to pay questions.
As you know in your area the cost of providing crop protection and veterinary service to
the farmers has mostly been financed by the government and provided free of charge.
However, lack of funds, cost ineffectiveness and lack of impact is now becoming a major
obstacle in providing these services. In view of this, private crop spray providers and
CAHWs have initiated to introduce cost recovery mechanism to the farmers through some
user charges of birr X to ensure financial sustainability of service delivery and to build
genuine quality control mechanism. Thus, we want to know your response with the
existing payment and your willingness to pay per hectare spray/de-worming (if you are not
satisfied with the existing payment) so that high quality services can be provided.
1 Is the existing actual charge rates (X) for different crop protection /animal health
services is reasonable? 1=Yes, 2= No
2 If NO for Q1, would you be willing to pay a little different fee than actual for high
quality spray/CAHWs service and enhance maximum production from crop/livestock
production? 1. Lower and go to Q5 2. Higher and go to Q4
3 If the answer for Q1 is Yes, why? 1.I can’t afford more than this 2.It is the fee the
service deserve 3. I do not believe in improving the service delivery through paying 4.
The government has to fund to cover the remaining fee 5.Other (specify) __________
4 Would you be willing to pay BX birr per hectare/de-worming? Where BX>X.
Yes=1 if yes go to (6), No=2 if no go to
5 Would you be willing to CX birr per hectare/de-worming? Where CX<X.
6 Yes=1 if yes go to (6), No=2 if no go to
7 What is the maximum you are willing to pay per visit? -----------------------
8 What is the main reason for your maximum willingness to pay the fee stated in number
6 above? 1) I could not afford more 2) I think it worth that amount 3) Other (specify)

126
9 How do you evaluate your ability to pay for spray/CAHWs service?
10 1. Unable 2. Able 3. Well able
11 Preferred mode of payment? 1. Personally 2. With other farmers 3. In
cooperative 4. Others(specify)-----------------------
12 Preferred payment vehicle (how the WTP amount would be paid)?
13 1. Per hectare/de-worming 2. Per month 3. Per bi-annual 4. Per annum
14 Conditions that will enhance payment?
1. Relevance of the spray/CAHWs service
2. Effectiveness and efficiency of the development agent
3. Improvement in production output and market
4. Improved income from crop production/animal husbandry
5. Others(specify)----------------------------------

Appendix 13. Checklist for Group Discussion of KIGs

1.Does formal vision / long term plan (national/regional) exist with regard to developing
pluralistic service delivery, whereby private and local organization will gradually have
more roles than the public sector in production inputs supply and protection/ animal
health service delivery? Please provide official document and/ or details.
2.If yes, what is (are) the formal/official strategic aim (s) to be achieved through the
promotion of pluralistic service delivery? Such aims may include the improvement of
service access (coverage, timeliness, effectiveness, accountability for performance, etc)
Please provide official document and/ or details.
3.What are the (current & future) strategic focuses (key interventions) of public extension
(WoARD) to support the development of private service delivery?
4.Please provide official document and or details.
5.Which department, team or ‘process owner’ at WoARD (if any) has formal
responsibility of coordinating activities for supporting and overseeing private
production input supply and protection/ animal health service delivery?
6.Who else are actually involved in providing support and services to the private crop
protection and/or animal health service delivery?
Service Provider/ Facilitator/ Capacity (staff No
supplier financer & competence)*
knowledge (technical training,

127
 information, and backstopping)
Knowledge
(business/entrepreneurship skills)
Finance/credit
Material/inputs
Licensing / certification
Quality and safety supervision
Market development/linkages
Any other (specify)
* Rate from 1 (very low capacity) to 5 (high capacity)

7. How do you assess the relative performance of the private crop protection/ animal
health service delivery? Rate on scale from 1 (poor) to 5 (excellent)
Indicators Rating Remark
Timeliness/responsiveness
Effectiveness
Affordability
Commercial viability
Safety (health &
environmental)
8.SWOT Analysis of private crop protection/ animal health service delivery by expert
group at WoARD. Identify and rate on scale from 1 (marginal) to 5 (high) the main
SWOTs of the private crop protection/animal health service delivery
Key strengths of private service Key opportunities for private service expansion
(internal factor) and sustainability (external factors)

Key weaknesses of private Key threats for private service expansion and
service (internal factors) sustainability (external factors)

9. Please provide any data available at WoARD on private crop protection and animal
health service. a) Service type, Service providers, Service providers’ capacity, Farmers
access to service / factors constraining access, Service coverage, etc
10. Pesticide/drug sources, use, handling, and health and environmental effects
11. Pesticides and vet drugs sources

Type chemical Trade Common Source WHO class@

/ vet drug name name (can be done after the survey)

@= highly hazardous, moderately hazardous, slightly hazardous, no hazard in normal use, unknown

10.1 Pesticides or/and vet drugs handling practice:

10.1.1 Protective equipment and precaution against exposure?
10.1.2 Storage?

128
10.1.3 Container disposal (reuse/sell/litter in the field/bury)?
10.2 Any symptom(s) of health impairments encountered due to pesticide application such
as eye irritation, skin irritation, Nausea, headache, vomiting, etc?
10.3 Any change in biodiversity due to pesticides use such as decrease/increase in
weeds/invasive plant species, insect pests, mosquitoes, beneficial insects, mammals
and birds, etc)?

Appendix 14. Checklist for CAHWs or Private Crop Protection Service Providers
Part I. General information
1. Contact address of the service provider ---------------------------------------------------------
2. Education of the service provider (none/primary/secondary/beyond)
3. Type of service s/he provides and for how long s/he has been providing -------------
4. How did you start the service provision?
4.1 What motivated you to start the business?
4.2 What external support did you get at a start?
4.3 Have you had formal training and/or prior experience in crop protection/animal health
service business?
If you have attended any formal training (both technical & non-technical) relevant to the
service please provide details:
Title of the Training duration Venue Trainer Skill- orientation*

*1=highly theoretical, 2=slightly theoretical, 3=moderately practical, 4=practical, 5=highly practical oriented.
5.1 License and regulatory requirements
5.2 Do you need license/certification to provide the service?
5.3 What are the requirements that one should fulfill to provide the service formally?
5.4 What is your view about the requirements and ability of the providers to meet it?
5.5 What are the regulations currently enforced to ensure service quality and safety?
6 What were the main constraints/challenges that you faced during starting up?
A B C
7 Currently, who are your service users (clients)? Please list them in order of
importance, under the following categories:
a. Residence (Urban / peri-urban/ rural) 1. ---------------- --2. -------------- 3. ------
b. Wealth category (poor/middle/better-off) 1. ---------------- 2. --------------------- 3.
c. Headship (Male-headed/female-headed) 1. ------------------- 2. -----------------------

129
8 List in order of importance your current sources of inputs, knowledge and finance for
the crop protection and/or animal health service provision:
a) Inputs/materials 1. ----------------------- --2. ---------------- 3. -------------------
b) Knowledge and information, 1. ------------- --2. -------------- 3. -------------
c) Finance/credit 1. ------------------ --2. -------------------------- 3. ------
10. Current external support and linkages (only formal providers)
10.1 What external supports are you currently getting from WoARD and others?
A. B. C.
10.2 How do you assess the technical back stopping you are being provided with by
WoARD? Rate on scale from 1 (poor) to 5 (excellent) in terms of
Relevance/usefulness -----, Timeliness-----, Adequacy----------------------
11 With whom and for what purpose would you like to establish new linkages to help
strengthen your business (service provision)? A ------ B ---- C-------
12 Perception about opportunities and constraints to stay in the business and/or expand
the business.
12.1 What are the three things that you consider as opportunities encouraging you to
expand your service?
a-------------------, b-----------------------------, c-----------------------------
12.2 What are the three things that you consider as constraints or challenges
discouraging you to expand your service? a) --- b)---- c)---
13 The demand for and the delivery of crop protection and/or animal health service:
specific services Season (months) in which Average service Can you meet
demanded service needed need (ha/cattle the demand?*
head)

*Rate on scale 1(rarely) to 5(always)

14 Overall all, how has been the demand for your service in the last 12 months?
Rate on scale from 1(very low ) to 5 (very highly ). ---------------------------------
15 Please provide actual data on your crop protection/animal health service coverage
(please refer to their record for formal providers) in the last cropping season
16 Service charge (only formal providers)?
16.1 Who set service charge rates and how they are set? -------------------------------------
16.2 How comparable are your charge rates (low/ the same/ higher) with the rates charged
by another private/public provider of similar service (if there is any)? -------------- ----

130
16.3 What is the payment condition (cash/credit)? --------------------------------------
17 Please provide actual charge rates for different crop protection /animal health services.
Rate on scale from 1 (marginally viable) to 5 (highly viable)
18 Overall, how do you assess the commercial viability of the service you are providing?
Rate on scale from 1 (marginally viable) to 5 (highly viable) -------------------------------

Part II. Pesticide and vet drug sources, use, and handling

1. Pesticides and vet drugs sources

chemical/ drug Trade name Common name Source WHO class @

@ 1= highly hazardous, 2=moderately hazardous, 3=slightly hazardous, 4=no hazard in normal use, 5=unknown

2. Pesticides or/and vet drugs handling practice:

2.1 Protective equipment and precaution against exposure? --------------------Storage?
-------------------------Container disposal (reuse/sell/litter in the field/bury)? ---------------
Have you ever encountered any symptom(s) of health impairments resulting from
pesticide application? (yes/no)
1. Eye irritation, 2=skin irritation, 3=nausea, 4=headache, 5=vomiting, 6=other
(specify)
3. Have you observed any change in biodiversity such as decrease/increase in
weeds/invasive plant species, insect pests, mosquitoes, beneficial insects, mammals
and birds, etc)? Please provide details.

131