THE EFFECT OF COFFEE PRODUCTION ON THE LIVELIHOOD OF FARMERS:

A CASE STUDY OF SHEEMA DISTRICT

BY

KANOEL LINNET

17/U/4696/BDD/PD

A RESEARCH PROPOSAL report SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF

DEVELOPMENT STUDIES IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF
THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE AWARD OF A DEGREE
OF DEVELOPMENT STUDIES AT KYAMBOGO UNIVERSITY

OCTOBER, 2020
 DECLARATION

I, KANOEL LINNETdeclare that this research is my original work and has never been
submitted to any University or Institution of Higher Learning for any academic award.

Signature ……………………………. Date: ……………………………

KANOEL LINNET
17/U/4696/BDD/PD

i
APPROVAL
This is to certify that this research report has been done under my supervision and it is now ready
for submission for examination to the Department of development studies of Kyambogo
University.

Signature ………………………………………………….. Date: ……………………………

MR. NATAMBA SHADRACK

(SUPERVISOR)

ii
 DEDICATION

I dedicate this report to my brother Kamusiime chrispus, my Parents Mr Kategeya Robert and
Mrs Justine kategaya and all my grandparents, uncles, aunties, sisters, brothers and all my
relatives for their tireless and never-ending support they provided during my academic and
financial struggles. I really owe them a lot and May the Almighty God reward them with an
everlasting life!

Special thanks go to my supervisor for his time and professional input given to me during the
entire study. Your input cannot be under estimated because a lot of things could not have been
achieved without your commitment and willingness.

iii
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I am deeply grateful to the Almighty God for his mercies, love and all his amazing grace
throughout my academic life and all those who helped me in all ways towards the completion of
my report.

Very special thanks go to my supervisor Mr. Natamba Shadrack to whom I owe so much for his
continued support, guidance, critical examination and concern in all situations to make me
finish this report in time.

I wish to express my sincere gratitude and appreciation to Kyambogo university, department of

development studies and all the lecturers for the knowledge and priceless guidance and
encouragement they gave me in all my academic disciplines that guided me throughout the
research. May God reward them abundantly in all their works.

I am very grateful to respondents in Sheema district for allowing me to have access to data
through the interviews conducted at household level in order to finish my study. I also extend my
heartful special thanks to my colleagues and academic friends most especially Ninsiima Linda
and all members of the development studies group, May the Lord Almighty bless you.

iv
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
DECLARATION..............................................................................................................................i
DEDICATION...............................................................................................................................iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT..............................................................................................................iv
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS......................................................................................................viii
LIST OF TABLES..........................................................................................................................ix
ABSTRACT...................................................................................................................................xi
CHAPTER ONE..............................................................................................................................1
INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................1
1.1 Background to the Study........................................................................................................1
1.2 Statement of the Problem.......................................................................................................3
1.3 Purpose of the Study..............................................................................................................3
1.4 Specific Objectives................................................................................................................4
1.5 Research Questions................................................................................................................4
1.6 Research Hypothesis..............................................................................................................4
1.6 Scope of the study..................................................................................................................4
1.7 Significance of the Study.......................................................................................................4
CHAPTER TWO.............................................................................................................................6
LITERATURE REVIEW................................................................................................................6
2.0 Introduction............................................................................................................................6
2.1 Coffee Production..................................................................................................................6
2.2 Coffee growing and Food Security........................................................................................8
2.3 Coffee Production and Households Income.........................................................................11
2.4 Coffee Production and Households’ Employment Levels...................................................13
CHAPTER THREE.......................................................................................................................16
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY..................................................................................................16
3.0 Introduction..........................................................................................................................16
3.1 Research Design...................................................................................................................16
3.2 Target Population.................................................................................................................16
3.3 Sample size and Sampling Techniques................................................................................17
3.3.2 Sampling Technique..............................................................................................17
3.4 Data Sources........................................................................................................................17

v
 3.4.1 Primary Data.....................................................................................................................17
3.4.2 Secondary Data.................................................................................................................18
3.5 Data Collection Methods.....................................................................................................18
3.5.1 Questionnaire Survey method.............................................................................18
3.6 Data Validity and Reliability...............................................................................................18
3.7 Data Processing, Analysis and Presentation........................................................................20
3.8 Limitations of the Study.......................................................................................................20
3.9 Ethical Consideration........................................................................................................20
CHAPTER FOUR.........................................................................................................................22
EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS OF FINDINGS...................................................................................22
4.0 Introduction..........................................................................................................................22
4.1 Response rate......................................................................................................................22
4.2 Demographic Findings.........................................................................................................22
4.3 Coffee Production................................................................................................................24
4.4 Effect of Coffee Production on Food Security.....................................................................26
4.5 Effect of Coffee Production on households Income level...................................................27
4.5.2 Correlation between coffee production and Households income levels................28
4.7 Effect coffee production on households’ employment levels..............................................30
CHAPTER FIVE...........................................................................................................................34
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS..........................34
5.0 Introduction..........................................................................................................................34
5.1 Summary of the Findings.....................................................................................................34
5.2 Conclusions..........................................................................................................................35
5.2.1 The effect of coffee production on food security...................................................35
5.2.2 The effect of coffee production on income levels of households..........................35
5.2.3 The effect of coffee production on households’ employment level.......................35
5.3 Recommendations................................................................................................................35
5.3.1 Coffee production and food security......................................................................35
5.3.2 The effect of coffee production on income levels of households..........................35
REFERENCES..............................................................................................................................36
APPENDICES...............................................................................................................................39

vi
APPENDIX I: QUESTIONAIRE..............................................................................................39

vii
 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

CDO: Community Development Officer

COREC: The Coffee Research Centre

COSA: Committee on Sustainability Assessment

DID: Difference-In-Difference

FAO: Food and Agriculture Organization

FTF: Uganda Feed the Future

NAADS: National Agricultural Advisory Services

NARO: National Research Organization

PSM: Propensity Score Matching

SPSS: Statistical Package for the Social Sciences

TACRI: Tanzania Coffee Research Institute

UBOS: Uganda Bureau of Statistics

UCDA: Uganda Coffee Development Authority

USAID: United States Agency for International Development

viii
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 4.1 : Descriptive Analysis................................................................................................................19

Table 4.2 : Size of Land coffee production................................................................................................21
Table 4.3 : Coffee Produced per season.....................................................................................................22
Table 4.4 : Number of Meals Accessed per day.........................................................................................23
Table 4.5 : Correlation test between coffee production and food security.................................................23
Table 4.6 : Other sources of Income..........................................................................................................24
Table 4.7 : Correlation between coffee production and Households income levels...................................25
Table 4.8 : Households income from coffee production............................................................................25
Table 4.9 : Monthly expenses that are always incurred..............................................................................26
Table 4.10 : Assets Attained from coffee production.................................................................................26
Table 4.11 : Whether households coffee farms employee labour force......................................................27
Table 4.12 : Chi-Square Test.....................................................................................................................27
Table 4.13 : Main source of labour force employed coffee farm...............................................................28
Table 4.14 : Number of workers employed................................................................................................28
Table 4.15 : Common employment opportunities in coffee farmers..........................................................29

ix
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 4.1 : Type of coffee under cultivation.............................................................................................23

x
 ABSTRACT

The purpose of the study was to assess the effect of coffee production on the livelihood of coffee
farmers in Sheema District. Specifically, it was intended to examine the effect of coffee
production on food security, income levels of households and households’ employment level.

The study used a cross sectional survey where primary data was collected from a sample of 50
respondents using a questionnaire. The data was entered for computation using Ms Excel and
SPSS for further analysis to determine the relationship between variables of study. The
researcher used Descriptive analysis tables that contained frequencies and percentages were used
to interpret the respondents’ perception on what is in the questionnaires and chi-square test,
correlation test was run to test association between variables.

The study found out that coffee production has a significant effect on food security, income and
employment levels.

Also from the findings coffee farmers not only depend on coffee production alone for their
livelihood but also carry out other economic activities like trading.

Among the possible measures suggested by the researcher to improve on coffee production the
coffee farmers should also be encouraged to grow more coffee in large hectares as this may help
to solve the problem of food insecurity thus poverty level reduced.

xi
 CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.0 Introduction

This chapter contains the background to the study, statement of the problem, objectives of study,
research questions, scope and the significance of the study on the effect of coffee production on
the livelihood of coffee farmers.

1.1 Background to the Study

Globally, coffee is one among the prominent cash crops for the nations and the livelihoods of the
farmers. Coffee is estimated to be produced in more than 70 countries world-wide (ICO report,
2015).

According to FAO report (2017), Brazil was ranked the world leading coffee producing country
with output reaching 2595000 metric tonnes followed by Vietnam with 1650000 metric tonnes,
and Colombia with the production reaching 876,000 tonnes in 2017.

FAO statistic (2017) showed that the leading African country in coffee production was Ethiopia
with output of 384000 metric tonnes, followed by Uganda with 288000 metric tonnes and Côte
d'Ivoire respectively. Both Arabica and Robusta coffee originated in Africa, and were the first
two varieties to be cultivated. The Europeans introduced Coffee cultivation to most parts of
Africa during the colonial era; although, the preparation and cultivation of coffee was first done
by the Arabs. In the world trade, Arabica coffee is of greater economic importance.

Coffee production in East Africa is of a rather recent origin but has been rapidly expanding,
representing currently 26% of the world’s sustainable certified coffee supply. African coffee
production includes both Arabica and Robusta varieties that are mostly grown by smallholders
and marketed through cooperative societies. Production of coffee declined in East Africa from
19.5 million bags in 1997 to only 17.5 million bags in 2008, mainly due to poor management
practices, ageing of the coffee trees and losses due to damage by insect pests and diseases, lack
of improved varieties and high production cost due to the removal of subsidies (Salami et al.,
2010).which implied a decline in the performance. Coffee marketing regimes are also rather

1
different between the three countries involved in the field studies: in Ethiopia coffee trade is
dominated by the state, while in Kenya coffee is exchanged at central auctions and in Uganda a
free market regime (with sometimes limited competition) prevails. This is reflected in different
degrees of price transmission: coffee prices in Kenya generally respond better to world prices
compared to prices in Ethiopia. In Tanzania, about 90% of coffee farms are owned by
smallholder farmers while the remaining 10% is owned by estates’ growers (TACRI, 2013),
Empirical studies on the effects of standards for smallholders are notably scarce.

Uganda is one of the world’s major coffee producers and the government exerts control on the
industry with coffee outflow controlled by the Uganda coffee development authority (UCDA).
The commodity is grown in different highland areas of the country. Notably, on the slopes of
Mount Elgon, bordered with Kenya and the slopes of the Mount Rwenzori, also known as the
‘mountains of the moon' bordered with the Democratic Republic of Congo. Some coffee is also
cultivated in the West Nile region in the north-western Uganda. Uganda produces excellent wet-
processed Arabica, mainly grown by rural smallholder farmers. Coffee marketed as 'Drugar'
(Dry Uganda Arabica) or 'Wugar' (Wet Uganda Arabica) is grown on mountains bordered with
Democratic Republic of Congo, along the western Uganda. The crop is mainly cultivated in the
southern and central districts (57%), Eastern Uganda (23%) and Western (10%) and to a lesser
extent, in non-traditional areas like Mpigi, Wakiso, and Rakai (10%).

Coffee if well developed, it may improve smallholders’ livelihood and regional development in
the producing countries (Bradford et al., 2011). More so, the coffee production plays a crucial
role in the socio-economic development of Uganda most especially in acquiring basic needs such
as food, education, health services, income and many more others. The Ugandan coffee sub-
sector employs over 5 million people, both in the farms and post-harvesting processes. It remains
a primary source of income for the poor rural inhabitants in over 30 Districts. The commodity
plays a leading role in the economy, contributing a substantial foreign exchange earnings over
the decades.

However, coffee production trends have not been impressive due to factors such as high
incidence of diseases, climatic change, falling coffee prices, unfavorable agricultural policies and
youth not being interested in agriculture. Also factors such as land tenure system in the central
mostly and eastern district of Uganda experiencing lack of improved varieties and high

2
production costs due to the removal of subsidies in agriculture (BwaSheema,2019) thus affecting
the livelihoods of coffee famers.

1.2 Statement of the Problem

Uganda registered expansion in coffee production in 2016/17 rose by 2.8 per cent .The
production increased to 5.1 million bags in 2017/18 due to improved global markets, stability in
coffee prices, improved coffee seedlings and others (UCDA report, 2018). Ugandans participate
in coffee production and this provides them a stable income base that positively impacts their
livelihood especially in terms of provision of education, medical care, proper housing and a
source of income to increase their investments. However we are not sure about how much
income coffee production generates compared to other economic activities carried out. This
makes us unsure of the proportion of income generated specifically from coffee production
compared to other crops being cultivated and how coffee production directly increases the
livelihood of farmers for example provision of medical care, education, food security.

Despite the efforts put in by the government of providing extensive services like improved
seedling and pesticide, agriculture grants coffee farmers statistics shows that coffee farmers
typically earn less than 10 percent per pound of the retail value for their coffee. And it is
understood that the added costs of agricultural inputs (like fertilizer), cooperative fees and
middlemen further cut into what measly profit farmers can pocket from the sale of their coffee
beans leaving them in a poverty state(UBOS, 2017) and according to UBOS(2010) found that a
huge portion (46%)of households in eastern Uganda were categorized as poor compared to only
(11%)and (23%) in central and western Uganda respectively.It is against this background that the
researcher undertook a study on the effect of coffee production on the livelihood of coffee
farmers in Sheema District.

1.3 Purpose of the Study

The general objective of this study was to assess the effect of coffee production on the livelihood
of coffee farmers in Sheema District.

3
1.4 Specific Objectives

i. To examine the effect of coffee production on food security

ii. To establish the effect of coffee production on income levels of households
iii. To examine the impact of coffee production on households’ employment level

1.5 Research Questions

This research study was designed to provide answers to the following research questions.

i. What is the effect of coffee production on food security?

ii. What is the effect of coffee production on income levels of households?
iii. What is the effect of coffee production on households’ employment level?

1.6 Research Hypothesis

H0: There is a positive and significant relationship between coffee production and Food
security.

H1: There is no relationship between coffee production on income levels of house holds.

H2: There is no relationship between coffee production and house hold employment.

1.6 Scope of the study

The study analyzed the effect of coffee production on the livelihood of coffee farmers.
Specifically, it was intended to examine the effect of coffee production on food security, income
levels of households and households’ employment level. The study was carried among coffee
farmers in Sheema district that is located in western part of Uganda. The area was chosen for
study because it was easily accessed by the researcher but also there is considerable coffee
production within the district. The study took a period of 5 month that is to say from May to
October 2020. This period was considered being appropriate to undertake a study based on
University calendar.

1.7 Significance of the Study

4
To the academicians and future researchers, this study may furnish them with relevant
information regarding the effect of coffee production on the livelihood of coffee farmers as it
will contribute to the existing literature.

The study findings may help in formulation of appropriate policy tools by the policy makers that
may help in promoting coffee production among the households at the micro level and the whole
economy at the macro level.

More importantly, it may help the student to be awarded an academic qualification of a bachelor
of Development studies from Kyambogo University.

5
 CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.0 Introduction

This chapter dealt with review of the related literature on the study of the variables specifically
on the assessment of the effects of coffee production on the livelihood of coffee farmers in
Uganda. The review was guided by the objectives of the study which included examining the
effect of coffee production on food security, analyzing the effect of coffee production on
education level of households and finally establishing the effect of coffee production on income
levels of households.

2.1 Coffee Production

In Uganda and in Sheema particularly, Coffee is mostly grown in mixed farms where it is inter
cropped with food crops such as bananas and beans which ensure households’ food security. It is
also grown among shade trees that result into sustainable coffee production, while ensuring a
social, economic and suitable environment that requires a minimal use of agro-chemicals such as
fertilizers, pesticides and fungicides. Cheap labor available in Uganda enhances great
opportunities for investment in the coffee sector. Coffee is a perennial crop. However, there are
two main harvest seasons in Uganda for both Arabica and Robusta coffee (March-June and
September-November). The main production season for Robusta ranges May-August for Masaka
and Western regions and November to February for Central, Eastern regions. In the case of
Arabica, the main seasons are April-June for Western Region and October-February for Eastern
and West Nile Regions as indicated as follows;

Robusta Coffee is grown in the low altitude areas of Central, Eastern, Western and South Eastern
Uganda up to 1,200 meters above sea level. Arabica coffee on the other hand is grown in the
highland areas on the slopes of Mount Elgon in the East and Mt. Rwenzori and Mt. Muhavura in
the South Western Region (1500-2,300m above sea level) and other areas in western uganda.
Unlike Robusta whose native habitat is the Lake Victoria Crescent, Arabica coffee is an
introduced crop originating from Ethiopia. Arabica coffee is more competitive on the
international market because of its superior quality. Uganda Robusta too has intrinsic quality

6
attributes which also attract a premium on the international coffee market. There is, also, a new
Arabica variety locally known as Tuzza, commonly referred to as catimors which performs well
in low altitude areas of the country predominantly zoned for Robusta coffee, (1,200-1,500 m).
This variety is known for its high yielding capabilities, drought resistance and tolerance to
diseases presenting a very attractive opportunity for investment.

Following several decades of total state control of the coffee sector, the industry was fully
liberalized during the period 1991-1992. Presently, the sector is entirely controlled by the private
sector. Nonetheless, export quality control remains the responsibility of the Uganda Coffee
Development Authority (UCDA) that grades, liquors and classifies all export shipments. The
government of Uganda was successful in regulating the Coffee sector to produce and trade
competitively through the successive policy measures in the early 1990’s. Business activity in
the agricultural sector, in particular, increased enormously as the number of vigorous exporters
increased significantly. The number of small traders entering the agricultural sector has
considerably increased healthy competition in the markets. Most importantly, the poverty
reduction of households in the coffee-growing regions are well documented (Baffes, 2006) since
1994 when the coffee boom hit the Ugandan market. The Ugandan economy has expanded and
developed in recent years. Coffee remained an important product, earning an average of 60% of
annual export revenues during the period 1993 to 2000 (Baffes, 2006). However, the share of
coffee on total merchandise in the country exports has been shrinking over the years from about
30% to 26% in 2001 and 2008 respectively. It further shrank down to below 20% in recent years.

Uganda is among top major coffee producers in the world. Coffee production in Africa increased
by 16 % from 15.7 million bags during crop year 2011/12 to 16.7 million in 2012/13, accounting
11.5 % of the total world production. The major producing nations in the region showed
increases in production. For instance, the largest producing country in Africa remains Ethiopia
with 6.4 million bags in 2012/13, followed by Uganda (3.7 million) and Côte D’Ivoire with 2
million (International Coffee Organization, 2014). Uganda produced, on average, 2% of total
world production in 2012.

7
Fig. 1: Coffee production, exports and domestic consumption in Uganda (1975-2012)

Source: FAO, 2015

2.2 Coffee growing and Food Security

According to the World Food Summit organized in Rome 1996, Food security has been defined
as access by all people, at all times, to adequate food for an active, healthy life (Coleman,2011).
According to Jose and Rica (2012), Food security is defined as when all people, at all times, have
physical, social and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food that meets their
dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life. This widely accepted definition
points out the categorical dimensions of food security as food availability, food access,
utilization and stability.

In addition to research that examines food security in coffee communities, some studies have
focused on strategies to improve food security in regions where coffee is grown (although not
necessarily with coffee farmers). Examples of this are discussions of household seasonal food
insecurity in Ethiopia (Tolosa, 2002), crop/livestock modeling in the Ethiopian Highlands
(Amede, 2008) and fruit cultivation in Kerala, India (Chandrashekara, 2009), among others.

8
Researchers have also addressed the causes and consequences of poverty in coffee communities
without an explicit focus on food security including more general discussions around strategies
to improve farm income in Mesoamerica (Kilian et al, 2006); increasing agricultural
sustainability in developing countries (Pretty et al, 2003); coffee and household poverty in
Uganda (Seaman et al, 2004); and implications of Fair Trade (Arnould et al, 2009; Ruben &
Fort, 2012; Barham et al, 2011), among many others. These studies provide important context,
but there is still a need to specifically consider the complexities and unique circumstances of
coffee producers who are food insecure. Without this, proposed interventions risk missing the
mark.

Fisher and Lewin, (2014), states that cooperatives play a critical role in both food security and
value addition to coffee. Four perspectives emerge from the findings of various articles Vuthy et
al 2016): first, by means of pooling supply purchases and sales, coffee cooperatives can help to
decrease price risks and enhance bargaining power and market access of members. Members
may earn a better income that guarantees more and diverse food purchases. Second, cooperatives
enhance the dissemination of improved technologies such as inputs and improved agricultural
practices which could maximize potential food production. Third, cooperatives can serve as
information and awareness creation platforms, which could promote knowledge on livelihood
diversification strategies. Finally, cooperatives may ease access to a variety of funds held by
stakeholders outside the direct coffee value chain, such as government subsidies, donor funds,
and research and development. At the same time, food security and other welfare impacts of
cooperatives depend on their ability to deliver good quality services and to put a comprehensive
and well-organized governance systems in place that enable them to deal with various internal
and external challenges in their operation.

Njogu (2002) conducted a scientific study on household food security and nutritional status of
children in coffee and non-coffee producing households in Kirinyaga district and observed that
coffee payments were usually made monthly and annual bonus given at the end of the year.
Coffee production on small land holdings did not yield high levels of income as large holdings
would do. Coffee producing households gave first priority to the purchase of food when they
received their money. The reason why food was given the first priority was because these
households did not get enough food through home production and therefore had to purchase from

9
the market. Njogu further asserted that most of the farmers in the coffee producing areas devoted
most of their land to coffee production at the expense of food.

The study indicate that commercialization has a great impact on the level of food security
(Arnould, 2009). As an example, argued that “commercialization has direct effect on household's
earnings degree which likely results in a rise in food and non-meals expenditure”. This
hypothesis is straightforwardly associated with the famous Engel’s law which suggests the
inverse relationship between the proportion of food intake expenditure and overall earnings.
Based on this law, family are likely to spend more on food things as their earnings level grows
up, however with a diminishing budget share allocated to food. In addition, it is argued that
better admittance for meals relies upon on earnings increase; especially to utmost African
smallholders where agriculture is the main source of earnings. This implies that improving level
of market participation can have a huge impact on the status of farmers’ food security. Moreover,
in a study it is noted that “smallholders with high degree of market engagements have higher
ability of enjoying better requirements of welfare”.

The largest coffee crisis (typically the coffee crisis) began in 1989 when the most influential
coffee producing nations called for renegotiation of quotas, which ultimately caused the ICA to
collapse. This caused drastic drops in the price of coffee and the “regulation of coffee production
and quality (to be) left to each individual producer country” (Eakin et al. 2006). Within two
months after the ICA failed, the price of coffee lost two thirds of its value (Kamola 2007) and
“country after country flooded the market with coffee reserves which pushed prices lower and
lower” (Watson and Achinelli 2008).

The relationship between coffee production and food security is complex. Bazaara (2001)
studied the impact of agricultural sector liberalization on food security in Uganda, and found that
agricultural liberalization increased the fraction of world’s coffee price passed to farmers.
Liangzhi and Bolwig (2003) contend that coffee can raise farm incomes unless gains at the farm
level are siphoned off by domestic traders and exporters through reduced farm gate prices.
However, Mbowa et al (2013), show that about 70 percent of the international coffee value
margins are retained at farm level. On the other hand, Bazaara (2001) mentions that it is not only
prices that are critical for increasing coffee production, but access to adequate land and security
of tenure. Under conditions of land tenure impasse, farmers cannot increase acreage, even if they

10
intend to, and they cannot plant trees. This study also explores the extent to which land tenure
plays out as a constraint to invest in coffee farming in mid-Northern Uganda.

2.3 Coffee Production and Households Income

Wessels (2015) in his study of assessing of coffee production on households income. Found out
that income of smallholder coffee farmers amongst others the methodologies of COSA was used.
From these sources the standard comprehensive income model was used, which was adapted to
farms with a focus on the cash available to the farmer. In this study the financial income is
defined as accounting income and does not include opportunity costs, which would be the case if
income would be defined in terms of economic profit. This methodology was chosen because
economic profit is less relevant for farmers themselves than the actual profit. In addition, the
operating profit is defined in cash terms and all non-cash items are categorized under changes in
invested capital. This allows a clear identification of the cash available to farmers, which is most
relevant to farmers. Moreover, a cash flow profit approach is less complex, time consuming and
leaves less room for manipulation of numbers. This approach is in accordance with the approach
of the European Union to farmers’ income.

The liberalization of the coffee sector created a gap in the monitoring of the quality of coffee for
export. Therefore the Uganda Coffee Development Authority (UCDA) – a statutory body was
established in 1991 to play the functions of regulation, coordination, quality assurance, and
licensing and export marketing - as well as promoting increased investment in the coffee sub-
sector. UCDA was therefore entrusted with the mandate to regulate and develop the subsector,
under the auspices of MAAIF. Coffee like other crop commodities receives extension advisory
services from the National Agricultural Advisory Services (NAADS) and the local government
extension services. The Coffee Research Centre (COREC) under the National Research
Organization (NARO) is in-charge of coffee research projects (UCDA report 2018).

According to Appleton (2001) studied poverty trends from 1992 to 2000 in Uganda, and reported
that over the period; progress in poverty reduction in the Northern part of the country was
modest, compared to other regions. Reduction in poverty was most remarkable in the Central and
to a less extent, the Western regions, largely because of difference in coffee growing between
regions. However the limitation in Appleton’s work of tracking changes in household poverty

11
comes from his direct comparison (using descriptive statistical methods) between coffee and
non-coffee growers without an appropriate counterfactual (control) group. In this study, an
impact evaluation of coffee growing on poverty is undertaken by use of the propensity score
matching (PSM) method where a counterfactual is created and compared to a treatment group.
He further estimated the distributional impact of coffee production, an analysis which is lacking
in the Ugandan literature.

USAID (2010) reports that coffee plays a great role in terms of revenue generation through
exports in Uganda. In relation to supporting livelihood and/or contributing to rural poverty
reduction, USAID further elaborates that; farmers sell their coffee as soon as it is harvested in
order to spend on necessities such as - Medicare and school fees; and if better processing of
coffee is done, Uganda has the potential of doubling its income - for instance when farmers
move away from home processed coffee and increase on processing at wet mills, for better and
consistent quality. Mbowa et al (2013) demonstrate that, poverty levels can be reduced where an
individual person is enabled to produce over 700 kilograms of clean coffee per year. This study
provides a detailed investigation on the implications of coffee expansion in mid-Northern
Uganda to the national economy in general, and the direct welfare impact on farming households
in particular. The study also unveils detailed information on implications of a continued
investment in the coffee growing program in mid-North sub-region in terms of 12 export
revenues to Uganda.

Oehmke et al (2011) used the Difference-In-Difference (DID) method to examine changes in

income and poverty among smallholder coffee farmers in Rwanda from USAID supported coffee
interventions. The study takes farmers linked to coffee washing stations as a ‘treatment group’,
and those not linked as the ‘comparison group’. The DID results revealed that the USAID
supported coffee interventions increased average smallholder income by US$1,776 between
2000 and 2010. It was also reported that there were statistically significant differences in income
growth rates between the treatment and comparison groups over the 2000-2010 period. Incomes
of the treatment group grew by 27% faster than that of the comparison between 2000 and 2005.
While over the extended period 2000 -2010, the treatment group’s incomes grew by 82% faster
than the comparison group’s incomes.

12
According to FTF (2012), around 125 million people depend on coffee for their livelihoods
worldwide through the generated income, and provision of the much needed rural employment
for both men and women in the labour intensive production and harvesting processes. In
Ethiopia, nearly a fifth of the population, depend on coffee for their livelihood. In Uganda, about
a million smallholder farming households produce coffee, and the coffee sub-sector value chain
activities is a source of income for around 2.5 million people or 8 percent of the population.
However, FTF warns that the importance of coffee to poverty among households can be reduced
in situations of a drastic fall in coffee prices like the 1999-2004 coffee crisis when the price of
Arabica plummet to 45 cents a pound (a 30-year lowest price). This had devastating social,
economic, and political consequences for countries throughout Africa, Asia and Latin America.
Export earnings fell from around $10bn to $6bn, reducing rural incomes and trapping coffee
farmers and their families into poverty (FTF, 2012). Hundreds of thousands of coffee farmers
were forced out of business, many abandoning their farms in search for work in cities or
migrating to neighboring countries, along with thousands of landless plantation workers. As part
of literature, we also make a review of the overtime trends in international coffee prices as a
source of risk that might negatively affect the outcomes from concerted efforts to promote coffee
growing in mid-Northern Uganda.

2.4 Coffee Production and Households’ Employment Levels

There is a strong argument that coffee farming and exportation has been creating and improving
jobs among the farmers and other stakeholders in coffee supply chain. In Nepal for
example, one of the few hopeful areas of Nepal’s economy is the potential for increased export
of tea and coffee. Most coffee in Nepal has been produced for consumption within the country,
although a small amount is exported to Japan. With Win-rock’s help, international experts in
coffee production have worked in Nepal to develop processing methods appropriate to the
country, allowing more exports of high-quality specialty coffee (Winrock International, 2009).

Reform in the coffee sector has been playing an important part in helping thousands of farmers
increase their income. It has, also, been helping to create jobs and provide opportunities for
new skills training. Additionally, it has been strengthening human and social capital and,
in the process, may also be generating valuable social benefits (Boudreaux, 2010).

13
Coffee production also stimulated the insertion of Latin American economies in the world trade.
In this period, given its high level of dependence on external markets, the price of coffee was the
principal factor in guaranteeing equilibrium in the balance of payments and, consequently,
guaranteeing macroeconomic stability and economic growth. Income generated by coffee
production and exports created domestic demand in the industrial sector, whereby domestically,
social development was highly dependent on the jobs created and sustained by the production
and export of coffee (Paiva 2010). Coffee production and processing there is economic,
environmental and social sustainability. It is particularly necessary that the economic
environment should encourage stability and reasonable living standards for the populations
involved with coffee by securing adequate returns to producers, ensuring meanwhile that
adequate consideration is given to maintaining quality rather than the amount of coffee produced.
Furthermore, the issue of climate change is expected to exert an increasing influence on coffee
production in upcoming years, necessitating appropriate adaptation and mitigation strategies
(UCDA, 2017).

The ICO report (2017) revealed that the social importance of established coffee-growing
communities and the difficulties of finding alternative sources of income in many coffee areas.
In addition, the ICO seeks to promote the use of environmentally friendly technologies
throughout the production and processing chain, integrated biological pest control and improved
technology for the washing process. Action against pests and diseases is important not only to
protect the economies of producing countries and the livelihood of farming populations but also
to protect the quality of the product.

In order to gain economic sustainability, small scale businesses through microfinance help the
communities to reduce poverty, create jobs, and promote income generation. In the developing
countries, sustainability is linked more closely to issues of poverty and the gross inequalities of
power and resources (Hamlett, 2010).

Hamlett, (2010), also mentioned that small scale businesses being one of the main sources of
employment for small and marginal people, small scale business groups have found it necessary
to develop a suitable business management system which can generate year-round employment
and substantial income to sustain peoples’ livelihood. However, increasing development of
small-scale businesses on small scale is a challenge because even under well-established

14
conditions, the growth of small-scale businesses itself has been almost stagnant for the last 8-10
years. Therefore, there is a need to take a fresh look at the present scenario and plan for another
Green Revolution with a new focus.

15
 CHAPTER THREE

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.0 Introduction.

This chapter comprises of research design, target population, sampling size and sampling
techniques, data source, data collection tools, data validity and reliability, data processing,
analysis and presentation, the limitation of the study and the ethical consideration.

3.1 Research Design

Research design refers to how data collection and analysis are structured in order to meet the
research objectives through empirical evidence economically (Cooper and Schindler, 2006). The
research design to be employed will be Cross-sectional research, this will be used in conjunction
with descriptive research design. According to Mugenda and Mugenda (2006), a descriptive
research is a process of collecting data in order to answer questions concerning the status of the
subjects in the study. In a cross-sectional study, the investigator measures the outcome and the
exposures in the study participants at the same time. The choice of the survey was due to the
need for accuracy and the nature of data being studied. Cross-sectional design is applied
alongside descriptive because it helps in research surveys where the research has no definite case
study or single case study.

3.2Target Population

The study population refers to the total collection of elements which one would like to study or
make inferences (Cohen et al, 2013).The study population included the households who were
mainly involved in coffee growing and the selected coffee cooperatives like Ankole Coffee
Producers Cooperative Union Ltd , Turikuumu. The study targets a total population of 87
respondents from which a sample can ably be taken. The respondents were taken from groups
that included coffee farmers (60), local leaders (15), Community Development Officer (6) and
top management of the selected cooperatives(6)

16
3.3 Sample size and Sampling Techniques

3.3.1 Sample size

The study used a sample size of 50 respondents that included coffee farmers(43), local leaders
(04), Community Development Officers (01) and top management of the selected
cooperatives(02).

Table 3.1 Showing Sample Size

Category of Respondents Target population Sample Size

Coffee farmers 60 43
Cooperative managers 06 02
Community development officers 06 01
Local Council leaders 15 04
Total 87 50
Source: Primary data (2020)

3.3.2 Sampling Technique

Simple random sampling technique was used to select respondents for the study. Simple random
sampling is the sampling technique where every element of the population stands a chance to be
selected for the sampleThis method involved selection of respondents randomly in that, all the
eligible respondents had equal opportunities to participate in the study. The study applied this
technique in selecting samples from household due to the need to enhance the
comprehensiveness of the study but also avoid bias.

3.4 Data Sources

3.4.1 Primary Data

Primary data is where the researcher collects information that has never been collected before.
According to Creswell (2007), data collection methods for primary data include; structured
questionnaires, interviews, observation, and focus group discussions. Questionnaires are the most
commonly used methods when respondents can be reached and are willing to provide
information to the researcher, for this reason the researcher will utilize this method

17
3.4.2 Secondary Data

Secondary data is where the researcher uses data that other researchers have used before. In this
study the researcher will use information sources such as journals, internet, newspaper, reports.

3.5 Data Collection Methods

Data collection methods refers to the process of gathering data after the researcher has identified the
type of information needed. The researcher will use questionnaire survey method, and interviews.

3.5.1 Questionnaire Survey method

The study used a self-administered structured questionnaire as the question for collecting data, As a
means of creating measures for the study, the questionnaires was structured towards an
investigation of the research topic as well as the objectives, The questionnaire comprised of 5 parts.
The first part consisted of demographic profile of the respondents which was designed in a close
ended format and the second part mostly talking about coffee production and other 3 parts were
arranged according to the three (3) specific objectives of the study. The questionnaire was
standardized and it consisted of both close ended and open-ended questions. A questionnaire was
formulated with the help of the research supervisor. This tool was used because it was quicker
compared to other data collection methods and it minimized costs.

3.5.2 Interviews

The interview method of collecting data involves presentation of oral-verbal qualitative and reply in
terms of oral-verbal responses (Kothari, 2014).Interviews wereused to supplement information
provided from questionnaires. Emphasis was put on obtaining answers to carefully phrased
questions. The interviewer sought to encourage free and open responses thus providing for
corrective actions, more related questions in the process. Patton (2002) asserts that, the quality of
the information obtained through these methods is largely dependent on the interviewer’s skills and
personality.

3.6 Data Validity and Reliability

18
3.6.1 Data Validity

Borg and Gall (2011) define validity as the degree to which a test measures what it purports to
measure. Validity involves how accurately the data obtained represents the variables of the
study. Thus, the researcher consulted the supervisor in formulating and designing of the data
collection tools. Not until, the validity of the tool was acknowledged by the supervisor the tools
were subjected to changes.

3.6.2 Data Reliability

Borg and Gall (1989) define reliability as the degree of consistency that the instruments
demonstrate in whatever it is measuring. To ensure reliability, the researcher will carry out a
pilot study where approximately 10% of the target population (50) will be exposed to the
instrument prior to the actual study.

The researcher consulted the supervisor prior to conducting a simple pilot test. In case of any
ambiguity and fallacious statements, these were eliminated before the final tool were
administered to respondents.

19
3.7 Data Processing, Analysis and Presentation

Raw data was collected by the use of questionnaires that was cross examined to ensure that
errors were detected and eliminated for completeness, accuracy and consistence with the purpose
of the study. Using a clean data file that was produced from excel sheets, Results were presented
in form of pie charts, bar graphs and tables showing frequencies and percentages at different
level of analysis that is to say Univariate, Bivariate levels to determine the relationship between
variables.

3.8 Limitations of the Study

The researcher faced a challenge of limited costs to ably fund the study and this was limit in the
distribution of samples. The researcher was limited by information provided since respondents
failed to provide all the needed information as they perceived it to be confidential.

Non-responses, objective information was cumbersome to collect especially when respondents

kept confidentiality of information considered sensitive from the target respondents was
expected to be problematic. However, the researcher solved this by providing adequate assurance
to them about data being purely for academic purposes.

The study involved costs such as transport to and from the field, communication, stationery and
printing of the research work. This was solved by seeking funding from friends and relatives and
adhering to the study budget.

Time. The researcher experience time constraint in data collection, which affected analyzing of
data and in final presentation of the report. However, the researcher overcame this problem by
ensuring that the time element was put into consideration and all appointments were agreed upon
with respondents.

3.9 Ethical Consideration

In order to conduct a successful research study, the following ethical issues were considered;

Informed consent: Before starting the study, the researcher was provided with accurate and
complete information to research regarding the purpose of the study.

20
Anonymity; This involved removing the participator name. However, the researcher took more
than this basic step to protect a participant's identity. Other information helped to identify people,
for example: age, marital status, religion and strongly expressed opinions. The more pieces of
information that was presented, the easier it was to identify someone.

Autonomy; this involved personal rule from both controlling interferences by others and from
personal limitations that prevented meaningful choice. Autonomous individuals acted
intentionally with understanding, and without controlling influences.

Confidentiality: Each interview was conducted in a comfortable place (such as class room),
where the privacy of the research participant was safeguarded for the interview process not to
draw any unnecessary attention. The information was collected for analysis were treated with the
utmost confidentiality and only used for research purposes.

21
 CHAPTER FOUR

EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS OF FINDINGS

4.0 Introduction

This chapter presents data analysis and interpretation effect of coffee production on the
livelihood of coffee farmers in Sheema District. This chapter is presented in accordance with
three specific objectives; examining the effect of coffee production on food security, income
levels of households and households’ employment level. The findings are summarized from
primary data source, presented in frequency tables and percentage distributions. The first section
of the chapter presents the bio data of respondents.

4.1 Response rate

The research study was conducted from the selected study area and data was collected from
selected sample population of 50respondents giving 100% response rate. All of distributed
research instruments were collected back from the respondents, this is good since all the desired
information was ably derived from the respondents.
4.2Demographic Findings

These include gender distribution, age, education level, marital status and area of work in the
organization. These findings were necessary as they help the researcher understand the nature of
respondents she is dealing with. Each demographic characteristic had a unique addition to the
findings.

Table 4.2: Descriptive Analysis

Gender Frequency Percent

Male 30 60
Female 20 40
Age distribution
02 04
>18
11 22
18-30
15 30
31-45
22 44
Above 46

22
Education level
None 01 02
Primary 10 20
Secondary 19 38
Certificate 09 18
Diploma 07 14
Degree 04 08

Marital status
Single 12 24
Married 29 58
Divorced 05 10
Widowed 04 08

Period spent in coffee production

14 28
Less than 1 year
16 32
1-5 years
20 40
Above 6 years
Source, Primary Data,(2021)

From the table 4.2above, the findings showed that 60% of the respondents were males, while
40% of the respondents were females. According to School (2006), agricultural activity
significantly varies according to gender, with men more likely than women to be engaged in
these activities.

The study showed that 44% were aged above 46 years, followed by 30% were in aged between
31-45 years, 22% of the respondents were aged between 18-30 years and finally 04% were in
aged bracket of less 10 years. This implies that the predominance of elderly farmer may be as a
result of coffee farms being long term investments that may require keeping individual capital
and delays of profits as a future investment plan.

The study revealed that 38% of the respondents had attained secondary level as the highest level
of education, followed by 20% had attained primary level, 18% had attained Certificate, whereas
24% had attained non formal education, diploma and degree as the highest level of education.
This implies that most of the respondents involved in coffee production had attained at least as

23
their highest level of education thus they were in position to provide reliable information. Thus,
education level has influence on coffee production since it is something yet to be established.

From the findings, the study showed that 58% of the respondents were married, followed by 24%
were single, 10% of the respondents had divorced and finally 08% minority of the respondents
were widowed. This implies that married respondents participated more in the researcher’s study
and these had other responsibilities apart from involving in coffee production and among the
responsibilities include taking care of their families.

The study revealed that 40% of the respondents had been in coffee production a period above 6
years, followed by 32% had spent a period of 1-5 years, while 28% of the respondents had spent
less than a year in coffee production. This is implying that majority of farmers have been in
coffee production for a long time which has reduced on the poverty levels.

4.3 Coffee Production

4.3.1 Size of Land coffee production

Table 4.3: Size of Land coffee production

Responses Frequency Percent

Under 1 acre 09 18.0
1-2 acres 11 22.0
2-4 acres 21 42.0
4-6 acres 09 18.0
Total 50 100.0

Source, Primary data, (2021)

From the above table the study revealed that 42% had coffee farms at coverage of 2-4 acres of
land, followed by 22% who had a coverage of 1-2 acres of land and finally 18% of the
respondents has of Under 1 acre and 4-6 acres of land. This implies that coffee production is
under small scale compared to the land coverage.

24
4.3.2 Type of coffee under cultivation
Figure 4.1: Type of coffee under cultivation

PERCENTAGE
70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%
ARABIC ROBUSTA OTHERS

Source, Primary Data, (2021)

From figure 4.1 above, the study revealed that 62% of the respondents were growing Arabic
compared to 30% who were producing robust type While 8% engage in other types of coffee
farming. This implies that since Arabic coffee contains antioxidants like Vitamin E, it helps to
reduce the risk of infections and diseases thus cost effective in term of production. Mary, (2016)
in her study on coffee production and welfare of women found that Arabic coffee was the most
grown kind of coffee in most parts of western Uganda.

4.2.3 Coffee Produced per season

Table 4.1: Coffee Produced per season

Responses Frequency Percent

Below 20 kgs 03 6.0
21-50 kgs 10 20.0
51-100 kgs 16 32.0
Above 100kgs 21 42.0
Total 50 100.0

Source, Primary Data, (2021)

25
From table 4.3 above, the study showed that 42% of the respondents produces above 100kgs per
season, 32% produces between 51-100 kgs, 20% of the respondent produces 21-50 kgs and
finally 6% of the respondents produces below 20kgs per season. This implies that coffee
production is not based on land coverage but it may depend on the quality under cultivation.

You cannot move from 4.2.3 and you come to 4.4. Any how you seem to have deceived to
delete the entire 4.3. Make sure, it is deleted in questionnaires as well. If it was an objective
delete it from objectives and in literature review.

4.4Effect of Coffee Production on Food Security

This was the first objective that aimed at analyzing the effect of coffee production on food
security the responsesare presented below;

4.4.1 Meals Accessed per day

Table 4.2: Meals Accessed per day

Descriptive Statistics

N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation

Meals 50 1.00 3.00 2.2000 .69985
Valid N
50
(listwise)

In the questionnaires, statements were directed towards finding out whether food was absent or
hard to reach. From table 4.4. The mean score based on a likert scale of 1-5, a mean score 2.20 is
below average. Meaning that majority respondents disagreed to the statements that they were
asked. Thus respondents were in agreement that coffee productions makes food accessibility
easier.The study shows that the e number of meals accessed were 2 times per day. This implies
that majority of the households had access to food thus coffee production provides income that
helps to purchase other food items.

4.4.2 Correlation between coffee production and Food security

In order to establish the nature of the relationship between coffee productions and food security,
the study run the correlation test as shown below;

26
Table 4.3: Correlation test between coffee production and food security

Coffee Food
production security
Spearman's Coffee production Correlation
1.000 .029
rho Coefficient
Sig. (2-tailed) . .040
N 50 50
Food security Correlation
.029 1.000
Coefficient
Sig. (2-tailed) .040 .
N 50 50

*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

Pearson’s correlation in table 4.5 yielded r=0.029* and Sig value-=0.040 which is less than 0.05.
Hence the research hypothesis (H0: There is a positive and significant relationship between
coffee production and Food security.) you need to state the hypothesis first before testing it.
Therefore, state for your reader what H1 is and H2 will be then go ahead to test and verifyor
reject? was accepted that there is a significant positive relationship between coffee production
and food security. This means that respondents believed that food security is a factor influenced
by the level of coffee production. It can be concluded that there was a significant positive
correlation between coffee production and food security at 29% positive correlation. Osiru,
(2011) in his study on income and coffee production found that coffee production has a
significant effect on income which has a bearing on food security. Check previous comments
4.3.2 and 4.7

4.5 Effect of Coffee Production on households Income level

4.5.1 Other sources of Income

Table 4.5: Other sources of Income

Responses Frequency Percent

Trading 17 34.0
Tea production 12 24.0
Banana 13 26.0
Other 08 16.0
Total 50 100.0

27
Source, Primary data, (2021)

From table 4.6 above shows that 34% of the respondents were involved in trading as the source
of income other than coffee production, followed by 26% of the respondents were involved
banana production, followed by 24% were involved in tea production and finally minority
(16%) of the respondents were involved in other productions like maize, Irish. This implies that
most of the households in Sheema district don’t rely on coffee production however they are
involved in other activities like tea production, trading as the source of income.

4.5.2 Correlation between coffee production and Households income levels

In order to establish the nature of the relationship between coffee productions and household’s
income levels, the study run the correlation test as shown below;

Table 5.4: Correlation between coffee production and Households income levels

Household
Coffee s Income
Production Levels
Coffee Production Pearson
1 .283(*)
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .047
N 50 50
Households income Pearson
.283(*) 1
levels Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .047
N 50 50

* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

Source, Primary data, (2021)
Pearson test was run at 5% significant level and from the findings it was observed that the
coefficient was 0.283, since the P-value of 0.047 was less than 0.05 this implies that there was
significant association between coffee production and household’s income levels. The alternative
hypothesis (H1: There is no relationship between coffee production on income levels of house
holds) is rejected and the researcher concluded that there is a significant positive correlation
between coffee production and household’s income levels.

4.6 Households income from coffee production

28
Table 4.6: Households income from coffee production

Descriptive Statistics

N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation

how much money
50 100000.00 1000000 567000.0 179457.80017
earned per season
Valid N (listwise) 50

The study revealed that the income earned per season from coffee production was 567000 shs.
This implies that coffee production helps households to meet their needs considering a maximum
limit of 1,000,000.

4.6.4 Monthly expenses that are always incurred

Table 4.7: Monthly expenses that are always incurred

N Minimum Maximum Mean

monthly expenses incurred in

50 20,000 500,000 210,800
maintaining coffee production

Valid N (listwise) 50

Source, Primary Data, (2021)

From table 4.7 above, it was revealed that the expenses incurred by households in maintaining
coffee farms was 210,000 she. This implies that farms must incur costs in order to maintain their
production through paying of salaries, farm inputs like pesticides among others.

4.6.5 Assets Attained from coffee production

Table 4.8: Assets Attained from coffee production

Responses Frequency Percent

Land 03 6.0
Automobile Business 16 32.0
Chicken Project 10 20.0
Vehicles 13 26.0
Furniture 08 16.0

29
 Total 50 100.0
Source, Primary Data, (2021)

From table 4.8 above shows that 32% of the respondents benefited by starting up automobile
business, followed by 26% of the respondents had vehicles, followed by 20% chicken projects,
and finally 16%, 06% had furniture and land respectively. This implies that coffee production
has domestically reduced poverty levels among households.

4.7 Effect coffee production on households’ employment levels

4.7.1 Responses whether households coffee farms employee labour force

Table 4.9: Whether households coffee farms employee labour force

Responses Frequency Percent

Yes 29 58.0
No 21 42.0
Total 50 100.0

Source, Primary Data, 2021

From table 4.9 above, the study showed that most of the coffee farms employ labour force as
represented by 58% and some farms do not as shown by 42%. This implies that small scale
coffee production is more of labour intensive than capital.
4.7.2 Correlation between coffee production and Households employment levels

In order to establish the nature of the relationship between coffee production and Households
employment levels, a chi-square test was run to test the relation between variables as shown
below;

Ho; Coffee production does not depend on the source of labour

30
Table 4.5: Chi-Square Test

Chi-Square Tests

Asymp. Sig.
Value df (2-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 9.160a 3 .027
Likelihood Ratio 5.683 3 .128
N of Valid Cases 50
a. 5 cells (62.5%) have expected count less than 5. The
minimum expected count is .36.

From the above test, since the p-value 0.027 is less than 0.05 is significant. It can be concluded
that there is a significant association between coffee production and source of labour force thus
the null hypothesis is rejected.

31
4.5.3 Main source of labour force employed coffee farm

Table 4.6: Main source of labour force employed coffee farm

Responses Frequency Percent

Family members 10 20.0

hiring of prisoners 09 18.0
permanent workers 28 56.0
Others 03 6.0
Total 50 100.0

From the table 4.13 above, the study revealed that 56% of the respondents were permanent
workers, followed by 20% of the respondents were family members, followed by 18% were
using hired prisoners, and finally 6% were using other sources of labour like village groups and
friends. This implies that coffee production more relies on permanent employees for easy
maintenance of the farms.

4.5.4 Number of workers employed

Table 4.7: Number of workers employed

N Minimum Maximum Mean

how many workers are currently
50 0 10 4.86
employed in your farm
Valid N (listwise) 50

From table 4.14 above, it was revealed that the average number of workers employed in coffee
farm at a small household level was ≈ 5. This implies that farms employ workers thus laborers
receive wage income and other additional benefits from employment in coffee production.

32
4.5.5 Common employment Opportunities in coffee farmers

Table 4.8: Common employment opportunities in coffee farmers

Responses Frequency Percent

Accountants 04 8.0
Cleaning and sorting 20 40.0
Picking 20 40.0
Hulling 06 12.0
Total 50 100.0

From table 4.15 above, the study revealed that 40% of the respondent were providing jobs of
picking, cleaning and sorting of coffee, followed by 12% who were providing hulling and finally
8% were providing accountants opportunities. This implies that coffee production creates
employment opportunities for local people, it is often the case that the local people have to
benefits from such opportunities.

These were my comments for the previous document. You did not address them. PlZ address
these. If you have a problem, let me know.

These were among the last comments.

e. The aspect to do with discussion in missing. Please read more about

discussion.
f. When discussing you integrate what researchers have found out in
relation to your study. Areas on agreement or disagreement are pointed
out.

33
 CHAPTER FIVE

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.0 Introduction

This chapter summarizes the whole study findings conclusions and gives the possible
recommendations the researcher sought fit if implemented on the contribution of coffee growing
on the livelihood of farmers.

5.1 Summary of the Findings

From the findings, the study showed that 60% of the respondents were males, while 40% of the
respondents were females implying that males participated more in the study. And most of the
respondents were aged above 46 years followed by those in between the age of 31-45 years
implying that elderly involved in coffee production.

The findings revealed that 38% of the respondents had attained secondary level as the highest
level of education. Thus, they were in position to provide reliable information. The study showed
that married respondents participated more in the researcher’s study represented by 58%.

The study revealed that 40% of the respondents had been in coffee production for over a period
of above 6 years with coffee farms at coverage of 2-4 acres of land growing mostly arabica
coffee represented by 88%.From the findings, the study showed that most of the respondents
produces above 100kgs per season.

The findings showed a significant positive relationship in the contribution of coffee production
on food security, level of households’ income and employment opportunities. And on average
households are able access meals 2-3 times a day.

From the findings, the other sources of income include trading, tea production, banana and other
with 34%, 24%, 26% and 16% respectively. Also, the assets attained from coffee production was
automobile business with 32%.

From the findings, coffee production more relies on permanent workers as the main source of
labour force employed in the coffee with on average 5 workers at a small household level. And

34
other common employment opportunities included cleaning and sorting, picking, hulling and
accountants.

5.2 Conclusions

5.2.1 The effect of coffee production on food security.

The study shows that the average number of meals accessed were 2 times per day. The study thus
concludes that coffee production has a significant effect on food security. Majority of the
households had access to food thus coffee production provides income that helps to purchase
other food items. Further conclude that coffee production enhances food security being a fact
that on average households have access to meals 2-3 times away.

5.2.2 The effect of coffee production on income levels of households

The study concludes that coffee production has a significant effect on house hold income levels.
Coffee production has provided employment opportunities to people in the field of cleaning and
sorting, picking, hulling and accountants thus reducing the level of poverty rate among
individuals

5.2.3 The effect of coffee production on households’ employment level

The study concludes that coffee production has a significant effect on employment levels of
house holds. Coffee farmers not only depend on coffee production alone for their livelihood but
also other economic activities like trading, tea production, banana and other businesses and its
noted that coffee as a core business gave way to these other opportunities which avails more
jobs.

5.3 Recommendations

Based on the findings the following recommendations were made;

5.3.1Coffee production and food security

The coffee farmers should also be encouraged to grow more coffee in large hectares as this may
help to solve the problem of food insecurity thus poverty level reduced.

5.3.2 The effect of coffee production on income levels of households

The coffee farmers should not only participate in coffee production but also other economic
activities as this may provide more income to them hence improving on the livelihood of the

35
farmers. and also, they should be sensitized on the importance of carrying out different economic
activities.

REFERENCES
Arnould, EJ, Plastina, A, Ball, D. 2009. Does Fair Trade Deliver on Its Core Value Proposition?
Effects on Income, Educational Attainment, and Health in Three Countries. Journal of
Public Policy & Marketing 28(2): 186-201.

Baffes, J. (2006). Restructuring Uganda's coffee industry: Why going back to basic matters.
Development policy review, 24(4), 413-436.

Barham, BL, Callenes, M, Gitter, S, Lewis, J, Weber, J. 2011. Fair Trade/ Organic Coffee, Rural
Livelihoods, and the “Agrarian Question”: Southern Mexican Coffee Families in
Transition. World Development 39(1): 134- 145.

Bazaara/CBR. (2011). Structural Adjustment Participatory Review Initiative (SAPRI) Uganda:

Impact of liberalization on Agriculture and food security in Uganda.

Callenes, M, Gitter, S, Lewis, J, Weber, J. (2011). Fair Trade/ Organic Coffee, Rural
Livelihoods, and the “Agrarian Question”: Southern Mexican Coffee Families in
Transition. World Development 39(1): 134- 145.

Coleman, A.L. and J.M. Galbraith 2000. Using GIS as an Agricultural Land Use Planning Tool.
In Using GIS as an Agricultural Land Use Planning Tool, Department of Crop and Soil
Environmental Science, Virginia Tech. Blacksburg. Bulletin No 2.

Eakin H. et al (2006). Responding to the coffee crisis: a pilot study of farmers’ adaptations in
Mexico, Guatemala and Honduras. The Geographical Journal. 172, 2006 pp.156-171.

FAO (2008). The State of Food Security in the World: High food prices and food security –
threats and opportunities. Rome: FAO.

FAO. 2011b. The state of the world’s land and water resources for food and agriculture
(SOLAW). [Website] (available at www. fao.org/nr/solaw/solaw-home). Accessed
November 2016

FTF. (2012). Fair trade and coffee: Commodity briefing.

36
Getu Z, Dale G, Tafa M, James G, Njogu, Gonfa T (2011). Carbon Stock Assessment in
Different Land Uses for REDD+ in Ethiopia. Practitioners Field Guide/Manual.Yayu
Forest Coffee Biosphere Reserve.33. http://www. worldagroforestrycentre.org.

Jose and Rica (2012), Price determinants in top-quality auctioned specialty coffees. Agricultural
Economics, 3(38), p. 267–276.

Kamola, I. The Global Coffee Economy and the Production of Genocide in Rwanda. Third
World Quarterly. 28. 2007. Pp.571-592.

Kilian, B, Jones, C, Pratt, L, Villalobos, A. 2006. Is sustainable agriculture a viable strategy to

improve farm income in Central America? A case study on coffee. Journal of Business
Research 59: 322-330.

Liangzhi, Y; Bolwig, S. (2003). Alternative growth scenario for Ugandan coffee to 2020 –
International Food Policy Research Institute, February 2003.

Liangzhi, Y; Hamlett M. (2010). Alternative growth scenario for Ugandan coffee to 2020 –
International Food Policy Research Institute, February 2003.

Mbowa, S., Ahaibwe. G., and Lwanga, M.M. (July 2013). Insights on Opportunities for Youth
Employment in Agricultural Value Chains: Unpublished Economic Policy Research
Centre (EPRC) Report Series.

Mbowa, S., Ahaibwe. G., and Lwanga, M.M. (July 2013). Insights on Opportunities for Youth
Employment in Agricultural Value Chains: Unpublished Economic Policy Research
Centre (EPRC) Report Series.

Osiru, D.S.O. Oehmke et al (2011). Report on crop/farming systems and PRA. FAO
transboundary agro-ecosystem management programme (TAMP).

Paiva RN, Carvalho CHS, Mendes ANG and Almeida SR (2010). Comportamento agronômico
de progênies de cafeeiro (Coffea arabica L.) em Varginha-MG. Coffee Sci. 5: 49-5.

TaCRI (2010) “Tanzania Coffee Industry Development Strategy 2011-2016”

UCDA report, (2018), Strategic Framework and positioning, 2017/2018

Wessels H. (2015): Coffee in a Fair Trade Market. Report on the Americas. 2, 2000. Pp11-14
37
38
 APPENDICES

APPENDIX I: QUESTIONAIRE

Dear Respondent,

I am Kanoel Linnet a final year student of Bachelors Degree of Development studies of

Kyambogo University. I am carrying out a research study ‘The Effect of Coffee Production on
the Livelihood of Farmers in Sheema District as a case study’ as a requirement to complete the
course.

You are among the respondents randomly selected to provide me with the appropriate
information, Information given will be treated with utmost confidentiality, privacy, consent and
finally it’s for academic purposes only.
‘Please by ticking or where necessary make a brief statement’

Part A: Background Information

Village Name ………………………………..

1. Sex of the respondent

Male Female

2. Age bracket

< 18 18-30

31-45 Above 46

3. Education level

a. Non formal
b. Primary
c. Secondary
d. Certificate
e. Diploma

f. Degree
39
 4. Marital status of the respondent

Single

Married

Divorced

Widowed

5. For how long have you been involved in coffee production?

Less than 1 year

1 -5 years

Above 6 years

PART B: COFFFEE PRODUCTION

6. Indicate the size of your land under coffee production
Under 1 acre 1-2 acres 2-4 acres 4-6 acres

7. What type of coffee is under cultivation on the firm?

Robusta Arabica Others and mention……………………….

8. How many kilograms do you produce per season?

Below 20kgs 21-50kgs

51-100kgs above 100kgs

SECTION C: FOOD SECURITY

9. How many meals do you access per day?

Once twice thrice none of above

40
10. Which other source of food does your home rely on?

Dairy farm food purchase others and mention……………………….

SECTION D: INCOME
11. What is your other source of income?
a) Trading

b) Tea production

c) Banana

d) Other Specify…………………………………………………………………….

12. How much do you earn from your coffee farm per season?
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
13. What are your monthly expenses that are always incurred in maintaining your coffee
production?

______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
14. Which assets do you have as a result of coffee production?

Land Automobile business Chicken project

Vehicles Furniture

SECTION E: EMPLOYMENT LEVELS

15. Does your firm employ labour force?
Yes No
16. What is your main source of labour force for your farm?
a) Family members
b) Hiring of prisoners
c) Permanent workers
d) Others please specify…………………………………………………………………….

41
17. How many workers are currently employed in your coffee farm?
……………………………………………………………………………………………………..
18. Which employment opportunities do you normally give out?
a) Accountants
b) Cleaning and sorting
c) Picking
d) Hulling
e) Other please specify……………………………………………………………………….

Thank you for Your Cooperation

42