ANALYSIS OF VEGETABLE MARKET SUPPLY IN CHEHA WOREDA:

THE CASE OF ONION MARKET

Prepared by ID No

1. EPHREM ALEMAYEHU AGR/133/10

2. MTKU TILAHUN AGR/244/10
3. EHTSEW WNDMNEW AGR/121/10

Advisor: Tiru Abebe (MSc)

A Senior Research Project Submitted to Wolkite University College of Agriculture and

Natural resource, Department of Agricultural Economics In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for B.SC. Degree in Agricultural economics

December, 30/ 2020

Wolkite University, Ethiopia
 APPROVAL SHEET
WOLKITE UNIVERSITY
COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE AN D NATURAL RESOURSCE
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS

ANALYSIS OF VEGETABLE MARKET SUPPLY: THE CASE OF ONION MARKET IN

CHEHA WOREDA OF GURAGE ZONE, ETHIOPIA.

SUBMITTED BY

NAME OF STUDENT
Ephrem Alemayehu _____________ _____________
Signature Date

Mtku Tilahun _____________ ___________

Signature Date

Ehtsew Wndmnew _____________ ___________

Signature Date

APPROVED BY

Tiru Abebe (MSc) ____________ _____________

Name of Advisor Signature Date

Feven Yohannes ____________ _____________

Name of dep‟t Head Signature Date
 ACKNOWLEDGMENT

First of all, we would like to thank GOD for his miraculous time to let us accomplish everything
we start and also for his help to go through every event successfully up to this minute.
We convey our deepest thanks to our advisor, Tiru A (Msc) .The completion of this work may
not have been possible without her generous devotion from the early design of the research
proposal title. Thus, we thank her for her genuine and energetic encouragement, suggestion;
insight and guidance to complete this research proposal.
We further extend our gratitude to Wolkite University College of Agriculture and Natural
Resource in providing computer services and other facilities for the accomplishment of our
research proposal preparation work.

i
 Table of Contents
ACKNOWLEDGMENT ...........................................................................................
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS.............................................................. vi
ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................... vii
1. INTRODUCTION................................................................................................1
1.1. Background of the study .................................................................................................... 1
1.2. Statement of the Problem .................................................................................................. 3
1.3. Objectives of the Study ...................................................................................................... 4
1.3.1 General Objective ......................................................................................................... 4
1.3.2. Specific Objective ........................................................................................................ 4
1.4. Research Question of the study ......................................................................................... 4
1.5. Scope of the Study .............................................................................................................. 4
1.6. Significance of the Study.................................................................................................... 5
1.7. Limitations of the Study .................................................................................................... 5
1.8. Organization of the paper.................................................................................................. 5
2. LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................................................ 6
2.1. Definition of terms .......................................................................................................... 6
2.2. Fundamental Approaches to Study Marketing ........................................................... 7
2.2.1. Functional Approach ................................................................................................... 7
2.2.2. Institutional Approach ................................................................................................ 7
2.2.3. Commodity Approach ................................................................................................. 8
2.3. Market Supply ................................................................................................................ 8
2.4. Status of Horticulture Production in Ethiopia ................................................................ 9
2.5. Characteristics of Vegetables Marketing ......................................................................... 9
2.6. Empirical Review in Ethiopia ......................................................................................... 11
2.7. Conceptual Framework Proposed .................................................................................. 13
3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ................................................................................ 15
3.1. Description of the study area........................................................................................... 15
3.1.1 Geographical location................................................................................................. 15
3.1.2 Climate ......................................................................................................................... 16

ii
 3.1.3 Demography ................................................................................................................ 16
3.2. Research Design................................................................................................................ 17
3.3. Methods of Data Collection ............................................................................................. 17
3.4. Sampling Size and Sampling Procedures ....................................................................... 17
3.5. Methods of Data Analysis ................................................................................................ 19
3.5.1. Descriptive statistic analysis ..................................................................................... 19
3.5.2. Econometric analysis ................................................................................................. 19
3.6. Hypothesis, Variable Selection and Definition .............................................................. 20
3.6.1. Dependent Variable:.................................................................................................. 20
3.6.2. The Independent variables: ...................................................................................... 20
4. RESULT AND DISCUSSION ...................................................................................... 23
4.1 Determinants of onion market supply volume ............................................................... 23
4.2 major constraints and opportunities of production and supply ................................... 26
5. CONCLUSION AND RECOMENDATION ........................................................... 28
5.1 CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................... 28
5.2 RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................................................. 28
REFERENCES ....................................................................................................................... 30
APPENDIX .............................................................................................................................. 35

iii
 LIST OF FIGURE
Figure 1: Research Conceptual Frame Work –Linking Variables …………….....13

Figure 2. Map of the study Area………………………….……………….……...15

iv
 LIST OF TABLE

Table 1: Summary of working variable and hypothesis………………………………………………………… 22

v
 ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

CSA Central Statistical Authority

EARO Ethiopian Agricultural Research Organization

FAO Food and Agriculture Organization

Ha Hectare‟

Qt Quintal

Km kilometer

TLU Total Livestock Unit

vi
 ABSTRACT
The study was initiated with the objectives of analyzing vegetable marketing in cheha woreda.
Specifically the study attempts to analyze market supply determinants and identifies constraints
and opportunities in onion production and marketing. The two stage sampling technique was
used. Purposive sampling was used for selecting kebeles and simple random sampling for
selecting sample respondents. But this study in this part is going to assess and review different
related literatures conducted so far in the same problem and give a general discussions about
the variables and the research outputs. This is because, due to the existing problems of the
country we have shortage of time to collect the actual data from the respondents in the study
area. Multiple linear regressions were aimed to use to identify factors that determine onion
market supply of the farm households in the area. Among the different variables that were
hypothesized as determining factors for volume of marketable supply the econometric result of
the review showed that, age of household head, educational level of household, family size in
household and quantity produced were significant. The result of the review of the econometric
analysis indicated that the significant variables had a positive and negative effect on households’
decision to sell onion. This review result is confirmed with hypostatized variable that are total
size of land owned, access to market information, total quantity produced, and education of
household head are significantly and positively affect yield of onion produced per hectare. This
influenced marketable supply of onion positively. In contrast to this based on the different
literatures result age of household head, family size in household, and frequency of extension
contact are affect positively and negatively the quantity of onion supplied to the market. weak
extension support service, limited land holding, lack of water, lack of access to credit,
insufficient product handling, outbreak of disease and pest, limited supply of within the
producers are key constraints of production and marketing of the onion crops . Infrastructural
facility such as road and telecommunication also played vital role in marketing by attracting
wholesalers. Therefore it is essential to take some improvement measures like the presence of
farmers training centers, education access and development agents in each kebeles played a
great role in the production and improving farmer’s management practices of onion product and
thereby increase their volume of market supply.

Key words: Market supply, Onion, multiple linear regressions

vii
 1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. Background of the study
Vegetable production is an important economic activity in Ethiopia. The production system
ranges from home gardening, smallholder farming to commercial farms owned both by public
and private enterprises (ATA, 2014).

Vegetables are defined in culinary terms to include vegetables “proper”, that have fruit and leafy
herbaceous parts eaten raw or cooked (i.e., lettuce, head cabbage, Ethiopian cabbage/kale,
tomatoes, green and red peppers, Swiss chard, celery, green beans, etc.), root and tubers which
include beetroot, carrot, potatoes, sweet potatoes, taro/ godere and bulb crops (onion, garlic,
shallot) (CSA, 2013).

In Ethiopia, post-harvest losses for fruits and vegetables are estimated to range between 15% and
70% according to previous research in the project African fruits. Ethiopia at the same time is
ranked as one of the poorest countries in the world by the UNDP-index (United Nations
Development Report 2013).

The major economically important vegetables include hot and sweet peppers (Capsicum spp.),
Ethiopian mustard/kale (Brassica carinata), onion (Allium cepa), tomato
(Solanumlycopersicum), chili (C. chinense), carrot (Daucuscarota), garlic (A. sativum) and
cabbage (B. oleracea var. capitata). According to the Ethiopian Investment Agency (2012), green
beans (Phaseolus spp.) and peas (Pisumsativum), okra (Abelmoschus spp.), asparagus
(Asparagus officinalis), cauliflower (B. oleracea var. botrytis), broccoli (B. oleracea var. italica),
celery (Apiumgraveolens L.), and Various types of vegetable crops are grown in Ethiopia under
rain-fed and/or irrigation systems (Alemayehu et al., 2010).

Onion- (Allium cepa) is considered as one of the most important vegetable crops produced on
small scale in Ethiopia. It also occupies an economically important place among vegetables in
the country. The area under onion is increasing from time to time mainly due to its high
profitability per unit area and ease of production, and the increases in small scale irrigation areas.
The crop is produced both under rain fed in the “Meher” season and under irrigation in the off
season. In many areas of the country, the off season crop (under irrigation) constitutes much of
the area under onion production. Despite areas increase, the productivity of onion is much lower
than other African countries. The low productivity could be attributed to the limited availability

1
of quality seeds and associated production technologies used, among the others (Aklilu, et al,
2015).

However, it can be grown in a wide range of climatic conditions. It is grown mainly for its bulb
which is used in every home, almost daily, across Ethiopia (AgroBIG, 2016). Ethiopia, the third-
biggest producer of onion in the African continent next to Egypt and South Africa, contribute
only 2.7% to the total world production between 2000 – 2011 (FAOSTAT , 2019). Averaged
over the period of 2010 to 2018, the onion area harvested , production, and yield at the national
level are 28,942 hectares, 33,947 tons and 11.70 tons/ha, respectively, (CSA), 2019; Food and
Agriculture Organization Statistical Division (FAOSTAT), 2019), which is far below the world
average of 19.7 tons/ha (Megersa, 2017).

In the major rainy (Meher) season of 2018/19, onion production covered about 11.46% of root
crops area in the country. The most recent evidence shows that low quality of cultivars,
inappropriate agronomic practices, weak extension system, disease and pests ,and fluctuation of
climatic conditions are the major constraints for the onion production and productivity in
Ethiopia (Abebe,2018; Agro BIG, 2016; Etana, 2019; Gebrselassie, 2013; Hailu, Zemedu, &
Getnet, 2017; Megersa,2017; Melese, Dessie, & Abate, 2018). Despite low productivity, onion is
becoming the sources of livelihood for many people who have engaged in the production and
trading. This has led to increased demand for onion production and marketing in Ethiopia
(Gebrselassie, 2013). However, the evidence shows that lack of storage to increase its shelf life;
poor handling of the products, imperfect price information, lack of horizontal coordination
among producers, weak market linkage (lack of vertical coordination among chain actors), and
lack of quality standards and grades are the major constraints for the marketing process of onion
in Ethiopia (Abebe, 2018).

The red onions are culturally most accepted in Ethiopia. The emphasis of this research lies on the
red onion since those are the most cultivated species in the vicinity of the district of cheha, where
the research was conducted. Cheha district endowed with beautiful diverse natural resource has
the capacity to grow different annual and perennial crops. It is used for irrigation during the dry
season mainly for vegetables. Major types of vegetable crops growing in the area include potato,
onion, tomato, garlic, and some leafy vegetables. Vegetable production in the study area is

2
mainly for market. The production is very fragmented and uncoordinated where all growers
produce similar type of crop resulting in glut (mainly onion) typically in harvest seasons.

1.2. Statement of the Problem

The development of horticulture in general and vegetable production and marketing in Ethiopia
in particular is constrained by a number of factors: Policy implementation gap, inadequate
vegetable seed regulatory frameworks, inadequate quality control and certification mechanisms,
limited public institutional capacity and capability supporting efficient and regular vegetable
seed supply, inefficient seed importation and distribution system, high post-harvest losses, high
incidence of diseases and insect pests, poor vegetable marketing and value chain development
and weak linkage and integration among stakeholders (Bezabih et al., 2014).

According to Bezabih (2010), The major constraints of horticulture marketing include lack of
markets to absorb production, low price for the products, large number of middlemen in the
marketing system, lack of marketing institutions safeguarding farmers' interest and rights over
their marketable produces (e.g. cooperatives), lack of coordination among producers to increase
their bargaining power, poor product handling and packaging, imperfect pricing system, and lack
of transparency in market information system mainly in the export market.

According to Kumilachew et al. (2014) risks in vegetable production from the perspective of
smallholder farmers‟ results suggest that production and price risks were generally perceived as
the most important sources of risks. Of all the risk sources, output price fluctuation, drought,
pests/diseases, termites/insect attack, high costs of inputs, flood/high rainfall, illness/injury/death
of operator/member, changes in family relations, theft, conflict and violence, changes in policy
and rules, and high cost of credit were of important concerns in that order of importance. Market
risks may be due to factors affecting the timely delivery of produce to markets or quality of
produce (e.g. poor feeder roads, non-existence of storage/transportation facilities, bulk and
perishable nature of the produce). Consequently, farmers are forced to sell their produce to the
traders at cheaper prices. The steep fall in market prices during the harvest season has been the
most common grievance of farmers.

3
This study has the purpose of investigating the vegetables ( onion) marketing challenges and
factors affecting onion supply to the market, in cheha district, and reducing the information gap
on the subject and by contributing to work better understanding on improved strategies for
reorienting marketing system for the benefit of small farmer development ..

1.3. Objectives of the Study

1.3.1 General Objective
The overall objective of the study is to analyze vegetables marketing supply in cheha woreda, in
case of onion

1.3.2. Specific Objective

 To analyze the determinants of marketable supply
 To identify major constraints and opportunities of onion production and supply

1.4. Research Question of the study

1. What are the determinants of market supply?

2. What are the major constraints and opportunities of onion production and supply?

1.5. Scope of the Study

Attempting to analyze the entire food system is an impossible action given the limited resources
and human skill. Thus, the research was narrowed down to concentrate on the production area
(cheha woreda). The types of crops were limited to onion for their increasing coverage in
relation to marketing problem they used to face. These crops account for the major proportion of
vegetable production in the study area and pass through a number of marketing stages. The
commodity approach to market study will used to analyze marketing chains of vegetable,
involved on the major constraints and opportunities of production and supply of onion and
factors determining supply of vegetable in the District is the center of the study.

4
1.6. Significance of the Study
Horticultural marketing in Ethiopia and Cheha woreda in particular is constrained by number of
factors such as seasonality of production, perishable nature of the product, bulkiness, imperfect
market information and market power by traders. Many studies indicated that the dynamics of
horticultural marketing have great interaction with farmer‟s participation and production
response in Ethiopia. The primary significance of the study is to all actors in the marketing
system. Analysis of the whole system and identifying clearly the factors of onion market supply
and the challenges will benefit policy makers and implementers in indicating the area of
advantage for what should be done to improve onion marketing. The potential users of the results
of this study will be farmers, governmental and non-governmental organization, who want to
introduce interventions in vegetable marketing system. Furthermore, this study can be used as
source material for further study.

1.7. Limitations of the Study

Being the first study in the district it may lack details of investigations which can have reinforced
in understanding of the whole system particularly in relation to production studies. The limitation
of this study is related to the types of data collected. The study mainly utilized cross-sectional
data generated from the sample household survey of only one cropping season and was not also
incorporate information generated from farming plot characteristics.
1.8. Organization of the paper

Following the introduction section, the remainder of the paper is organized as follows. Section 2
presents review of relevant literature. Methodology describing the study areas, sampling
methods, methods used in data collection and the actual type of data collected and analytical
methods adopted follows in section 3. Section 4 presents results and discussion which identify
determinants of market supply of onion and identify the main production and marketing problem,
and opportunities. Section 5 presents conclusion of the key findings and the recommendation of
the study.

5
 2. LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1. Definition of terms

Market:

The word “market” has many connotations. Bain and Peter (1988), define “markets” as a single
arrangement in which one thing is exchanged for another. A market is also thought of as a
meeting point of buyers and sellers, a place where sellers and buyers meet and exchange takes
place, an area for which there is a demand for goods an area for which price determining forces
(demand and supply) operates. For McNair and Hansen (1956), “market is another name for
demand”. Others define market as a system or an atmosphere or a mechanism that facilitate price
fixation and thereby exchange of goods and services.

Marketing:
In its simplest form is defined as the process of satisfying human needs by bringing products to
people in the proper form, time and place (Branson and Norvel, 1983). Marketing has an intrinsic
productive value, in that it adds time, form, place and possession utilities to products and
commodities. Through the technical functions of storage, processing and transportation, and
through exchange, marketing increases consumer satisfaction from any given quantity of output
Mendoza (1995).
Agricultural Marketing
It is defined as agriculturally oriented marketing. It embraces all operations and institutions
involved in moving farm products from farm to consumers (Pritchard, 1969). It covers all the
activities associated with the agricultural production and food, feed, and fiber assembly,
processing, and distribution to final consumers, including analysis of consumers‟ needs,
motivations, and purchasing and consumption behavior (Branson and Norvell, 1983).

It is both a physical distribution and an economic bridge designed to facilitate the movement and
exchange of commodities from farm to fork. Food marketing (of branded foods) tends to be
inter-disciplinary, combining psychology and sociology with economics, whereas agricultural
marketing (of unbranded products) is more mono disciplinary, using economics almost
exhaustively (Kohls and Uhl, 1985).

6
Marketing system

The concept of marketing system includes both the physical distribution of economic input and
products and the mechanism of process or coordinating production and distribution (Ayelech,
2011). It is any systematic process enabling many market players to bid and ask: helping bidders
and sellers interact and make deals. It is not just the price mechanism but the entire system of
regulation, qualification, credentials, reputations and clearing that surrounds that mechanism and
makes it operate in a social context. Because a market system relies on the assumption that
players are constantly involved and unequally enabled. It is also an economic system that relies
upon markets to allocate resources and determine prices. It is usually seen as a “system” because
it comprises several, usually stable, interrelated structures that, along with production,
distribution, and consumption, underpin the economic process (Mendoza and Rosegant, 1995).

2.2. Fundamental Approaches to Study Marketing

According to Johan et al (1988), different circumstances involved in the supply and demand of
agricultural products, and the unique product characteristics require a different approach for
analyzing agricultural marketing problems. The most commonly used are functional, institutional
and commodity approaches

2.2.1. Functional Approach

Functional approach studies marketing in terms of the various activities that are performed in
getting farm product from the producer to the consumer. These activities are called functions
(Cramers and Jensen, 1982). According to Kohls and Uhl (1985), Functional approach to study
marketing is to break up the whole marketing process into specialized activities performed in
accomplishing the marketing process. The widely accepted functions are exchange (buying and
selling), physical (processing, storage, packing, labeling and transportation) function, and
facilitating (standardizing, financing and risk bearing, promoting and market information)
function.

2.2.2. Institutional Approach

The institutional approach focuses on the study of the various institutions, which perform the
marketing activities. These organizations or people are middlemen who perform the operations
necessary to transfer goods from the producer to consumer, because of the benefit of

7
specialization and economics of scale that exist in marketing as well as production (Cramers and
Jensen, 1982). Moreover, institutional approach focuses on the description and analysis of
different organizations engaged in marketing (producers, wholesalers, agents, retailers, and the
like) and pays special attention to the operations and problems of each type of marketing
institution.

2.2.3. Commodity Approach

In a commodity approach, a specific commodity or groups of commodities are taken and the
functions and institutions involved in the marketing process are analyzed. This approach is said
to be the most practical as it helps to locate specific marketing problems of each commodity and
improvement measures. The approach follows the commodity along the path between producer
and consumer and is concerned with describing what is done and how the commodity handled
more efficiently (Kohls and Uhl, 1985).

2.3. Market Supply

Agricultural products differ from manufactured goods in terms of supply and demand.
Agricultural products supply is different because of the very seasonal biological nature while
their demand is comparatively constant throughout the year. In economic theory, it is stated that
human being is always under course of action of choice from a number of options. The basis for
the decisions could be issues ranging from household characteristic to the exogenous
unmanageable factors. A case in point here is market supply where researchers put each owns
point of determining variables. The analysis can identify factors that determine market supply. A
clear understanding of the determinants helps to know where to focus to enhance production and
marketable supply.

Marketable surplus is the quantity of produce left out after meeting the farmer‟s consumption
and utilization requirements for kind payments and other obligations such as gifts, donation,
charity, etc. This marketable surplus shows the quantity available for sale in the market. The
marketed surplus shows the quantity actually sold after accounting for losses and retention by the
farmers, if any and adding the previous stock left out for sale (Thakur et al., 1997). Marketed
surplus is defined as the proportion of output that is marketed (Harris, 1982). Marketed surplus
may be equal to marketable surplus, but may be less if the entire marketable surplus is not sold

8
out and the farmers retain some stock and if losses are incurred at the farm or during the transit
(Thakur et al., 1997).

2.4. Status of Horticulture Production in Ethiopia

Ethiopia has potential area for horticultural crop production of 1.22 million square kilometers
with appropriate of climatic and soil types which can grow crops for home consumption and
foreign markets ( Tadle and Derbew, 2015).

Fruit and vegetable cultivation is a new activity in many parts of the above mentioned belts and
it has been given due attention very recently for its diverse economic benefits. The belts also
differ in resources, technical capacity and practical implementation in the production of quality
products for local market and export. The bulk of root and tuber, fruit and vegetables are
produced by small scale farmers and flowers are produced by commercial farms. The
horticultural crops production in Ethiopia has been small compared to other crops but it has great
potential since the climate is favorable for many horticulture products. According to the nation
rainy season data (CSA, 2018), the total areas under fruits, vegetables and root crops estimated to
be 0.55 million hectares with 60.78 million tons of harvest. About 17.66 million small-scale
producers were engaged in production of these crops. Oromia and Southern National and
Nationality People Regional (SNNP) state are the major producing regions with almost equal
percent share (CSA, 2018).

The Central Statistics Authority data is for rainy (Meher) season report, however most vegetables
are produced under irrigation and give better yield. Besides the scattered small farmers, private
investor cooperatives unions that are increasing in number also produce different fruits and
vegetables for local and export markets. The overall productivity of the crops is lower in
farmers‟ fields compared to the private investors‟ field (Selamawit, 2013).

2.5. Characteristics of Vegetables Marketing

Being produced both by commercial and smallholder farmer‟s vegetable marketing is influenced
by a number of factors that can be attributed to production, product, and market characteristics.
Kohl and Uhl (1985) identified these attributes as-

9
Perish ability-as vegetables are highly perishable, they start to lose their quality right after
harvest and continued throughout the process until it is consumed. For this purpose, elaborated
and extensive marketing channels, facilities and equipment‟s are vital. This behavior of
vegetables exposed the commodity not to be held for long periods and fresh produce from one
area is often sent to distant markets without a firm buyer or price. Prices may be negotiated while
the commodities are en route, and they are frequently diverted from their original destination of a
better price can be found. Sellers might have little market power in determining a price.
Producers are normally price takers and are frequently exposed for cheating by any intermediary.

Price /Quantity Risks- Due to perishable nature and biological nature of production process
there is a difficulty of scheduling the supply of vegetables to market demand. The crops are
subjected to high price and quantity risks with changing consumer demands and production
conditions. Unusual production or harvesting weather or a major crop disease can influence
badly the marketing system. While food-marketing system demands stable price and supply, a
number of marketing arrangements like contract farming provide stability.

Seasonality- Vegetables have seasonal production directly influencing their marketing.

Normally they have limited period of harvest and more or less a year round demand. In fact, in
some cases the cultural and religious set up of the society also renders demand to be seasonal.
This seasonality also worsened by lack of facilities to store.

Product bulkiness- Since water is the major components of the product, it makes them bulky
and low value per unit that is expensive to transport in fresh form every time. This, therefore,
exposed farmers to lose large amount of product in the farm unsold.

Improving vegetables marketing in developing countries is vital for a number of reasons: rapid
increase in demand from growing domestic urban populations, opportunities to earn foreign
exchange by exporting high value-off-season produce; the income raising opportunities it offer to
small farmers and the contribution to employment made by its labor intensive production,
handling and sales requirement are some to mention (FAO, 1986, cited on Abay, 2007).

Ideally, measures commonly recommended for the improvement of vegetables marketing are
better packaging, handling, and transport; sorting by quality; extending the market season and
leveling out gluts and shortages by market delivery planning and storage; developing new

10
markets; installation of refrigerated transport and processing equipment: and establishing
marketing enterprises.

2.6. Empirical Review in Ethiopia

Bezabih and Hadera (2007) state low level of improved agricultural technologies, risks
associated with weather conditions, shortage of fertilizer, price of fuel for pumping water ,
diseases and pests as the major constraints of horticulture production in Eastern Ethiopia. Other
problems they reported also include poor know how in product sorting, grading, packing, and
traditional transporting affecting quality. They added absence of direct transaction or linkage
between the producer and the large buyer as another property that characterized horticulture
marketing. Buyers follow contact persons who identify vegetables to be purchased, negotiate the
price, and purchase and deliver the products.

Jema (2008) further identified that, existence of considerable economic inefficiency in

production, poor contract enforcement, and imperfect completion in the marketing of vegetables
are some of the main problems of vegetable production and marketing in eastern Ethiopia. He
also added that, volume handle, shipping cost, and time trend be significant factors in explaining
variations in the price spreads. Moreover, results of his study show that traders share of the
marketing surplus increase with the degree of perish ability of the produce. That is, the more
perishable the produce is, the higher is the share that traders‟ capture from the marketing surplus.

Different production and marketing constraints such as: weak extension support service, limited
land holding, lack of water, lack of access to credit, insufficient product handling, outbreak of
disease and pest, limited supply of improved seed and shortage of human labor from the
production side and unfair price quotation, lack of standards and lack of strong cooperative from
the marketing side are some of the most important problems that hinder the production and
marketing of onion and tomato.( Adugna, 2009).

If the existing system identify and take into account factors that determine market supply of
onion in gender perspective, problem identification and structured support can mitigate and
reduce poverty and improve sustainable production (Almaz, 2015).

11
Almaz et al. (2014) used value chain approach to study on constraints of vegetables in Ethiopia
in perspective of gender. The finding of study indicate that onion and tomato value chain is
complicated by substantial problems including; low yield, lack of production and marketing skill,
lack of capital, adulteration (poor quality of seed), lack of market information, brokers hindering
fairness price, unable to have good vegetable marketing policy, problem of rural road access,
storage problem, improper shading and lack of demand. The productivity level of onion and
tomato in the study area is below its potential. Female-headed producers had low yield compared
to their male counterparts. The study recommended giving due attention needed for vegetable
marketing and production in any on-going and future vegetable development plan.

Debela (2013) identified that imperfect market information, excess supply in peak season; low
producer price; weight cheating and existence of high traders bargaining power are the major
challenges in onion marketing. The learning effect and neighborhood effect are much more
important in technology adoption, production and marketing of the produce. The start of on farm
onion seed production was also one of the opportunities for production and marketing increment.
The infrastructural facility such as road and telecommunication also played vital role in
marketing by attracting wholesalers from different parts of Ethiopia. The presence of farmers
training centers and development agents in each kebeles also played a great role in the
production and improving farmer‟s management practices of onion product and thereby increase
their volume of market supply.

Addisu (2016) conducted value chain analysis of vegetables to identify determinants of vegetable
supplied to the market. The author finding showed that quantity of onion supply to market was
significantly and positively affected by yield of onion produced per hectare, education level of
households‟, farming experience and area of land allocated for onion.

Akalu and Jochen (2016) identified major challenges and opportunities in vegetable production,
marketing and consumption in Yayu and Hurumu districts. The result of the author pointed out
that seasonal unavailability and low volume of vegetable supply, fluctuation in price, poor
postharvest handling, and absence of market place (shade), long distance from market places and
shortage of capital are the major constraints to vegetables marketing. The author identified that
highly demanded vegetables supplied through imports from other regions of Ethiopia because the
local supply is low in the district. The available local producers supply in specific production

12
season, which leads supply deficit in the off-season period and price fluctuation in the marketing
of vegetable marketing.

According to Alemayehu et al, (2016), the age of household heads positively affected the amount
of onion sold. Aged households are believed to be wise in resource use; on the other hand, young
households are active for labor work.

Teklebrhan et al, (2020) identified that Quantity of onion production influenced the quantity
supplied to the market positively. This is explained by the fact that onion is the major cash crop
for the majority of sampled farm households, and it‟ shows that the higher the household
produces, the higher they supply to the market. And Access to market information has shown a
positive effect on the quantity of onion supplied to the market. It indicates that obtaining
information helps onion producers to supply more quantity of onion to the market.

2.7. Conceptual Framework Proposed

The conceptual framework given in Figure 1 is based on literature and empirical evidence that
indicates the interrelationships in the study, the key variables involved and how they are
interrelated. Socioeconomic and demographic characteristics are the background factors like
(age, literacy status, gender, transport ownership, livestock owned, non/off farm income, onion
yield and household size), institutional factors like (group marketing, contract marketing, access
to extension service, credit and training), farmer and farm specific characteristics (like land
allocated to onion, onion farming experience and agro ecology) and market factors like (lagged
onion market price, distance to nearest urban center and ownership of communication device)
had an influence on market participation. The participation leads to the level of participation. The
level of participation (amount of onions sales) in turn increased the household income

13
Demographic Socio –economic factor Institutional factor
Characteristics
Literacy status of HH Access to extension
Age of household, sex of
Livestock owned Service, credit, contract
household and household size
Non /off farm income Marketing, cooperative
Membership, access to
Ownership of transport
training
Onion yield

Farmer and farm

specific
characteristics
Market supply
Land allocated to
Market factors onion, onion farming
Distance to nearest urban experience
market Agro ecology
Lagged onion market price
Ownership of
communication device
Agro ecology

Figure 1.Conceptual Framework of study.

Source: Adopted from Tadesse (2008), Berhanu (2012), Geoffrey (2014) with modification

14
 3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1. Description of the study area

The map of cheha woreda

Figure 2. Map of the study Area

Source: cheha woreda office

3.1.1 Geographical location

The study was conducted in Cheha Woreda, located in Gurage Zone of Southern Nations,
Nationalities and Peoples Regional State. (SNNPRS), The capital of the Woreda, Imdbir, is
located at 188 km distance south of Addis Ababa on the way to Wolkite town, the capital of the
Zone. Imdibir means "mother forest" and is the combination of two words in the Gurage
language, "Im” means mother and “dibir" means forest. This name clearly indicates that the area

15
was once covered by forests (Mojoa et.al, 2015). The geographical location of the study area
extends from 8° 00' 18.9" to 8° 15' 28.53" N and 37° 35' 46.48" to 38° 03' 59.59" E. Cheha
woreda covers an area of 44,072 ha and its altitude ranges from 1200 m a. s. l. in the lowlands to
2600m a. s. l. in the highlands. EnemorEner Woreda borders the in the south, Oromia region in
the west, Ezha Woreda in the East, Gumer and Geta in the Southeast, and Wabe River, which
separates it from Abeshege, and Kebena in the North. The woreda constitutes 40 rural kebeles
(the lowest administrative unit) of which 39 are rural and 1 is rural town.

3.1.2 Climate
The annual rainfall of the area ranges from 800 to 1200 mm. Rainfall and temperature conditions
for Cheha woreda depend on elevation as it is the case for other parts of the country too.
According to the Ministry of Agriculture (MoA) (1998), the agro-ecology of the area is classified
into three agro-ecological zones. These agro-ecological zones and Kolla (Lowlands, 500 - 1,500
masl) (EIAR, 2011). The WeinaDega covers the largest part, which accounts for about 94 % of
the total while both Dega and Kolla cover 6%. The information obtained from the Cheha
Woreda Agriculture and Rural Development Office indicates that the area receives unimodal
include Dega (Highlands, 2,300 - 3,200 m a.s.l), WeinaDega (Midlands, 1,500 - 2,300 m a.s.l)
Rainfall. 'Kiremt', the main rainy season is from June to September with the peak in July and
August. The short rainy season with erratic nature i.e. 'Belg' extends from March to May.

3.1.3 Demography
Based on the 2007 Census conducted by the CSA, this woreda has a total population of 115,951,
of whom 56,851 are men and 59,100 women; 8,992 or 7.76% of its population are urban
dwellers. The plurality of the inhabitants were reported as Muslim , with 42.98% of the
population reporting that belief, while 36.31% practiced Ethiopian Orthodox Christianity ,
12.87% were Protestants , and 7.73% were Roman Catholics. The 1994 national census reported
a total population for this woreda of 115,864 of whom 56,740 were males and 59,444 were
females; 3,693 or 3.19% of its population were urban dwellers. The largest ethnic group reported
in Cheha, who were almost the only one in this woreda, was the Sebat Bet Gurage (99.23%); all
other ethnic groups made up 0.77% of the population. Sebat Bet Gurage was spoken as a first
language by 97.91% of the population, and 1.65% spoke Amharic; the remaining 0.44% spoke
all other primary languages reported. The plurality of the inhabitants were Muslim, with 44.17%
of the population reporting they practiced that belief, while 41.71% practiced Ethiopian
16
Orthodox Christianity , 8.31% were Catholic , and 5.42% were Protestants . Concerning
education , 29.33% of the population were considered literate, which is more than the Zone
average of 20.62%; 20.47% of children aged 7–12 were in primary school, 5.28% of the children
aged 13–14 were in junior secondary school, and 6.67% of the inhabitants aged 15–18 were in
senior secondary school. Concerning Sanitary conditions, 97.22% of the urban houses and
23.32% of all houses had access to safe drinking (Wikipedia).

3.2. Research Design

There are many types of research designs. Among these, descriptive research is one of the
research design used in social researches. Descriptive research is defined as a purposive process
of gathering, analyzing and classifying and tabulating data about prevailing conditions, practices,
beliefs, processes that are going on, effects that are being felt, or trends that are developing; and
then making adequate and accurate interpretations about such data with or without the aid of
statistical methods. Therefore, this study will be directed towards collecting and analyzing
vegetable market in the study area.

3.3. Methods of Data Collection

Data was collect from primary and secondary sources. Primary data sources incorporated the
entire situations of the marketing system from the producing farmer structured and unstructured
interview. It is essential to gathered essential and face to face information. The most important
data types collected consist of production, determinants of market supply, and, characteristics.
Besides, secondary data on total land size, and other data relevant to the study will collected.

3.4. Sampling Size and Sampling Procedures

The target population for this study was all households of Cheha woreda. In this study, two stage
sampling procedure was used. In the first stage, out of 39 kebeles two kebeles namely bakanwete
and adoshe were purposively selected, this is because first, this kebeles has better flow of
vegetable production than the other. The second reason is its convenience for the researcher in
reaching the kebele and its closeness.

In the second stage, 93 sample households from the selected kebeles were selected randomly.

17
Yamane (1967) formula was used to determine the representative sample size. For determining
the size of samples representing small and homogenous population, it comparatively minimizes
the sample size related biasness and hence it is preferable (Yemane, 1967).

According to him, for a given finite population with certain confidence level and precision (e),
the sample size can be calculated as:

Where; n =the sample size to be determined, N= Total no of households under sample frame of
the study, e = degree of precision.
Numbers of household at adoshe =660

Numbers of household at bakanwete =708 (kebele administrations, 2020 and own

computations).

N=1368

Therefore; by taking e as 10% and N = 1368 the total number of households in the sample
kebeles, the sample size for this study was estimated as:

93.18 ≈ 93

Thus, a total of 93 household heads were selected randomly from the identified two kebeles of
Cheha Woreda for an interview of the questionnaire.

Then we have to apply proportionate sampling to obtain how many respondents are select from
each stratum by using formulas: nh = n (Nh)/N
Where: nh = Sample size for stratum h
Nh is the numbers of households for stratum h
N is the total numbers of households and n is the total sample size.
Nh1 = n (Nh1)/N nh2 = n (Nh2)/N
= 93(660)/1368 = 93(708)/1368

18
 Nh1 =44.87~45 nh2 = 48.13~48
So that, nh1=45 and nh2=48 are the sample size of the strata to the kebele, adoshe and
bakanwete respectively.

3.5. Methods of Data Analysis

In this study both descriptive and econometric analyses was used to conduct market supply
analysis. An econometric model was used to identify factors affecting marketable supply of
vegetable for data‟s collected from a cross-section of samples. To describe the characteristics of
onion producer descriptive statistics like mean, standard deviation and percentage will employed.

3.5.1. Descriptive statistic analysis

To describe the characteristics of respondents and to identify key constraints in Production and
marketing descriptive statistics will be used like percentage, mean and standard deviation.
3.5.2. Econometric analysis
The econometric analysis used to estimate the causal relationship between the dependent variable
and the explanatory variables.

In this study, multiple linear regression models will be used to analyze factors affecting farm
level vegetables supply to the market in the study areas because of all vegetable producers
participate in the market. Or all sample households supply these vegetables to the market.

This model is also selected for its simplicity and practical applicability (Greene, 2000). It is used
to estimate the parameters as it is appropriate when the dependent variable is continuous. In
addition, it is intuitively appealing and simple to use (Gujarati, 2004). Econometric model
specification of supply function in matrix notation is the following.

Y = ' βx+ui

Where:

Y = quantity of onion supplied to market

X = a vector of explanatory variables

„β =a vector of estimated coefficient of the explanatory variables

Ui = disturbance term

19
When some of the assumptions of the Classical Linear Regression (CLR) model are violated, the
parameter estimates of the above model may not be Best Linear Unbiased Estimator (BLUE).
Moreover, high Multi-collinearity may render important variables insignificant. Thus, it is
important to check the presence of Multi-collinearity among the variables that affect supply of
onion in the area.

3.6. Hypothesis, Variable Selection and Definition

3.6.1. Dependent Variable:

Quantity Supplied to Market: It is a continuous variable representing dependent variable. It is
the amount of onion supplied by households to market and measured in quintal.

3.6.2. The Independent variables:

1. Age of the household head (Aghh) - It is a continuous variable and measured in years. Age is
a proxy measure of farming experience of household. Aged households are believed older
households may also be tradition bound and reluctant to take up new technologies. On the other
hand, as an individual stays long, he would have better knowledge and wise use in resource .it is
expected to have a positive effect on market participation and marketable surplus, hence
positively affecting horticultural production (meron, 2015).

2. Total land owned (Tlanown) - this is a continuous variable in hectare indicating the total
land owned by a farmer. It is expected to take positive sign implying that the larger land size a
farmer owns the more land size would be allocated for the crop at interest. Increase in size of
land assumes direct influence on marketable surplus (Mossie et al, 2020).

3. Frequency of extension contacts (extcon): It is a continuous variable, which refers to the

frequency of contacts that producers have with an extension agent per month. Frequent extension
contact provides important information that helps to increase onion market supply. This
continuous variable is expected to influence supply positively ( Hailu ,2017).

4. Education of household head (Edlhh): this is a dummy variable with a value of one if a
household head is literate and zero otherwise. Education increases farmers‟ ability to get and use
information. Since households who have better knowledge are assumed to adopt better
production practices, this variable is assumed to have positive relation with farm level
marketable supply of onion (Debela 2013).
20
5. Total quantity produced (TOTQtPRO): It is a continuous variable. A marginal increase in
onion production has obvious and significant effect on the volume of onion supply. The volume
of production of onion is expected to have positive relation to market participation and
marketable supply (Abraham 2013).

6. Family size (Fshh) – this is the total number of family members that can be taken as a proxy
for level of consumption. This continuous variable is expected to influence supply negatively
(Debela 2013).

7. Access to market information (Maiform). Access to market information is assumed to have

a positive impact on marketable supply of onion. It is a dummy variable with a value of 1 if an
onion producing household has access to market information and 0 otherwise. Therefore, it is
hypothesized that market information is positively related to market supply of onion (Asale et al,
2016).

8. Credit Access (CREDIT): This is a dummy variable, which indicates credit taken for onion
production. Access to credit would enhance the financial capacity of the farmer to purchase the
necessary inputs. Therefore, it is hypothesized that access to credit would have positive influence
(Abrha et al 2020).

9. Income from non-farming activity (NONFINC): It is a continues variable that show

income obtained from non-farming activities by the household head. This income may
strength farming activity or reluctant to produce onion to generate money from onion
rather than getting income from non-farming activities. Therefore, getting income from non-
farming activity is assumed a positive relation with market participation and market supply
(Addisu 2016).

10. Total livestock unit (TLU): This is a continuous variable defined in terms of tropical
livestock unit (TLU).. On the other hand, when the household has less production; it must either
borrow money or sell his livestock to meet household needs. Farmers who have low production
of onion need to specialize in livestock production and hence it has an inverse relationship with
crop production and market supply(Debela 2013).

21
Table 1: Summary of working variable and hypothesis

No Factors Continuous Categorical Effect on onion production

Negatively
Positively

1 Age of household
head
 

2 Total Land owned  

3 Extension contact  

4 Education  

5 Number of oxen  

6 Family size  

7 Access to market  
information


8 Credit Access 


9 Income from non- 
farming activity

10 Total livestock unit  

22
 4. RESULT AND DISCUSSION

In contrast with the usual ways, this study in this part is going to assess and review different
related literatures conducted so far in the same problem and give a general discussions about the
variables and the research outputs. This is because, due the existing problems of the country we
have shortage of time to collect the actual data from the respondents in the study area.

4.1 Determinants of onion market supply volume

Age of the household head (Aghh) – According to the finding of Ebrahim et al, (2017) the age
of household heads negatively affect the quantity of onion supplied to the market at 5%
significant level. This implied that one additional year increase in the age of household head
decrease the quantity of onion supplied by 0.04Qt, keeping all other factors constant. The
possible reason might be due to young household heads are more productive in labor work and
active for new information and technology, which enables them to produce thereby supply more
than older households.

This result is in line with the Adugna (2009) findings that age of household heads negatively
affect onion market supply due to older households may be tradition-bound and reluctant to take
up new technologies. In contrast to this (meron, 2015) indicate that age of the household head
significantly and positively influenced market participation. An increase in the age of household
head by one year increases the probability of participating in vegetables market by 0.16%, all
other factors held constant. This implies that as an individual stays long, he will have better
knowledge and experience.

Total land owned (Tlanown) –According to Debela (2013) revealed from his study Total size
of land owned by the sample households was expected to adversely affect total sales (both
volume and participation). Total land holding was significantly and positively affected
marketable supply. An increase in one hectare of land indicated on increase in the quantity
supplied by 5.479 kilograms among the whole sample and as size of land holding increased by a
kilogram, a probability of quantity supplied increased among non-sellers group by 0.169%. The
assumption that farmer who has more land that the positive impact on market supply, because if
a farmer owns more land, the probability of allocating land for onion crops would increase.

23
Accordingly, Mossie et al, (2020) confirmed that area allocated to onion production and post-
harvest value additions is significant and positive relation with the quantity of onion supplied to
the market at 1% significance level. This implies that those households allocated more land to
onion production have managed to supply more product to the market. The coefficient shows an
increase in the area allocated to onion production by one hectare would result in 33.350 quintal
increase in the quantity of onion supplied to the market.

According to the Addisu (2016) also found that the result has showed significant effect at 1%
significant level for onion with expected positive sign. Increase in the size of one hectare of land
allocated to onion resulted in an increase in volume of onion by 106.095 quintals, keeping other
factors constant. Households with larger land size are relatively better off because it allows the
household to have a surplus production above subsistence needs and enable them to sell products
for market.

Frequency of extension contacts (extcon)- According to Abrha et al (2020) The other

significant variable was extension contact, which as expected influenced the quantity of onion
marketed positively and statistically significant at 1%. Extension contact is related to access to
formal training and informal (contact with agricultural Development Agents and experts) on
onion production and marketing for producer farmers. The positive and significant relationship
indicates that extension contact had improved onion farming household ability to acquire new
technology and capacity of production, which in turn improves productivity and thereby increase
marketable supply of onion. Furthermore, the coefficient shows that onion producers who
received extension services on onion production had more probability to supply 5.4 quintals of
onion than those who didn‟t receive extension services, other variables are held constant. This
suggests that access to extension service avails information regarding technology which
improves production that affects the marketable supply.

Moreover, Hailu (2017) found the positive relationship between the number of extension contact
and the onion market choice in Ejere district Oromia regional states of Ethiopia. He noted that
the extension contact enables the farmer to improve production methods hence leading to more
output which in turn more likely to sell onion in the market. However, the finding is opposite to
the findings by Melese et al. (2018) in Fogera district, Amahara regional states of Ethiopia. They
found that the contact to extension agent could lead a 5% reduction of onion farmer market

24
participation. They indicated that the farmers those who have access to the extension service do
not appropriately apply the techniques and advice suggested by the extension agents such as the
method of applying fertilizer, herbicides and pesticide, these have abilities to kill and destroy the
onion bulb during the production stage if not used appropriately.

Education of household head (Edlhh):- Addisu (2016) identified that Education has showed
positive effect on onion quantity supplied to market with significance level at 10%. The survey
results revealed that, if onion producer gets educated, the amount of onion supplied to the market
increases by 8.074 quintal, keeping other factors constant. This may be because majority of the
farmers in the study area have minimum education requirements to make them market oriented
and thus enable them to have better skills and better access to information to supply more onion
to market.

Also Melese et al. (2018) showed that Education has a positive effect on market supply because
it enhances has showed positive effect on log of onion quantity sold with significance level at 10
%. On average, if onion producer gets educated, the amount of log of onion supplied to the
market increases by 0.1. The result further indicated that, education has improved the producing
household ability to acquire new idea in relation to market information and improved production,
which in turn enhanced productivity and thereby increased marketable supply of onion. This is in
line with Ayelech (2011) and Astewel (2010) who illustrate if producer gets educated, the
amount of products supplied to the market increases, which suggests that education improves
level of sales that affects the marketable supply.

Total quantity produced (TOTQtPRO):- Abrha et al (2020) shows that the quantity of onion
production influenced the quantity supplied to the market positively and statistically
significantat1%. The positive coefficient indicated that an increase in the quantity of onion
produced increases the quantity of marketable supply of onion by producers. This is explained by
the fact that onion is the major cash crop for the majority of sampled farm households, and it
shows that the higher the household produces, the higher they supply to the market. This result is
similar to the findings by Giziew (2013) who stated that the amount of tomato, onion, leafy
vegetables and potato, mango, avocado, and papaya, respectively, produced by household
affected marketable supply of each of the commodities significantly and positively. Moreover,

25
Melese et al. (2018) found the positive relationship between onion yields, which is proxy for
production, and volume supplied to the market in the Fogera district of theAmahara regional
state of Ethiopia.

Family size (Fshh) - Meron (2015) found that family size significantly and positively influences
the extent of market supply. Since, vegetable production and marketing is labor-intensive activity
the more family members tend to have more labor, which in turn increases vegetable production
and market supply. But According to Debela (2013) family size influenced negatively and
significantly the quantity supplied at 5% probability level. Each additional family member
decreases the probability of quantity supplied by 0.036%. A unit increase in family member
decreases the quantity of onion supplied to the market by 1.161 factors among the whole sample
respondents and by 0.953 factors among onion sellers.

Access to market information (Maiform)- According to Asale et al, (2016) showed that
Access to market information has positively and significantly (at 5% level of significance)
affected the amount of onion supplied to market. Thus, a unit increase in alternative sources of
market information accessible for farmers on average increased the volume of onion sold by
4.12%. This implies that if farmers get adequate, consistent, and timely price information they
will adjust their production accordingly and supply sufficient amount of onion to market. This
result is consistent with the finding of Mossie et al, (2020) Access to market information is
positively and significant at 5% significance level. The coefficient also confirmed that accessing
market information to farmers would tend to increase the marketable supply of onion by 4.331
quintals. The implication is that obtaining and verifying information helps to supply more
quantity of onion.

4.2 major constraints and opportunities of production and supply

There are factors that hamper the production and marketing of horticultural crops. According to
the sample respondents, weak extension support service, limited land holding, lack of water, lack
of access to credit, insufficient product handling, outbreak of disease and pest, limited supply of
improved seed and shortage of human labor from the production side and unfair price quotation,
lack of standards and lack of strong cooperative from the marketing side are some of the most
important problems reported by sample respondents of onion (Adugna 2008).

26
Since vegetables are highly perishable, there is a sense of urgency in marketing these products as
quickly and efficiently as possible in order to maintain their farm- fresh value. It has also been
found that some farmers find it costly to hire transport, especially after harvesting, and
consequently women often carry the produce on their heads or in cart and wheelbarrows.
Farmers indicating lack of access to transport as the major constraint when it comes to accessing
markets in towns and consequently they are forced to sell their produce to local customers at
lower prices for fear of their fresh produce rotting. It is well known that nearness to towns
reduces transaction costs in agriculture (Meron, 2015).

According to Muluneh et al. (2016) marketing system for onion and tomato were predominantly
constrained by a number of difficulties like weight cheating, unfair pricing of products by
brokers and low quality of the products and lack of cooperative.

The key constraints identified in onion market include ; price fluctuation, lack of credit
availability, scarcity of fertilizers, high involvement and role of middlemen (brokers), less
availability of inputs, the high cost of onion seed and supply of homogeneous products to the
market. The main causes identified for the inefficient markets are high involvement of brokers,
the existence of the oligopolistic market and lack of market awareness; which results in lower
income and lower livelihood status of producers (Hailegiorgis, 2017).

Experience (learning effect) and neighborhood effect are much more important in technology
adoption, production and marketing of the produce. The start of on farm onion seed production
was also one of the opportunities for production and marketing increment. The infrastructural
facility such as road and telecommunication also played vital role in marketing by attracting
wholesalers from different parts of Ethiopia. The presence of farmers training centers and
development agents in each kebeles also played a great role in the production and improving
farmer‟s management practices of onion product and thereby increase their volume of market
supply. The other opportunities were the existences of governmental and non-governmental
organization (Debela 2013).

27
 5. CONCLUSION AND RECOMENDATION

5.1 CONCLUSIONS

This review has analyzed vegetable market supply by focusing on onion. The specific objectives
of the review were analyzing the determinants of quantity of onion supply and identify major
constraints and opportunities of onion production and supply. Determinants of market supply of
onion play a substantial role by generating income and improving livelihood. The review has
given a due emphasis mainly for determinates affecting the volume of onion supply to markets.
The review investigated the determinants of onion supply by using the Multiple Linear
Regression Model. The result of the reviewed literatures indicates that both demographic,
socioeconomics and marketing factors affecting onion producer households positively and
negatively. Total size of land owned, access to market information, Total quantity produced, and
Education of household head are significantly and positively affected by yield of onion produced
per hectare. the major constraints to vegetables (onion) marketing Seasonal unavailability and
low volume of vegetable supply, fluctuation in price, poor postharvest handling, and absence of
market place (shade), long distance from market places and shortage of capita high involvement
and role of middlemen (brokers), less availability of inputs, the high cost of onion seed and
supply of homogeneous products to the market.

5.2 RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on the results of this review, the following recommendations are given so as to be
considered in the future intervention strategies which are aimed at the promotion of vegetables
production and marketing

To increase quantity produced of onion per unit area of land through proper utilization of
land resource. The quantity produce for onion at the farm level affected marketable supply of
land positively and significantly. Nevertheless, increasing landholding size cannot be a
choice to raise vegetable marketable supply since supply of land is limited by nature. Hence,
boosting productivity per unit area of land is better alternative to increase quantity produced

28
in turn increase marketable supply of onion. This is relying on intensive farming rather than
on extensive one.
Education had also influence the production and market supply of onion through resource
utilization, better knowledge and also progressiveness to adoption of technology. Hence in
order to increase the marketable supply the government and other supportive institution
should deliver training center and education infrastructure.
Pest and disease occurrences should be managed, before they cause a destructive impact on
production.
Policymakers should focus on enhancing onion production, which could be achieved through
providing improved inputs, new technology, and techniques that enable farmers to produce
more than once in a year.

29
 REFERENCES
Abebe, A. (2018). Review on onion value chain analysis in Ethiopia. Nutrition and Food
Science International Journal, 6(5). doi:10.19080/NFSIJ.2018.06.555698.
Addisu Hailu. 2016. Value chain analysis of vegetables: The case of Ejere District, West
Shoa Zone, Oromia National Regional State of Ethiopia. MSc Thesis, Haramaya
University, Haramaya, Ethiopia.
Adugna Gessesse, 2009. Analysis of fruit and vegetable market chains in Alamata,
Southern Zone of Tigray: The case of onion, tomato and papaya, 2009.

Akalu Teshome and Jochen Dürr. 2016. Horticulture value chains in Ethiopia:
Opportunities for better nutrition and new market access? Conference on
International Research on Food Security, Natural Resource Management and Rural
Development organized by the University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences
(BOKU Vienna), Austria

AgroBIG. (2016). Onion value chain analysis. Agro Big programme for agribusiness
induced growth in the Amhara region.
Aklilu Nigussie, YitagesuKuma, AbiyAdisu, TigistAlemu and KidaneDesalegn. 2015.
Onion Production for Income Generation in Small Scale Irrigation Users Agro-
pastoral Households of Ethiopia. J Horticulture 2: 145. doi:10.4172/2376-
0354.1000145.

Alemayehu Asale, Derib W/Yhanes and Taye Buke. 2016. Onion market chain analysis in
Humbo District of Wolaita Zone, Southern Ethiopia. International Journal of
Scientific Research Engineering Technology, 2(1): 6-16.

ALEMAYEHU, N., D. HOEKSTRA, K. BERHE and M. JALETA (2010): Irrigated

vegetable promotion and expansion: The case of Ada‟a District, Oromia Region,
Ethiopia. Improving the productivity and market success of Ethiopian Farmers
(IPMS) Case Study Report, International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI),
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Downloadable at:
http://cgspace.cgiar.org/handle/10568/1422, accessed on February 11, 2014
Almaz Giziew, Workneh Negatu, Edilegnaw Wale, and Gezahegn Ayele. 2014.
Constraints of Vegetables Value Chain in Ethiopia: A Gender Perspective.
International Journal of Advanced Research in Management and Social Sciences, 3:
2278-6236.
Almaz, G. (2015). Gender perspective of vegetable value chain in Dugda District, East
Shewa, Ethiopia, PhD Dissertation, Addis Ababa University, Ethiopia

30
ATA (Agricultural Transformation Agency), PASDEP. Transforming Agriculture in
Ethiopia, annual report. Pp3-8, 2014
Astewel Takele, 2010. Analysis of rice profitability and marketing chain: The case of
Fogera District, South Gondar Zone, Amhara National Regional State, Ethiopia.
M.Sc thesis presented to School of Graduate Studies, Haramaya University. 76p.

Ayelech Tadesse, 2011. Market chain analysis of Fruits for Gomma Woreda, Jimma
Zone, Oromia National l Regional State (unpublished MSc thesis) MSc thesis no.
2011. Haramaya University, Haramaya, Ethiopia.
Bain, K. and P. Howells, 1988. Understanding Markets: An Introduction and Practice of
Marketing. Harvester Wheat sheaf, London

Berhanu K (2012). Market Access and Value Chain Analysis of Dairy Industry in
Ethiopia; The Case Of Wolaita Zone. A Dissertation Presented To School Of
Graduate Studies,Haramaya University.

Bezabih, E., and Hadera, G., 2007. Constraints and opportunities of horticulture production
and marketing in eastern Ethiopia. Dry Lands Coordination Group Report No 46.
Grensen 9b. Norway. 90p
Bezabih Emana. 2010. Market Assessment and Value Chain Analysis in Benishangul
Gumuz Regional State, Ethiopia. SID-Consult-Support Integrated Development,
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
Bezabih Emana, Amsalu Ayana, Tesfaye Balemi and Milkessa Temesgen. 2014. Scoping
Study on Vegetables Seed Systems and Policy in Ethiopia. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Branson, R., and D.G. Norvell, 1983. Introduction to Agricultural Marketing. McGraw-
Hill Inc, USA. 521p kind CSA, 2001/02, (Central statistical Authority). Area
and Production of Major Crops. Agricultural Sample Enumeration Survey part III.
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Cramer, G. L. and Jensen, W., 1982. Agricultural Economics and Agribusiness, 2nd
Edition. McGraw Hill Book Company, USA 222p.
Central Statistical Agency of Ethiopia, CSA. Agricultural Sample Survey. Retrieved July
20-28, http://www.csa.gov.et/index.php?option=com_rub
berdoc&view=category&i., 2012.

CSA, 2006, Area and Production of Major Crops. Agricultural Sample Enumeration
Survey. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

31
CSA, (Central Statistics Agency), 2018. The Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia.
Agricultural Sample Survey. Report on Area and Production of Major Crops for
Meher Season. 2017/18 (2010 E.C). Statistical Bulletin No 586. Addis Ababa,
Ethiopia.
Central Statistical Agency (CSA) of Ethiopia. (2019). Agricultural sample survey 2018/19
(2011 E.C.) report on area and production of major crops, private peasant holdings,
Meher season (volume I).
Dawit Alemu and HailemariamTeklewold, -----: Marketing of fruits and vegetables:
opportunities and constraints in the Rift Valley of Ethiopia. Melkasa&Debrezeit
Agricultural Research Centers. 22p
Debela Adugna. 2013. Analysis of onion marketing: The case of Fentalle woreda, East
Shewa Zone, Oromia national regional state, Ethiopia. MSc Thesis, Haramaya
University, Ethiopia
Ebrahim Endris, Jema Haji , Bosena Tegegne, 2017 Determinants of vegetables market
supply in case of Habru district, North Wollo Zone, Ethiopia . International
Journal of Sciences & Applied Research IJSAR, 7(4), 2020; 01-12

Etana, B. M., Aga, C., & Fufa, O. B. (2019). Major onion (Allium cepa L.) production
challenges in Ethiopia: A review. Journal of Biology, Agriculture and Healthcare,
9(7). doi:10.7176/JBAH
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization), 1986. Marketing improvement in the
developing world. Marketing and Credit Service.. Rome, Italy.
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization), 1999. Law and Markets: Improving the legal
environment for agricultural marketing. Agricultural Services Bulletin 000. Rome
Italy. 87p
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization), 2005a. Addressing marketing and processing
constraints that inhibit agri-food exports: A guide for policy analysts and planners.
Agricultural Service Bulletin 160. Rome. Italy. 109p
Food and Agriculture Organization Statistical Division (FAOSTAT). (2019). Retrieved
from http://www.fao. org/faostat/en/?#data/QC
Gebrselassie, S. (2013). Helping small farmers to commercialize: Evidence from growing
onion and tomatoes for sale in central Ethiopia. A research update of the future
agricultures‟ consortium.
Geoffrey K (2014). Determinants of market participation among smallscale pineapple
farmers in Kericho County, Kenya. M.Sc thesis presented to the school of graduate
studies, Egerton University.

32
Greene, W.H, 2000. Econometric Analysis.Fourth edition, Prentice Hall International, Inc.,
International edition, U.S.A. 1004p.

Gujarati, D.N. 2004.Basic Econometrics.4th Edition. McGraw hill Company, In United

States Military Academy, West Point.
Hailegiorgis D. Analysis of vegetable market chain in dugda woreda, East Shoa Zone,
Oromia Region, Ethiopia. Addis Ababa University, College Development Studies;
2015. Available:https://cgspace.cgiar.org/handle/ 10568/67318. (Accessed on 20th
April, 2017)
Hailu, A., Zemedu, L., & Getnet, K. (2017). Value chain analysis of onion: The case of
Ejere district, West Shoa zone, Oromia national regional state of Ethiopia. African
Journal of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development, 5(1), 512–524.
.
Jema, H, 2008. Economic efficiency and marketing performance of vegetable production
in the eastern and central parts of Ethiopia. PhD Dissertation. Uppsala.
Kumilachew Alamerie, Mengistu Ketema and Fekadu Gelaw. 2014. Risks in Vegetables
Production from the Perspective of Smallholder Farmers: The case of Kombolcha
Woreda, Oromia Region, Ethiopia. School of Agricultural Economics and
Agribusiness, Haramaya University, Haramaya, Ethiopia. ISSN: 2328-563X.
th
Kohls, R., and N. Uhl, 1985. Marketing of agricultural products. 5 Edition. McMillian
Publishing Company, New York, USA.

McNair, M.P. And Hansen, H.L. 1956. Reading in Marketing, Second Edition. McGraw-
McGraw Hill Book Company, USA 222p.

Melese, T., Dessie, B. A., & Abate, M. T. (2018). Determinants of commercialization by

smallholder onion farmers in Fogera district, South Gondar zone, Amhara national
regional state of Ethiopia. Journal of Development and Agricultural Economics,
10(10), 339–351. doi:10.5897/JDAE2018.0964

Megersa, G. H. (2017). Onion (Allium cepa L.) yield improvement progress in Ethiopia: A
review. International Journal of Agriculture and Biosciences, 6 (5), 265–271.

Mendoza, G., 1995. A premier on marketing channel and margins. Lyme RimerPublishers
Inc., USA.

33
MeronYohanes. 2015. Performance of vegetable market: The case of Kombolcha district,
East Hararghe Zone of Oromia National Regional State, Ethiopia. MSc Thesis,
Haramaya University, Haramaya, Ethiopia.

Muluneh Bekele, Kebenu Feyisa and Shimelis Getu. 2016. Challenges and opportunities of
marketing fruit and vegetables at Logia, Northeastern Ethiopia. The Case of Onion,
Tomato and Banana. Journal of Marketing and Consumer Research, Vol.22: p51-58

Pritchard, N.T., 1969. A framework for analysis of agricultural marketing systems in

developing countries. Agricultural Economics Researches 21(3): 78-88 Published
byVan Nostrand Rein Hold Company, New York, U.S.A, p8.

Selamawit, K., 2013. The State of Science and Technology of Vegetable Crops in
Ethiopia, in: Brhane, G., Seme, D., Solomon, B., Taye, B., Solomon, H., Gete, and
Z. (Eds.), The State of Agricultural Science and Technology in Ethiopia. Held at
International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. 28-30
November 2011. Ethiopian Academy of Sciences (EAS), Addis Ababa, Ethiopia,
pp. 163–179.

Tadele W and Derbew B, 2015. Review on production status of Horticultural crop.

Available on line Journal of Biology, Agriculture and Healthcare, Ethiopia

Tadesse A (2008). Farmers‟ Evaluation and Adoption Of Improved Onion Production

Package In Fogera district, South Gondar, Ethiopia. M.Sc Thesis Presented To The
School Of Graduate Studies, Haramaya University

Teklebrhan Abrha, Bezabih Emanna & Girma Gezimu Gebre | (2020) Factors affecting
onion market supply in Medebay Zana district, Tigray regional state, Northern
Ethiopia, Cogent Food & Agriculture, 6:1, 1712144

https://doi.org/10.1080/23311932.2020.1712144

Thakur, D.S., D.R. HarbansLal, K.D.Sharma and A.S.Saini, 1997. Market supply
response and marketing problems of farmers in the Hills. Indian J. Agric.
Economics. 52(1):139-150.
UN, United Nations Development Programme. 2013. Human Development Report 2013.
Available on: http://hdr.undp.org/en/media/HDR2013_EN_Summary.pdf
(Accessed 15 May 2014)

34
 APPENDIX
WOLKITE UNVERSITY

COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE AND NATURAL RESOURCE

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMIC

RESEARCH QUESTIONAIR

Dear respondent this questionnaire was prepare to analyze factors affecting market supply of
onion and to identify major constraints and opportunities of onion production and marketing.

1. Name _______

2. Age_______

3. Sex _______

4. Educational status of the household‟s

A. Grade 1-4 B) grade 5-8 C) grade 9-10

D) Certified E). Illiteracy

5. Family size in no._______

6. Do you have land? _______

a) Yes b) No

7 If yes, How many ha _______?

8. Did you produce onion?

a) Yes b) No

9. IF yes, how much did you produce in quintal______?

10. Where did you supply _______?

11. For who did you supply_______?

35
12. How much do you supply (quantity in quintal)_______?

13. When did you supply (time) _______?

14. If the product increase in 2018/19 what is the reason?

1) ……………………………….
2) ………………………………..
3) ………………………………..
15. If the product decrease in 2018/19 what is the reason?

1) ……………………………….
2) ………………………………..
3) ………………………………..
16. Did you get frequent extension service?

a) Yes
b) No
17. If yes how much you get? _______

18. Did you get market information?

a) Yes
b) No
19. If yes where? _______

20. What are the main constraints faced in production?

a) …………………………………….
b) ……………………………………
c) ……………………………………
d) ……………………………………
e) …………………………………..
21. What are the main constraints faced in marketing

a) …………………………………….

36
 b) ……………………………………
c) ……………………………………
d) …………………………………..
e) …………………………………
22. What are the opportunities to produce?

a)………………………………………………………

b)……………………………………………………….

c)………………………………………………………

d)……………………………………………………..

e)……………………………………………………..

f)……………………………………………………..

23. What are the opportunities to supply?

a)………………………………………………………

b)……………………………………………………

c)……………………………………………………

d)…………………………………………………..

e)………………………………………………….

f)…………………………………………………

24) Do you have livestock? A) Yes B) No

25) If your answer for Q.24 is yes, livestock Number
Ox Cattle Calf heifers donkey sheep Goat Poultry Mule

26) Did you need credit in the year 2019?

37
A) Yes B) No

27) If yes, for Q.26 how much did you take for onion production purpose? _____________Birr

28) From whom did you get credit for onion production?

A) Relative B) Bank C) Micro finance institution D) Friends E) Traders F) NGO

G) Peasant association H) others (specify)______

29) Did you participate in nonfarm activities? A) Yes B) No

30) If yes how much revenue you get from nonfarm activities (in birr) ______?

Thank you!!!

38