DETERMINANTS OF WHEAT PRODUCTIVITY IN HETOSA WOREDA

EAST ARSI ZONE, OROMIA REGIONAL STATE

A SENIOR ESSAY FOR PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF BACHLOR OF ART

IN ECONOMICS

SUBMITTED TO: DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS

COLLEGE OF BUSINESS AND ECONOMICS

ARBA MINCH UNIVERSITY

By: BEDASO ARARSE

ADVISOR: FASIL E

JUNE/20017/AMU, ETHIOPIA
DECLARATION

1,Bedaso Ararse declares that this research work entitled “The Determinats oe wheat
productiveity in case of Hetosa WoredaEast Arsi zone Oromia Region” submitted to department
of Economics, College of Business and Economics,Arba Minch University in partial fulfillment
for the requirement of Bachelor of Art Degree in Economics is my original work, and has not
been printed, published and submitted as a research work. Further the researcher confirms that all
the sources of the materials used for this study have been appropriately cited and acknowledged.

By:

Signature_________________

DATE____________________

I
Certificate evaluation

This is to certify that BEDASO ARARSE with ID, NO RBE/102/06 has done the research
titled the Determinants of wheat productivity in Hetosaworeda East Arsi Zone. The
research is done as per the requirement for partial fulfillment of the degree of Bachelor of
Arts in Economics.

Advisor-----------------------Signature--------------------Date-------------------------

Examiner 1 -----------------Signature--------------------Date--------------------------

Examiner 2-------------------Signature----------------------dates-----------------------

II
Acknowledgement

Before anything, I would like to give my heartfelt honor, praise &glory to the almighty God,
who gave me protection & strength at every step in my live Next I would like to express my deep
& sincere gratitude to my super advisor, FASIL (MSc) for his enthusiasm, dedication and
guidance throughout my paper. I really appreciated the in valuable advice that he has given to
me.

I am greatly indebted to my family for their moral and financial assistance without which the
accomplishment of this paper would not have been possible.

Lastly, but not least I would like to acknowledge all others who encouraged and assisted me in
any way or another during the preparation of this senior essay. In this respect special thanks goes
to respondents at HetosaWoreda area who took their valuable time to feel out the questionnaires.

III
 Abstract

The aim of this study is to examine the factor that influencing wheat productivity in the case
ofHetosaWoreda in four selected kebele, Arise Zone. Data for this study collected from primary
data and secondary data in 2016 cropping season. A two stage random sampling procedure was
adapted to select 4kebele primary agricultural cooperative and a total of 123
respondentsfromfourkebele. Both descriptive and econometrics were used to describe socio
economic and institutional characteristics of the respondent through percentage in farmers.

Multiple linear regression models were employed to identify determinant that influencing wheat
production was regressed against nine explanatory variables so as to identify the determinant of
wheat production in house holder farmers. Regression result revealed that age, fertilizer level,
number of oxen, credit access, and extension level are positively influenced and statistically
significant variables. Whereas only two variables arelandsize, family size, fertility level were
statistically negative an insignificant at 5%.

Therefore the study suggest that number of oxen, fertilizer, age, credit access are some of the
important priority area for the success of future intervention strategies aimed at the promotion of
increasing production for sustainable development in agricultural sector.

IV
ACRONYMS

HWAB=HetosaWoredaAgricultural Bureaus

WB=World Bank

CSA=Central statistics Agency

OLS=Ordinary Least Square

GDP=Gross domestic Production

EEA=Ethiopia Economics Associations

FAO=FOOD Assistance Organization

TFP=Total Factors of productivity

ADLI=Agricultural Developments Lead Industry

SSA=Sub-Saharan Africa

LDCs=Less Developed Countries

V
 TABLECONTENTS

Certificate evaluation………………………………………………………………………I

Acknowledgement………………………………………………………………………….II

Abstract……………………………………………………………………………………..III

Acronyms……………………………………………………………………………………..IV

Table contents…………………………………………………………………………………V

List of table……………………………………………………………………………………VI

CHAPTER ONE ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1

1. INTRODUCTION--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1

1.1. Background of the study---------------------------------------------------------------------2

1.2. Statements of the problem-------------------------------------------------------------------3

1.3. Objective of the study------------------------------------------------------------------------4

1.4. Significance of the study---------------------------------------------------------------------5

1.5. Scope of the study-----------------------------------------------------------------------------6

1.6. Organization of the study--------------------------------------------------------------------7

CHAPTER TWO--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------2

2. LITERATURE REVIEW-------------------------------------------------------------------------------1

2.1 definitions of term and concept ----------------------------------------------------------------------2

2.1.2 The role of agriculture in economic growth-----------------------------------------------------3

2.1.3 Total Factor of production--------------------------------------------------------------------------4

2.14 condition for the realization of agricultural progress-----------------------------------------5

2.1.5 Component of high yield crop production system---------------------------------------------6

2.1.6. Cultivation system-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------7

2.1.7. Agriculture development challenges--------------------------------------------------------------8

2.1.8. Direction for increase agricultural productivity-----------------------------------------------9

2.1.9. The post 1991 agricultural policies and strategies of Ethiopia----------------------------10

2.2. Empirical literature review-------------------------------------------------------------------------11

CHAPTER THREE----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------3

3. METHODOLOGIES------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1

3.1. Descriptive of the study area-------------------------------------------------------------------------2

3.2. Source of data-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------3

3.3. Sampling method and sampling size---------------------------------------------------------------4

3.4. Method of data analysis-------------------------------------------------------------------------------5

3.5. Model Specification------------------------------------------------------------------------------------6

CHAPTER FOUR-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4

4. DATA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION-------------------------------------------------------------1

4.1. Descriptive analysis of data---------------------------------------------------------------------------2

4.2. Demographic characteristic--------------------------------------------------------------------------3

4.2.1 Sex and age composition of respondent-----------------------------------------------------------

4

4.2.2. Education level of respondents--------------------------------------------------------------------5

4.2.3. Family size of the respondents---------------------------------------------------------------------6

4.3. Socio-economical determinants of production-------------------------------------------------7

4.3.1. Number of oxen and land size in hectares of households-----------------------------------8-

4.3.2. Distribution of fertilizer and improved seed use of household-----------------------------9-

4.3.3. The distribution of output of wheat in 2008 cropping season------------------------------10

4.3.4. Distribution of respondents by credit access and extension service----------------------11

4.3.5. Distribution of respondents by social leadership and off-farming activity--------------

12

4.3.6. Distribution of respondents on irrigation------------------------------------------------------13

4.4. The major problem of wheat production---------------------------------------------------------

14

4.5. Result of Econometrics Analysis-------------------------------------------------------------------15

4.5.1. Table summary-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------16

4.5.2. Discussion of the result----------------------------------------------------------------------------17

CHAPTER FIVE--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------5

5. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION-----------------------------------------------------1

5.1. Conclusion-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------2

5.2. Recommendation---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------3

APPENDIX-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4

SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE------------------------------------------------------------------------5

Multiple linear regression model result-------------------------------------------------------------6

REFERENCE---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------7
 VI

List of Table pages

Table 4.1 sex and age composition or respondents----------------------1

Table 4.2 Education level of respondents----------------------------------2

Table 4.3 Family size of the house hold-------------------------------------3

Table 4.4 numbers of oxen and land size per hectare holding by household-----4

Table 4.5 distribution of fertilizer and improved seed of farmer-----------------5

Table 4.6 Output of wheat production in 2008 cropping season-----------------6

Table 4.7 distribution of respondent by credit access and extension services----7

Table 4.8 distributions of respondents by the level of income from crop, livestock & off-farm----

…………………………………………………………………………………..8

Table 4.9 distribution of respondent of irrigation activities-------------------------9

 VII

CHAPTER ONE

1. INTRODUTION

1.1 Back Ground of the Study

Agriculture is dominants sector of developing world economics .It provides up with all over
food. In addition agricultural provides a material use in making industrial product .Agricultural
began to develop about 1000years ago in the Middle East. The world farmer grow about 85%
maser food crops (WB 2001)

The social ,economic and political import antes of agricultural development is under scored by
the society a large part of the world people huge majority of the world poorest people learn their
livelihood in agricultural(Dagim,2003).

South East Asia is a region of impressive cultural, environmental and there is a broad range of
temperatures from tropical in the low lands to temperate in the highlands. There is also a broad
range of to epigraphic conditions, from flat alluvial valleys and coastal plains in the law lands to
undulating terrain, hills and mountains in the up lands and high lands. Most of south East Asia is
in the humid tropics, but there is great variation in the distinctness and duration of the dry season
(Briggle, 1980).

Much of south East Asia is blessed with fertile volcanic or alluvial soils such areas particularly
the river valleys have high human populations many of the mountainous areas have been
dominated by forests until recon it decades but they are rapidly being transformed to agricultural
are consequence of logging and the movement of expanding human population into lands
available farming (CRC Press. 1990).

Sub-Sahara Africa is one of the world poorest regions. Its population (over 600 million) and land
area approximately three times that of the Sarthe regions economics are heavily dependent on
agriculture, which accounts for two thirds of the la bur force 35% of GNP and 40% of foreign
 1

exchange earnings.producitivity per formic in the agricultural sector is thus critical to

improvement in overall economic well-being in sub –Saharan Africa (SSA) Faro (1994-2000).

Agriculture contributes about 30 to 40 percent of GDP share and higher employment

opportunities total value of production is greater than any other economic sectors of African
economics (WB, 2880).

Agriculture in Ethiopia is main stay of economy where as 85% of the population engaged by this
sector and makes 43% of GDP shares. The salient feature of Ethiopia agriculture includes
subsistence or dentition & fragmentation and small size land holding valance rabidity to
manmade and natural disaster (AYELE, 2006).

In Ethiopia the agricultural production is dominated by crop production, this clop is

characterized by the traditional methods of forming. Ethiopia has a good land for all good crops.
It needs as well as numerous cash crops such as coffee, teas tobacco ….. Etc (CSA, 2009).

In Ethiopia is one of the sub- Saharan African countries which liberalize its economy to maintain
in all sectors a sustained economic growth and reduce poverty over the last ten years the

sustained economic growth brought with it posited trends in reducing poverty in urban and rural
areas (CSA, 2002)

Ethiopians agricultural: - is plagued by periodic drought, soil degree data ion caused by over
grazing, deforestation, high levels of taxation and poor infrastructure. Yet agriculture is the
country’s most promising resource. A potential exists for self- sufficiency in grains and for
export development in livestock, grains, vegetables and fruits. Agriculture in Ethiopia is the
foundation of the country’s economy, accounting for half of GDP 83.9% of exports and 80% of
total employ mint of the countries (FAO, 1984).

Agriculture sectors play a strategic role in the process of economic development of a county. It
had already made a significant contribution to the economic prosperity of advanced countries
and its role in the economic development of LDC, are of vital importance. In other words where
per capital Real in com is Low, emphasis is being laid on agriculture and other primary
 2

industries. Agricultural employs many people it contributes to economic development. As a

result, the national income level as well as peoples standard of lying is implodes.

The fast rate of development in agriculture sector offers progressive outlook as well as increased
motivation for development. Special in LDCs .Hence it odes to create good at morpheme for
overall economic development of a county. There sole agricultural iota source of economic
development most in LDCs.

LDCs the progress in agricultural sector provides surplus for in cleansing the exports of
agricultural products. In the earlier stages of development, an increase in the exports earning in
more desirable because of the greater stirring on the foreign exchange situation needed for the
sinning of imports of basis and essential capital goods.

Most of the developing contrives of the world are exporters of primary products. These products
contribute the capacity to import capital goods and machinery for industrial development
depends crucially on the export earning of the agriculture sector.

Agricultural is the main source of national income for most developing countries. However, for
the developed count ling aeroculture contribution a smaller per cent age to their national
incomes. Thus are wheat production, Barley production, sol sum, maize, cassia papaya and so. It
has two production clops production and livestock production activity. It has total population
27/5847/and it location by degree latitude of center 7 30 N and longitude of center 39 ‘30’ E. It
average elation 2313 maters (CSA 2007).

In Arise Zone post years low agriculture performances, water shortage posture stress and over
grazing occurred mostly in the low land (Kola). In (2002-2003) mal-nuttation signs reported after
that Arise Zone in 2004- 2009) to get modeled Rainfall. It has 22 worded, is have been appercted
by the prolonged drought conditions. Like Daudet site and Ziway way Grudges. Arise Zone
populated as a surplus the good security situation. Eater Zone production is many thus are wheat,
Barley tiff, coffee, papaya, and other Agricultural productizing exisisting in this west Arise
Zone.

According to DPPD in East Arise Zone, wheat and maize clops appear globally in very good
condition despite excess of rain having destroyed locally cereals clops. How erect, problems are
still affecting some pocked areas in Hetosa, Woreda cha and Dodo to sire workdays with wheat
 3

mostly affected by interruption of rain during growing stage and some pest attacks, lack of
modern seed to use and formats Training on form and scarce to use fertilizer. (Piquet, 2002). On
this Hetosaworeda area privy pious studies above seen now researcher to improve in that area

problem. This is namely low of fertilizer use to educate or to giving Training on form,
Sustainability to pest disease out breaks control and to control extensible high land soil elusions
in that area (HatosaWoreda).and also to use modernize seed. To giving education for formals to
working by organization.

1.2 statement of the problem

The activity of agriculture in Ethiopian is not dynamic due to land degradation, drought, poor
technology, poor marketing facilities, poor infrastructure small size land holding and lack of
good facilities from government (Daniel, 2004).

Ethiopia have been estimate population size of 80 million (CSA, 1997) which the majority of
them engaged in apiculture economy activity for the live hold. But millions people of Ethiopian
country chronically good in secured. An estimated 50 to 60% of country people under poverty
line. Even on good harvest year. This have aggravated food insecurity situation by widening the
gap between demand and supply of good by widening the gap between demand and supply of
good (luster, 1998). This resulted from increasing population, with slight variation of climate ,
access stability to market of products; the sectors is high dependence on rain fall with minimum
percent of arable litigation . Even of the out pat from the sector is satisfactory, agriculture is the
major contribution of good security (FAO, 2007).

According to Ethiopia economics association report gaining in the yields levels in the farming
over the few years, from most cereal clop (wheat, maize, tiff and …) has not been able to
increase average yield for most cereal crop country as a whole (EEA, 2006). This is due to low
fertilizer use, sustainability to pest disease out breaks and extensible high land soil erosions
(decreases sterilizer of the land) has meant to high variable in year to year agricultural
production.

Therefore, new Researcher to improving credit assesses of farmers in worked increasing patience
of a farmers by giving training about form adopting farm adopting form with fertilizer uses and
improving irrigation set vice and to improve and contra ling soil erosion and land fragmentation
of the area.
 4

However, new there is limited empirical in the study area that identified factors w/c determine
the wheat productity. To contribute to this knowledge gap, the study will be and retaken with
high wheat yield level among the smallholder farmer in the study area. The present study aimed
to address the following research of question.

a. What factors hinders wheat productivity in the study area?

b. What is the average productivity, output of wheat in quintal per hectare, in the study area?

c. What is the trend of wheat productivity in Hetosaworeda?

1.3 Objective of the study

The General objective of the present study is to examine the determinants of wheat productivity
in the study areas. Specifically, the current study devoted.

a. To explore the trend of wheat production in the study areas using time series data from
Secondary sources
b. To asses other socio-economic factor that affect of wheat production.
c. To examine farmers strategies to increase production.
d. To determine the average wheat productivity in the study areas by researcher or by
extension of agricultural productivity.
e. To identify the main determinant of wheat production in study area.
f. To forward some feasible policy recommendation based on key results of the study

1.4 Significance of the study

Agriculture is currently contributed in the total GPD was high and the population engine in the
sector in LDCs, including Ethiopia. To improve the love of this sector was as ensure of economic
growth of country, increasing productivity was important. Identifying factors that affected
production will policy makers to formulate policies and strata gives that improve the production
of farmers, sating rules and regulation or instruction governing to developed performance of
agriculture. It also increases smarmed production. This study hopes to contribute a long this line
and will conducted for this deficiency of information response behavior of farmer the local level
 5

of in the study are .In addition to this those study hint use how to get efficiency technically and
provide information for further research

1.5. Scope of the study

Even though it is important to investigate and examine the determinants of wheat production in
whole of Ethiopia, the study was only focus on Hetosaworeda. Under the study of determinants
of wheat production only four kebeles are selected, because due to both financial and time
constraint.

1.6. Organization of the study

This research would be organized in to five chapters. The first chapter is introduction part which
includes back ground, statements of the problem and with research question, objective of the
study, significances of the study, scope of the study. The second chapter deals with the
literature reviews. The third chapter tries to analysis the research design and methodology of the
study.

The fourth chapter deals with data analysis and discussion and finally, the fifth chapter provides
conclusion and recommendation.
 6

CHAPTER TWO

2. SURVEY OF RELATED LITERATURE

2.1. Definition of terms and concept

Agricultural productivity: -is measured as the ration of agricultural out puts to agricultural in
puts. While individual products are usually measured by weight, their varying densities make
measuring over all agricultural output difficult. Agricultural productivity is measure of the
amount of agricultural output productivity is measure of the amount of in putts such as an index
of multiple out puts divided by an index of multiple inputs (e.s the value of all farm out puts
divided by the value of all farm inputs.

Agriculture would the since of cultivates soil harvesting crop and raising livestock and also a
since of art of production of plant and animal useful to man and other disposal agriculture
include farming in all its branches and among other things includes a cultivation growing and
harvesting of any agriculture or horticultural commodities the raising of livestock or postural any
parts performance by farmer or a form as an incident to in conduction with some farming
operation but does not includes the monitoring the manufacturing and processing (apart, 1997).

Agriculture growing both animal and crop far human needs (Ablanosa, 1987) clop was large
number of plant of any given kind that is grown for human use. Crop grown to feed people are
called fiber crops. Produce use in clothing and other products (world book, 200). There are three
major crops categories are cereal, pulse and oil seeds, the principal cereal crop are wheat, Teff,
barley, maize, sorghum, millet and arts. Pulse includes horse been, click peas, haricot been, sidle
peas and oilseeds include Neuse, kin seed fugue rack rape seed sunflower, ground nets and see
same.

2.2 The role of agriculture in economic growth

The concept of agricultural development was the resent areas of emphasis a development
economists. Literature on agricultural developments show that agriculture cues not considered in
earlier period as on important and libation to economic growth. This was the view of agricultural
in economics development in historical prospective (Eithehar and stoat, 1960s ).Their
 7

explanation show that development with structural transformation of economics with deckling in
agricultural transformation of economics with deckling in agriculture was often treated as all
back bone form with people and food to feed them could be relies. According to lends (1854).
Labor can be transferred from subsistence sector to industrial sector without only less of
productivity.

Most of development economists of the 1950s viewed agriculture as passive sector, with would
deckling in important as industrial growth absorbed increasing source of production and
employment. They focused on the contribution of agriculture to overall economic growth in
steady of analyzing the process of agricultural growth. In 1906s however several economists role
including Jorson and Mallir (1561) stressed the fundamental role of that agriculture could
potentially play in economic development and the importance of understanding the process of
agriculture growth (todrlo.2003).

Agriculture was noted that as an important contribution for economic growth and major inputs
source like labor and other that inevitably associated with betterment with betterment of
economic conductions’ ‘Progresso civilization”(Lewis.1954).

2.3Total Factor Productivity

In economists, total sector of productivity (TFP) was a variable which accounts of effects in total
output not caused by traditionally measured in puts. If all puts were accounted as a measure of an
economies long term technological dynamism. In all input are accounted for total factor
productivity may also reflect omitted for example, a year with usual good weather hinders
agricultural output berceuse bad weather hinders agricultural output. If a variable like the
weather was not consider as an input than weather would be included in the measure of total
factor of productivity. Total factor productivity was often seen as the real drive of growth within
an economics and studies reveal that while labor and investment are important contributed total
factor productivity may account for up to 60% of the growth within economics.

2.3 Condition for the realization of agricultural progress

In most developing countries new agricultural technology and innovation in form practice are
precondition for sustenance improvement level output and productivity. Development and
 8

adoption of appropriate and farmable technical was essential for long run productivity
improvement and agricultural research was predominant the means to development new
agriculture to replace human labor and biological innovation and chemical innovation the major
source of technologies and innovation that can increase form yield (Todare.2003).Condition for
the realization of agriculture progress like land reform creating effective policy and integrated
development objective are some appropriate government economic policies that can increase
production.

2.4 Component of high field crop production system

Seed industry: Available and aggressively function of feed industry was the engine that drives
the transformation from tradition agriculture to modern or technology based agriculture. The
triggered the emergency of good.

Fertilizer use: The proper use of mineral fertilizer is not only enhancing crop yield but can play
a significant role in reducing land degradation and soil nutrient depletion (said, 2002).

Water: Ethiopian food crop production is primarily dependent on rain fall. During favorable
rainfall year harvest are adequate but when the rain is inadequate there is very little harvest.

Farm power and implements: The farm power and implements used in Ethiopia are old age;
often the power used in Ethiopia farmers comes from oxen and human labor

Harvesting: Popper and timely harvesting is critical for high field of high clop quality. If
harvesting was delayed, the chance of quality deterioration especially. If rain was present high
disease such as grain models and spouting of grain in the field could make market place.

Storage: Storage after harvesting and there shin it’s in the proper structure should be suitable for
the producers, unique situation and environment.

9
2.5 Cultivation system

The privies of crop production and techniques are visiting in accordance with particular
characteristics of the environment and the needs of farmers. According to Sam 1995
demonstration of the general principle of the cultivation are outline below.

Maintaining fertility

There are the number of in which soil fertility can be reserved some of them are maintaining
tillage. Sloughing is used to remove weeds to create and improve drainage of soils, provide a
good filled and bring insect’s larvae and pests.

 Soil conservation
 Cropping system
 Seed selection
 Crop rotation
 Inter cropping
 Pest control

2.6 Agriculture development challenges

In Ethiopia there are many challenges of agricultural sectors. But there is some challenges
indicated by Dejen as the following.

A. Environmental constant

Human and livestock population pressure complete with in appropriate land use system had been
responsible far over frizzing of farm land and irrigational use for forest resource there by
resulting in environmental degradation.

B. Technological constant

Ethiopians agricultural was mainly traditional and subsistence most small holder farmers use
very back word agricultural technologies

10
 C. Invitational constant

Attempts to create rural institutional to facilitate effective participation of farmers in the process
of agricultural development have been in adequate.

D. Dependence on rained agriculture

Although Ethiopia is considered as a country of water to war agricultural activity was being
conduct using mainly rain water most often the rain fall was in adequate in amount and erratic in
distribution for the growth plant. Another factor of production constraints are:-

 Land degradation
 Land fragmentation
 Land tenure
 Backward technology
 Unpredictable weather condition
 Poor infrastructure

2.8 The post 1991 agricultural policies and strategies of Ethiopia.

The countries development strategies are expected to remove around productivity enhancement
of small house hold agriculture and industrializations based on the utilization of domestic raw
material via adoptions labor intensive technologies this strategy is known as the agricultural
development led industrialization (ADLI) and ( cited by Temesgn, 2002). The solver men adopts
this strategy by the sir it Ethiopia context. It has internal sector, which concentrates primarily on
the development of agricultural with sir ward and back ward linkage between the agricultural and
industrial sectors and the external sector (export). The linkage can be under stood in two ways:

1/ Agricultural would provide domestic good requirement, supply industrial inputs and provide
commodities for export.

2/ Development of agricultural sector expands market for domestically product good and
services, because of increased income of farmers

11
 Agricultural extension was the base for raising the productivity of the small holder farmers
who are the participants at the grass-root level. One of the basic goals of the program was
ensuring accelerated economic growth through rural centered development program or
strategy, which mainly soused on the development agricultural sectors out puts using package
program through:

 The distribution of improved seed fertilizer and pesticides to farmers.

 Provision of credit and improved extension service.
 Conservation and natural resource rehabilitation.
 Establishment of agricultural market service.
 Expansion economic and social infrastructure and peasant association.
2.9 Empirical literature review
 The studies on determinants of agricultural form house hold are related to the “green
revolution technology” the other commonly available literature are the study made by
world bank on the evaluation of the impacts of tracing and visit extension system in some
developing countries, In Ethiopia, such type of studies are few and area also not to date
so, there little evidence available on effect of extension system exercises in the country in
general (Marcetion, 1976), classified the strategies, which have been used to deal with the
problem of small farmers in to different categories, the development of new technology
and production strategies, to increase the productivity if the resource used in agriculture.
(Richard&Larson 1987) also underlined the potential of new technologies for increasing
the income of the poor without neglecting the possibility of off farm jobs. He emphasized
the importance of the off-farm jobs to generate additional income where the biological
technologies& expansion of farm size were fully exploited (schultz1964), in his
influential book of “transforming’ ‘traditionalagriculture, ‘state that in traditional
agriculture where the maximum potential yield had been achieved, farmers where ‘poor
but efficient. ‘In his study, he indicated that the gap between the best practice & the
actual practice the farmers were soing was actually not very large & that the potential for
yield improvement from extension was low. He effectively pointed out that a rise in
maximum potential yields is required to create a potential to be effective. However,
evidence from bindles& Everson (1993), indicate that extension programs in countries

12
 with very low technological infrastructure have been effective even when the maximum
potential yields have not been rising.
 In agricultural potential areas, diffusion of modern technologies would undoubted help to
promote agricultural development & raise output level. However, the extension design &
its sound technical approach & strategies determine its success (Nails, 1988, cited by
Temesgn) Sims&leonory (1990) reported that linear agricultural development
&dissemination create problems to small farmers in rural poor ore as. The problem was
stemmed in part from an over estimation of the robustness of extension technologies.
 The impact of introducing new agricultural technologies depends largely up on the
region. Estimate of production of rice after increase in water supply in Ramajerd and
Abaj,Iran (sadagh;1978)showed different results, upward shift closely to optimum scale

13
 CHAPTER THREE

3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGIES

3.1 Description of the study area

According to base on the( 2007) census conducted by the central statistical agency (CSA) of Ethiopia,
Oromia has total eighteenzone,hundredeightieth total woreda and total kebele of 6500. The total
landareascoverage is 353006.8 km2 and haven a total population of 27158471.16 million.

East Arsi zone is one of zones which founds in Oromia region which have total population 2637657,
from this 541959 were households. Also these zones have a 25 woreda. The astronomical location of this
zone is 7o 57oN longitude and 39o 7o E latitude and has 15.1C0 temperature and it gates 11.47 mm rain fall
through the year.

Hetosaworeda is found in east Arise zone Oromia region and eastern part of Ethiopia. The administration
of this woreda is found Italy town. This woreda is far 150 km from Addis Ababa to east and 25 km from
Asella the capital town of east Arise zone to the north.

Hetosaworeda have 42 kebeles. From this kebeles 37 kebeles are rural kebeles. The economy of this
woreda is based on agriculture particularly clop production activates. The total population of this woreda
is 124.219, from this male 62466 and female 61753, rural population 105738 and urban population
18481. Total house holder is 46244.

Hetosaworeda is located between Dodota- sire woreda in the north, Lode Hetosaworeda in the east,
TiVoworeda in the south and Zuway-Dugadaworeda in the west (atlas of Arise Zone, 2008).

Their main economic activities are crops production product different types like wheat barley maize
sorghum…. etc. and many types of livestock like cattle’s, goat, sheep’s, monkeys…..etc.

3.2 Types and sources of data

The present study will use both primary and secondary source of data. The primary data will be
collected from sample households using structured questionnaire. To answer some specific
objectives, the secondary data will also be.
3.3. Sampling method & sampling size
In order to select the sample of households(in woreda&kebele)or two stage sampling technique
would be use. Because in each & every households of the in four kebele is given an equal chance
of being included in the sample. The researcher have selected four kebelefrom 42kebeles
selected based on the concentration of wheat production in the woreda. There a total of 16400
households in the four selected sample kebeles namely: Hate-Handode, Daya’a-Dabaso, Shaki-
Sharara&Shorima-Shararakebeles. The respondents by number 3800, 3700, 4600& 4300
respectivily of each kebeles. The sample size for the present study was determined using
Yamane Taro sample size determination formula as follow.

n = N/1+N (e) 2

n = 16400/1+16400(0.0081) =123

in generally, using proportionate sampling techniques 29, 28 , 34 & 32 households of from

selected &kebele respectable Hate handode,daya’adabaso,shorimasharara&shakisharara
respectively four kebeles

3.4. Method of data analysis

This data obtained would be analysis by using both descriptive and econometrics. The
descriptive part of this study would be used the table, frequency, percentage and etc way of
analysis where used. The econometrics part also used to identify these variables which will
significant effect on the wheat production in the study. To do this, soft software is the crucial
method. The analysis would be made by making a general technique which can be fitted to all
kinds of variables and interpolation. Also for econometrics method the multiple linear regression
model where employed.

3.5. Model specification

To attain the second objective of the study, the determinants of wheat productivity multiple,
linear regression model will be employed. In this model every value of independent variable “X”
will associated with the value of dependent variable of “Y”. The determinant of wheat product

15
line for y explanatory values will drive from cob- Douglass production function of production
theory. Their Cob Douglass function expresses the relationship between input and output in the
production since their function will drive as followings.

Y = A ( 1x .k B )

Where Y= was real output, L and K are the conventional factors of production which land and
capital and A is technological efficiency. K- Was physical capital, natural capital and social
capital when we take both sides natural logarithms?

Lnyi=LnA+ BiLn+Ui

To change in multiple linear regression model let LnA=Bo, then in least square model (OLS) the
best fitting line for the observation data minimization the sum of the square of the vertical
deviation from each data point to the line. So this production equation such as:

Y = βo+ β 1 SEX + β 2 AGE + β 3 EDUC+ β 4 FS+ β 5 LS+ β 6 FRT + β 7 Cr + β 8 ONO . OXEN + β 9 ImS + β 10 EX +U

Definition of variables and expected sign

Yi: Dependent variable (out-put) Physical out puts as a measure of production does not account
the different amount of the quality of the production. Therefore, it was advice to take
economic value of the output per house hold to represent the dependent variable in the
production function model,its continuous variable & not have dummy variable. Hence the
wheat output measure in quintals will be taken as dependent variable in production function.

X1: Age of house hold head (age): It was designed as the number of year of the house hold since
birth day until survey is conducted. It was a continuous variable measured by the year.
Throughout the time as a number of the year increase the farmers are increase its
experience in the wheat production. Therefore, the variable was hypothesized to have
positive (negative) impact on wheat production.

X2: Education level of the house hold head (educe): This variable is measured in year as in
schooling and can be used as a proxy variable to be more efficient presumable due to their

16
 on hence ability to achieve technical knowledge, with make to obtain process and use
adoption information of an improved wheat variety of fertilizer well. Therefore, it had
positive (negative) hypothesized influence farmer’s productivity.

X3: Family size (FS): It was the number of family member living within the house hold. The
lager the family member, the more the labor force would available for production purpose.
Based on this smaller with sufficient labor force would be expected to more the wheat. In
contrast, since food requirement increase with the number of adult equivalent in the family
most of produce used for consumption as member of family number relatively low.
Therefore, it was expected that this variable are a positively (negatively) impact on
production of wheat.

X4: Land size in hectare (LS): It was the total area under cultivation measured in hectare. Also it
may belong to enable farmer obtained by means of hiring, leasing or though share
cropping arrangement. Hence the area of the plot allocated from wheat production in
hectare during (2005/06) production season will be considered for analysis. It is
hypothesized to have positive impact on production.

X5: Use amount of fertilizer (UAP): Fertilizer was one of describe variable input of wheat
production, it measure by kg. When the farmers use the wheat production the total input of
wheat will be increase. Therefore it is expected to have positive relationship with wheat
production.

X6: Use of credit (CREDITED): The farmer who have the access to credit can relax their
financial consentient and used for buy material of production inputs. It was expressed that
access of credit would be increase farmer production. Therefore, it hypothesized positive
impact on the farmer production.

X7: Number of oxen (oxen): It was a decretive variable represented by oxen owned. Households
who have more number of oxen had between performances in production of wheat.
Therefore, it hypothesized that the variable was affected positively the wheat productivity.

17
X8: Distance from the market (DMRT): It has from market is to loss many profit. Because high
transportation of moving place to place and want other force to move market. This is
negative affect on wheat production.

X9: Distance from all season (DS): It has a gap between all seasons when rainfall is high or low
then no gaps that effect on production. When either high or low is no effect then it has
positive (negative) effect on production.

X10: Improved seed (IS): Seed was one of the principal inputs of wheat production for this study
it reset the quality which is improved seed of wheat production house hold used during 2008
production season. It was the total quality of seed by kg farmers used to produce wheat.
Therefore, it had hypothesized positive/negative impact on the wheat product.

18
 CHAPTERE FOUR

4 DATA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSION

This chapter involved displaying the result obtained from the study, analysis the mind inferring
the grouped interrelation. As it has been aforementioned in the methodology part one hundred
twenty three respondents would be selected as representative of target population. The result
made from or fund from the research of determinants of wheat production of Hetosaworeda. The
questioner distributed to the mind collected. This analysis part was discussed by used both
descriptive and econometrics methods as mention earlier.

4.1 Descriptive Analysis of data

In this part, the result of descriptive analysis was reported that are based on close sectional data
collected from hetosaworeda. The survey data were used to describe the demographic
characteristic and socio- economical characteristic of the respondent.

4.1.1 Sex and Age Composition of Respondent

Form the following table 4.1, we absolves that above the total Respondents 69 (56.1) remain
sorely, while the remaining 54 (43.90 are a female farmers. This implies that the woreda males
were participating than female in the paring activities. In the regarding age structures 28( 22.8%)
respondents were between 20-30 Age, 18(14.6%) respo0ents were between 31- 40 age, 12
(9.8%) were between 41-50 and 65 (52.8%) respondent were above 50 age. This age
composition implies that the age integral between20-40 year old was highly participant in
agricultural activity. From total respondent 65(53%) were in this age interval & in the study area
the majority farmer were there are interval was above 50.

19
Table 4.1: The Distribution of the family size of sample households in the study area

Source; own survey; 2017

Sex Composition Age Composition

Determinant frequency Percentage Age Level Frequency percentage
Male 69 56.1% 20-30 28 22.8%
Female 54 43.9% 31-40 18 14.6%
Total 123 100% 41-50 12 9.8%
Above 50 65 52.8
Total 123 100%

Table 4.1: The Distribution of the family size of sample households in the study area

Source; own survey; 2017

4.2.2 Education level of respondent

As survey of data indicate in the table 4.2 below among total respondents74 (60.2) were literate,
28(22.76) respondents between1-4 learned, 20(16.26) respondents between5-8 learned, 12(9.76)
respondents between9-10 learned, 9(7.32) respondents between11-12 learned, 5(4.1) respondents
college above&49(39.8) respondents zero class (illiterate).

Education level of respondents

determinant frequency percentage
1-4 28 22.76
5-8 20 16.26
9-10 12 9.76
11-12 9 7.32
 College above 5 4.1
illiterate 49 39.8
total 123 100%
Source; owen2017.

20

Another demographic factor which is directly related to wheat production was family size of
farmer through its effect on supply of labor. The range of family size was 11-15 by to king the
minimum and sixteen by taking maximum range. From the below table 4.3 among the total
respondents 61 (49.6%) have family size or 1-5 family size, 46 (37.4%) were have between 6-10
family size, 16(13%) respondents have between 11-15 family size and respondents were above
zero family size. This table indicates is not labor supply problem in study areas.

Table 4.3: The Distribution of the family size of sample households in the study area

Family Size Frequency percentage

1-5 61 49.6%
6-10 46 37.4
11-15 16 13%
Above 15 0 0%
Total 123 100%
Source; own Serve; 2017

4.1.3 Number of oxen and land size in hectares of households

From the following table among the total respondents 65(52.8) of house hold had between 1-5
oxen, 46 (37.4%) of respondents had between 6-10 their own an oxen, 8(6.5) had an oxen.
Between 11-15 and 4(3.3%) of respondents has above 15 oxen. This implied that greater than of
98%woreda farmers have their own oxen. The result of this indicates that there were large
impacts on the wheat production.

The other factors that holding land size in hectare in the stud areas. It was found that 65 (52.85)
of house hold has 0.5-5 their own land, 46(37.4%) of respondent had between 6-10 hectare of
land size, 11 (8.94%) of Respondents had between 6-10 hectare of land size, 11(8.94%) of
 Respondents had between 11-15 hectare of land size, 1(1.6%) of respondents has between or
above 20 hectare of land size. This implied that almost all respondents had their own land which
means about 99 % of Respondent have their own land and the farmer which having more family
size have an alternative to use more force available for production than those have low family
size.

21

Table 4.4: The distribution of the number of oxen and land size of households in the study area

Number of oxen Land size per hectare

Number of Frequency Percentage % Land Size in Frequency Percentage %

Ox hectares
1-5 65 52.8% 0.5-5 65 52.85%
6-10 46 37.4% 6-10 46 37.4%
11-15 8 6.5 % 11-15 11 8.94%
Above 15 4 3.3% Above20 1 0.81%
Total 123 100% Total 123 100%
Source; own survey; 2017

1. Hectares of allocated wheat production of households.

Another demographic factor which is directly related to wheat production was wheat production
by hectares of farmer through its effect on supply of labor. The range of hectares of wheat
production was 1-5 by taking the eighty eight by taking maximum range. From the below table
among the total respondents 88 (71.5%) were have between 1-5 hectares of wheat production, 7
(5.7%) respondents have above 5 Hectares of wheat production respondents 13(10.6) were have
between 1-5 hectares of wheat production 5(4.1%) respondents have above 5 Heaters of wheat
production rent land and share in same in some one of hectares of wheat production respondents
7(5.7%) were have between 1-5 hectare of wheat production 3 (4.1%) respondents have above 5
hectares of wheat production of share in same in same one. This table indicates that there is not
land problem in study areas.

Hectares of allocated wheat production of HH

Own land Rent land Share in same one
Determinant frequency % Determinant frequency % Determinant frequency %
1-5 88 17.5% 1-5 13 10.6 % 1-5 7 5.7%

Above 5 7 5.7% Above 5 5 4.1% Above 5 3 2.4%

Total frequency 123

Total frequency 100%

Source; own survey 2017

22

4.3.2. Distribution of fertility and improved seed use of house hold as will. This was the total
sample size123 (100%) of house hold used the fertilizer. While the other 6(4.9) where used
between above 150kg per hectare of fertilized during2008 cropping season, 95 (77.2) of them
used 50-100kg per hectare, 22 (17.9) of them used 101-150kg per hectare and Therefore based
on the result, the formers have use fertilizer was greater than 99.9 % are used the fertilizer of
total Respondents. This implies that the farmers of study area more adopted fertilizer.

The other survey data indicate that the using improved seed which was from total respondent
110(89.4%) of respondent are use the improved seed and the other 13 (10.6%) of them are not
used the improved seed. From those use the seed 19(15.4%) of them used 101-150 kg per hectare
of improved seed, 38(30.9%) of them used 50-100kgper hectare of improved seed & 53(43.1%)
of them use above 150kg per hectare of imploded seed. Generally the following table shows that,
the study areas farmer used both Fertilizer and improved seed a more and it also implies that the
farmer those use of both have high production than that the not use the both

Table 4.5; Distribution of fertilizer and improved seed of farmers.

Distribution of Fertilizes Distribution of improved seed

Determinate Determinate
kg/heat frequency Percentage % kg/heat frequency Percentage
50-100 95 77.2 1-50kg 19 15.4%
101-150 22 17.9 50-100kg 38 30.9%

Above 150 6 4.9 Above 100kg 53 43.1%

Total 123 100% Not use 13 10.6%
total 123 100%
Source; own survey 2017

4.3.3. The distribution of output of wheat in 2008 cropping season.

 As the Owen survey indicate that the farmers output was depend on the activity, which means,
as research implied in the proposal same factor affect the output. But in this case from the total
respondendent 35(28.5%) of respondent produce 1-20 quintal, 14(11.4%) of respondent
produce 21-30 quintals, 55(44.7%) of respondent produce 31-100 quintals and 19(15.4%) of
respondent produce above 100quintal of wheat crop. Therefore based on this result the researcher
concludes that that respondent who have more output have a more labor and used more
agriculture input that those less produce wheat production.

23

Table 4.6; output of wheat production in 2008 cropping season.

No Totaloutputin quintal frequency Percentage

1 1-20 quintal 35 28.5%
2 21-30 quintal 14 11.4%
3 31-100 quintal 55 44.7%
4 Above 100 quintal 19 15.4%
Total *** 123 100%
Source; Owen survey; 2017

4.1.4 Distribution of respondents by credit access and extension service

The result of this survey data indicate that from the total respondents about 69(56.1%) of
respondent are not got enough credit access from organization, while the other respondents.
54(43.9) of them are get credit access from deferent organization

Credit access Extension service

determinant Frequency Percentage Response frequency Percentage
yes 1000- 29 23.6% yes 64 52
2000
2001- 11 8.9%
4000 No 59 48
Above 14 11.4%
4000
NO 69 56.1%
Total 123 100% Total 123 100%
Therefore based on this result the former who get enough credit access from different
organization have confidence to purchase agricultural input from the government and private
organization during 2008 cropping season.

24

In the case of extension package adopted from DA advise during 2008 cropping season. From
total respondent 59(48%) of respondent do not have extension package adopted and the other
respondent 64(52%) of respondent have extension enough knowledge about production of clops
application from extension service agents. Therefore based on this result the survey data study
concludes that the farmer more contracted with extension agent get more knowledge about the
agricultural input than not contented with extension agent.

Table 4.7: The distribution of respondents by credit access and extension services

Source; Owen survey, 201

4.1.5 Distribution of respondents by the level of income from crop, livestock

and
off-form Activities

This survey data indicates that from total wheat production of study areas about clop production
4 (3.3%) of house hold of income is less than 1000 birr, 5(4.1%) of household of income are
between 1oo1-1500 birr, 114(92.6%) of household of income are above 1500 birr. This implies
those farmers who have high income are having the power to purchase agricultural in puts.

This survey data indicates that from total livestock Income of study areas about 10(8.1) of
household of income is less than 1000 birr, 7(5.7%) of household of income are between1001-
1500birr, 106 (86.2%) of house hold income are above 1500 birr. This implies those farmers who
have high income are having the power to purchase livestock out puts.

This survey data indicates that from total off-form income of study areas about 46(37.4%) of
house hold of Incomes is zero birr, 35 (28.5%) of house hold of income are between1-2000 birr,
42(34.1%) of household income are above 2000 Birr, This implies those farmers who have low
income are having the power to purchase off-form income

25

Table 4.8 distribution of respondents by the level of income from crop, livestock and off-form

Level of Income Frequency Percentage%

Crop 1-1000 4 3.3%
1001- 1500 5 4.1%
1500> 114 92.6%
Total 123 100%
Level of Income Frequency Percentage%
Livestock 0 46 37.4%
1-2000 35 28.5%
2000> 42 34.1 %
Total 123 100%
Level of Income Frequency Percentage%
Off farm 1-1000 10 8.1 %
Activity 1001-1500 7 5.7%
106 86.2%
1500>Total 123 100%

Source; Owen survey2017.

4.1.6Distribution of respondents on irrigation and the challenges of

Agricultural production
From the respondent of the study woreda 83(67.5%) of respondents cannot in irrigation
activities while the other 40(32.5 %) of respondents are engage in irrigation activities. This
implies that the study area the irrigation activities are not well adopted by the farmer. Therefore
based on the result this surrey data the study conclude by the researcher that farmers are almost
depend on the rainfall during the cropping season the rather than the irrigation.
Another demographic factor which is directly related to the challenges of agricultural production
lack of Rainfall 46(37.4%) of Respondents said, 63 (51.2%) of respondents said the lack of
Improve seed and the 14(11.4%) of Respondents have the lack of or risk of distances from
market. This implies in this area almost have the scarcity of improve seed. Therefore in the area
Respondents to educate about important of improve seed. Therefore in the area Respondents to
educate about important of improve seed.
26

Table 4.9 distribution of respondents of irrigation activities

The challenges of agriculture production Distribution of respondents on irrigation

Responses
Determination Frequency Percentage frequency Percentage
Lack of Rainfall 46 37.4%
Lack of Improve seat 63 51.2 % Not 83 67.5%
RiskofDistance from 14 11.4% Yes 40 32.5%
market
Total 123 100% Total 123 100%
Source; Owen survey; 2017

4.3 The villager for from the local Maries and for land for from all season read.

From the following table among the total Respondents 53 (43.1%) of house hold distance
between 1-5 from market, 44 (43.8%) of house hold and distance between 6-10 from market, , 26
(21.1%) of respondents had above 10 distance from market,. This implies that 1-5 km distance
from market is not far, but 57% of woreda respondents have distance from market. The result of
this indicates that there were large impacts on the wheat production. Therefore in this
woredahouseholds have risk of transports, lack of market information, lack of light and lack of
Cleon water?

The anther factors that form land for from all season road in study areas. It was found that 57
(46.3%) of house hold has 1-5 farm land for from all season road, 58(47.2%) of respondents had
between 6-10 for from all season road, 8(6.5% of respondents had above10 far from all season
road. this implied that almost all respondents had for from season road which means about 54%
of house hold on far from season road. This show Respondents of this woreda most impact on
farm. Then this researcher reduces this impact by participation of public to expand road.

27

Table: 10

How far your village from local market? How far your farm land from all season
road?
Distance from Frequency Percentage Distance from Frequency Percentage
Market Market
1-5 53 43.1% 1-5 57 46.3%
6-10 44 35.8% 6-10 58 47.1%
Above 10 26 21.1% Above 10 8 6.5%
Total 123 100% Total 123 100%
Source; Owen survey; 2017

4.5. Estimation Results of Econometric Model

This section presents the determinants of wheat production by used the multiple linear regression
models. So as to identify the major determinants of wheat production in the study area, the
dependent variable being produced was regressed against various explanatory variables.

Analysis of multiple linear regression result shows that among the ten explanatory variable that
entered in the model ,the expected sign or the coefficient for age of house hold, fertility
rate ,credit access, number of oxen owned by farmers, and improve seed are statistically
significant at 5% and sex , education level, family size, land side and extension level are
statistically insignificant at 5%. From the regression result, the coefficients of determinants
which is the measurements of goodness the model, is 33%. This shows that 40 of the total
variation of output explained by the change of sex, age of household, education level, family
size, land size level, fertilizer level, credit access, number of oxen owned by farmers, improved
seed and extension levels. This mains independent variable has expected 33% of the variation in
the dependent variable. The above regression model also model also show that sex, age,
education level, credit t access, number of oxen ,imp rove seed and extension levels were a
positively related and the other is negatively related with the wheat production.

According to the regression show that the coefficient of age house hold was positive related with
the wheat production. The age also shows the expanses of farmer in farming activity. When the
age of house hold increases by one year the, wheat production also increase by 1.41%, while

28

anther things remain constant. It also significant at 1% and 5% the level of significance. That
means an increase in age after some retire ages the farmers would get more experience thus add
more to household production obtained and may increase household income leading to high
wheat production. But family size was negatively affects the wheat production, which means as
the age increases and the retail so increase the production of wheat decline. Generally the
empirical test shows that, as age or experience of house hold increase or decrease, the wheat
production also increase or decrease.

Table: 11 results of regression model

variables Coef Std.err t-value p>t

sex 14.41 17.9767 0.79 0.430

Age 1.41 0.3716 3.81 0.000

Edu 5.83 3.5914 1.62 0.107

Fs -1.42 2.3973 -0.59 0.553

Ls -0.65 2.6469 -0.25 0.805

Frt -7.34 3.6137 -2.03 0.044

Cr 0.01 0.0042 2.36 0.020

Ox 6.19 2.3897 2.59 0.011

 Ims 0.40 0.1391 2.92 0.004

Exs 9.41 17.702 0.53 0.596

Con -87.08 36.929 -2.36 0.020

Source: own survey 2017

29

As already stated in the methodology part the model presented as follows.

Yi = -87.08+14.24sex+1.41age+5.83edu-1.42fs-0.65ls-7.34frt+0.01cr+6.19ox+0.40ims+9.41exs

+ui

Interpretations of the variables which are significantly affect the wheat production.

AGE: Ages is statically; significantly and positively affect the wheat production at 1% level of
significant or if age increases by one year, the wheat production increases 1.41. This implies that,
when age increases the wheat production increase. That means, production and age have
positively relationship.

FRT: Fertilizers is statically; significantly and negatively affect the wheat output at 5% level of
significant or if fertilizer increases by one unit, wheat output decrease by 7.34 quintal. This
implies that, wheat output and fertilizer have negatively relationship. But the theory predicted
that fertilizer adoption is positively related with the production, however in the study area due to
the farmers risk adverse fertilizer adoption is negatively related with wheat output.

CR: credit access is statically, significantly and negatively affects the wheat output at 5% level
of significant or when credit access increases by one birr the wheat output decreases by 0.01
quintal. This tells us credit access and wheat output have negatively related in the study area.
However the theory predicted that, when the farmer accessible on credit the agricultural
productivity will be increases. Credit access on agricultural production has crucial at harvesting
time as well as beforeharvesting.
OX: Numbers of oxen is statically; significantly and positively affect the wheat output
production at 1% level of significant or if the number of oxen increases by one, the wheat output
production increases by 6.19quintal. This shows us the positive relationship between number of
oxen and wheat output. On the other hand farmers that have oxen produce more wheat output
than that of farmers have no oxen.

IMS: improve seed is statically; significantly and positively affect wheat output production at
5% level of significant or if improved seeds increases by one quintal, the wheat output
production increases by 0.40 quintal. The finding result shows improve seed and wheat output
has positive relation ship

30

Diagnostic test

In this section, multicollinearity, heteroscedasticity, normality & Ramsey test was employed by
the researcher.

Normality:It is a test that can indicate the distribution of the variable from the true popnof the
model how far and also how far from the mean of the distribution to the left and right with the
given variable.

Omitted variable test

This is the test of model specification. In this test whether the model has omitted variable or not
performed. The decision of this is, if p-value is higher, the model has no omitted variable or the
model has no specification problem. Otherwise, the model has specification problem if p value is
lower.

If we are missing variables in our model , that variable is correlated with the included repressor,
and the omitted variables is determinant of the dependent variable, then our regression
coefficients are inconsistent (stock and Watson ,2003).

Ho: The model has no omitted variable

H1: The model has omitted variable

The nature of omitted variable in this model is judged by Ramsey test by using the decision
rules. If p value is higher, accept the null hypothesis of omitted variable otherwise accept that
alternative hypothesis of omitted variable.
 31

CHAPTER FIVE

5. CONCULUTION & RECOMANDATION.

5.1 Conclusion

 The aim of this study was to identify the determinants of wheat production by farmers in
2008cropping season which are created by different farmers in selected kebeles of
Hetosaworeda area. To the study theproblem. Problem input supply, institutional and a
socio-economic characteristic was included in the model. Primary data were collected
from four randomly selected kebele more over secondary data were obtained from
woredas agricultural bureau in order to see about the wheat production.
 For data analysis, the descriptive statistics, multiple linear regression models were used.
In addition to this the descriptive result shows some socio economic, institutional, and
demographic characteristics of respondents by using percentage and frequency
distribution.
 For econometric analysis the multiple linear models was employed so as to identify the
determinant of wheat production by farmers in four selected kebele of Hetosaworeda
area. The dependent variable that was the being wheat production was regressed against
ten explanatory variables, among which five of them were found to be statistically
 significant at 1%,5%&10%level of significance those are age , number of oxen fertility
level credit access improved seed level where as the coefficient level of sex ,education
level ,family size, land size &extension levels are statistically insignificant at
1%,5%&1% level of significant. Hence do not emerge as the major factor determinant of
wheat production by farmers as set as expected sign. Finally the sample respondent was
asked to mention the major problem that faced by farmers agricultural input supply &the
researcher conclude that the availability of inputs such as age, fertility level ,credit
access, number of oxen & improved seed level are important for expending wheat
production in the study area.

32

5.2 Recommendation

 Based on the finding of the study the following recommendations are for warded. Wheat
production are highly dependent on input such as credit access, number of oxen ,fertility
level ,and … ect.Therefore,the concerned body should expand extension system which
distribution input and aware to the farmer how to use them.
 Age level was positive influence farmers input use. This clearly indicate that for effective
utilization of motivation of farm ,to have force to participate on farm .so the concerned
farm experience in the study areas to increase the wheat production. Fertilizer level is
positively or negatively related to wheat production. This indicates that the development
of input and output process increases in country. Therefore the capacity to determine
increasing or decreasing of wheat production of study area. Oxen are an important
farmer’s asset that improved farmer’s sufficient input purchase. Therefore, important
more attention should be given to oxen quality rather than quantity to improve their
genetic and feed system. As much as possible the administration body or any anther
concerned organization should try to minimize dependency on rain fed farming though
irrigation and water conservation alternatively, the management should provide resisting
seeds& create awareness to the farm household to adopt such new seed.
  Credit facilities are an integrate part of economic development, which engage people on
economic activities that enhance self-reliance. Credit scheme increase the production
potential of poor farmer particularly women headed household. Therefore credit
facilitation through different governmental and non- governmental organization plays a
crucial role in agricultural production in country like Ethiopia if it managed properly.

33

APPENDIX

SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE

Firstly I would like to appreciate your willingness. I am the student of ArbaMinch University, in
department of Economics. Now I am doing my senior essay on the title “Determinants of wheat
production in case of Hetosaworeda.” For this purpose I need some information from you about
wheat production. The information that you are required to give is used for only for academic
purpose and the confidence of your personal information will be keep secret and no expose to
others. So I would like to ask you kindly to give the necessary answer for the questions for the
questionnaire provided below.

General direction for respondent

1. No need of write your name

2. Put X mark in the given boxes
3. For open question please write your respondent with to correspondent question.

General information about the households.

1. Sex A. Male B. Female

2. Age of household--------------------------------Years
3. Level of education--------------------------------Years

4. The number of family members whose age are

A. Below 15 -----------------------------------
B. Between 15 and 65-------------------------
C. Above 65-------------------------------------
Total-------------------------------------------

5. Numbers of oxen you have-----------------------------

6. How many hectare of and do you have for all crop production last year? -----------

34

7. Form this how much hector allocated for wheat production in the last year (2008)? ------

A. Own land-----------------------------------------------------

Parental land----------------------------------------------------

C. Share in same in same one-----------------------------

D. Total-----------------------------------------------------------

8. Did you use fertilize in you wheat production? A. Yes B. NO

9. If your answers for question number 8 is yes, how many kg per hectare? ---------

10. How many kg of improved seed you use per heater in last year? -------------------

11. From your plot of land for wheat how many quintal you produced in 2008? Per hectare--------

12.Did you credit access from any organization? A. Yes B. No

13. If you say question number 12 yes, specify by birr--------------

14. How many km villages far from the local market? -----------------km.
15. How many kg your farm land far from all season road------------km.

16. What is your annual total income from?

A. Crop production in birr--------------?

B. Livestock in birr-------------------------?

C. Off-farm income-------------------------?

17. What are the challenges of agricultural production in this area?

18. Did you engage in irrigation activities?

19. Frequency of visits by extension workers (DAS) per month-------------

35

REFERENCE

 Adam smith (2003) agricultural and food marketing management

 Ayelekurs (2003/2006), the Ethiopia Economy principle and practice. First Edition,
EthiopianTodaro.pmicael and smith (2000) Agriculture economic development
8thedition.
 Balaykejele (2005) production determinant of small holder in Ethiopia senior essay
pepper AAU.
 BerhanuAlamu, 2000. Quality and standard authority of Ethiopia, An overview on
fertilizer quality control.Abebemean, 2009. A.Study of factor that affecting credit
repayment and fertilizer use By comparative member in ada,a district, East Shaw zone,
oromiaregion.Haramaya university
 DejenAbesha (2002) Agriculture economics societies of Ethiopia (AESE) 6th annual
conference chamber printing house addisAbaba.
 Food and agricultural organization (2000) economic development of Ethiopia
 GashuHabte, 1985. Economic analysis of fertilizer use in coffee production. M.Sc.
 Mollaterefefe (2001) patterns of crop association in peasant sector of Ethiopia AAU
printing press Addis Ababa.
 Mudahar, M.S, 1978. Needed information and economic analysis for fertilizer policy
formulation India journal of agricultural economics.
 Reddy S.R (2006) Agronomy of field crop. Kalyani publishers New Delhi 1102. In India.
 Teresa adugna and F.heidhues, 1996. A simultaneous question approach to the analysis of
factor influencing the adoption of agricultural economics.
 Todaro.pmicael and smith (2000) economic development 8th edition

36
variance
. reg y sex age edu fs ls frt cr ox ims exs

Source SS df MS Number of obs = 123

F( 10, 112) = 5.62
Model 487728.447 10 48772.8447 Prob > F = 0.0000
Residual 971604.253 112 8675.03797 R-squared = 0.3342
Adj R-squared = 0.2748
Total 1459332.7 122 11961.7434 Root MSE = 93.14

y Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval]

sex 14.24555 17.97677 0.79 0.430 -21.37312 49.86422

age 1.414989 .3716371 3.81 0.000 .6786377 2.15134
edu 5.834923 3.59142 1.62 0.107 -1.281014 12.95086
fs -1.42612 2.397374 -0.59 0.553 -6.176209 3.32397
ls -.6533544 2.646932 -0.25 0.805 -5.897911 4.591202
frt -7.347413 3.613741 -2.03 0.044 -14.50758 -.1872487
cr .010098 .004284 2.36 0.020 .0016097 .0185862
ox 6.197793 2.389726 2.59 0.011 1.462858 10.93273
ims .4059761 .1391081 2.92 0.004 .1303513 .6816009
exs 9.417101 17.70243 0.53 0.596 -25.65799 44.49219
_cons -87.08892 36.92817 -2.36 0.020 -160.2574 -13.92048

. hettest

Breusch-Pagan / Cook-Weisberg test for heteroskedasticity

Ho: Constant variance
Variables: fitted values of y

chi2(1) = 123.20
Prob > chi2 = 0.0000

. vif

Variable VIF 1/VIF

ims 1.25 0.799450

ox 1.22 0.821822
age 1.19 0.838154
frt 1.15 0.865946
edu 1.15 0.868118
cr 1.14 0.877496
sex 1.13 0.886156
ls 1.12 0.893501
exs 1.11 0.901735
fs 1.06 0.945431

Mean VIF 1.15

. imtest

Cameron & Trivedi's decomposition of IM-test

Source chi2 df p

Heteroskedasticity 107.92 63 0.0004

Skewness 43.57 10 0.0000
Kurtosis 2.57 1 0.1089

Total 154.06 74 0.0000

37