Journal of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development

Vol. 6(1), pp. 718-725, March, 2020. © www.premierpublishers.org, ISSN: 2167-0477

Research Article

Technical Efficiency of Smallholder Sorghum Producers

in West Hararghe Zone, Oromia Region, Ethiopia
*Azeb Lemma1, Belaineh Legesse2, Mengistu Ketema3
1School of Agricultural Economics and Agribusiness, Oda Bultum University, Chiro, Ethiopia.
2,3School of Agricultural Economics and Agribusiness, Haramaya University, Haramaya, Ethiopia.
This study was aimed at analyzing the technical efficiency of sorghum producing smallholder
farmers in Chiro district. It was based on cross-sectional data of 130 sample sorghum producing
households randomly selected. The estimated results of the Cobb-Douglas frontier model with
inefficiency variables shows that the mean technical efficiency of the farmers in the production
of sorghum is 78 percent. This implies that sorghum producers can reduce current level of input
application by 22 percent given the existing technological level. The discrepancy ratio γ, which
measures the relative deviation of output from the frontier level due to inefficiency, was about
84.6% and while the remaining 15.4% variation in output, was due to the effect of random noise.
The estimated stochastic production frontier (SPF) model also indicates that Organic fertilizer,
DAP fertilizer, Area, Labor and seed are significant determinants of sorghum production level.
The estimated SPF model together with the inefficiency parameters shows that age, Frequency of
extension contact, Household size, Slope, Fertility of soil and Livestock holding significantly
determine the efficiency level of the farmers in sorghum production in the study area. Hence,
emphasis should be given to improve the efficiency level of those less efficient farmers by
adopting and using practices of relatively efficient farmers in the area so that they can be able to
operate at the frontier. Beside this, a strategy of the government needs to be directed towards the
above-mentioned determinants.
Keywords: Sorghum, Technical efficiency, Cobb-Douglass, Stochastic frontier.

INTRODUCTION

Ethiopia, the country with an area of about 1.12 million themselves but also for the development of other sectors
square kilometers, is one of the most populous countries in the economy.
in Africa with the population of 73.75 million in 2007 with
annual growth rate of 2.6% (Central Statistical Agency of Even though Ethiopia is the country with largest grain
Ethiopia, 2008). producers in Africa it is characterized by large pockets of
food insecurity and a net importer of grains. Despite
This growing population requires better economic agricultural dominance, there were more than seven
performance than ever before at least to insure food million peoples in need of food assistance in the country.
security. However, the agricultural sector in the country is The country is food insecure mainly due to lack of
characterized by small-scale, subsistence-oriented, an improved technology and economic inefficiency in
adverse combination of agro climatic, demographic, production. The smallholder farmers, who are providing
economic and institutional constraints, and heavily the major share of the agricultural output in the country,
dependent on rainfall. Ethiopian agricultural sector commonly employ backward production technology and
contributes 46.4% of the country’s GDP, employs 83% of limited modern inputs. Hence, being an agriculturally
total labor force and contributes 90% of exports. The
sector plays a pivotal role to induce the industrialization *Corresponding Author: Azeb Lemma, School of
process in the country. (Ethiopian Economic Association, Agricultural Economics and Agribusiness, Oda Bultum
2012). Therefore, enhancing the productivity of such University, Chiro, Ethiopia.
sector is crucial not only for the development of the sector E-mail: [email protected]

Technical Efficiency of Smallholder Sorghum Producers in West Hararghe Zone, Oromia Region, Ethiopia
Lemma et al. 719

dependent country with a food deficit, increasing crop sorghum production in the study area. The extent, causes
production and productivity is not a matter of choice rather and possible remedies of inefficiency of smallholders are
a must to attain food self-sufficiency (World Food not yet given due attention. Thus, this study has tried to
Programe, 2015). measure the technical efficiency of the farmers in study
area and identified its main determinants based on a cross
According to CSA (2017) within the category of grain sectional data collected from 130 rural households.
crops, cereals are the major food crops both in terms of
the area they are planted and volume of production Concept of Technical Efficiency
obtained. They are produced in larger volume compared
with other crops because they are the principal staple The efficiency of a firm is its ability to produce the greatest
crops. Cereals are grown in all regions with varying amount of output possible from a fixed amount of inputs
quantity as shown in the CSA survey results. Out of the and an efficient firm is one that given a state of technical
total grain crop area, 79.3% (9,588,923.7 ha) was under know-how, can produce a given quantity of goods by using
cereals. The proportion of the crop grain areas for teff, the least quantity of inputs possible (Raymond, 1981).
maize, sorghum and wheat took up 22.6% (about
2,731,111.7 ha), 17% (about 2,054,723.69 ha), 15.9% Technical efficiency of a producer is a comparison
(1,923,717.5 ha and 11.9% (1,437,484.7 ha), respectively. between observed and optimal values of its outputs and
Sorghum accounts for an average ten percent of daily inputs. It refers to the ability to avoid wastage either by
caloric intake of households living in the eastern and producing as much output as technology and input usage
northwest areas of the country. About three-quarters of the allow or by using as little input as required by technology
sorghum grain in Ethiopia is used for making injera (the and output production. Technical efficiency has, therefore,
traditional bread, made from teff in more productive areas both an input conserving and output promoting argument.
of the country). Another 20 percent is used for feed and for It is assumed that technical efficiency ranges between
local beer production, with the remainder held for seed. zero and one, if TE = 1 implies that the firm is producing
The entire plant is utilized, with sorghum stalks used for on its production frontier and is said to be technically
house construction and cooking fuel and leaves used for efficient. 1 – TE is therefore the largest proportional
animal fodder (GAIN, 2015). reduction in input that can be achieved in the production of
the output.
Research institutions claim that it is possible to produce
50-60 qt of sorghum per ha if improved technologies and According to Farrell and Fieldhouse (1962), allocative
practices are used appropriately. Yet, the average efficiency is related to the ability of a firm to choose its input
productivity level of sorghum in Chiro district about 22 in a cost minimizing way. It involves the selection of an
qt/ha, which is below minimum potential yield level. input mix that allocates factors to their highest valued uses
Despite increase in the use of improved inputs especially and thus introduces the opportunity cost of factor inputs to
fertilizers, the productivity level is so low. This is an the measurement of productive efficiency. AE reflects the
indication that farmers are not using inputs efficiently. If the ability of the firm to use the inputs in optimal proportions
existing production system is not efficient, introduction of given their respective prices and the production
new technology could not bring the expected technology. It is assumed that, 0 < AE < 1, Following the
improvements in the productivity of sorghum and other same line of reasoning, 1 – AE measures the maximal
crops. Given the existing technology, improvements in the proportion of cost the technical efficient firm can save by
level of technical efficiency will enable farmers to produce behaving in a cost minimizing way. Technical efficiency
the maximum possible output from a given level of inputs. and allocative efficiency are then combined to give
Hence, improvement in the level of technical efficiency will economic efficiency, which is sometimes referred to as
increase productivity. Theoretically introducing modern overall efficiency (Coelli et al., 1998). It is assumed that 0
technologies can increase agricultural output. However, < EE < 1. Therefore EE = 1 implies that it is both technically
according to Tarkamani and Hardarkar (1996), cited in and allocatively efficient
Mustefa (2014) in areas where there is inefficiency, trying
to introduce a new technology may not have the expected Sorghum Production and its Importance
impact and “there is a danger of trying to rediscover the
wheel” if the existing knowledge is not efficient. Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor L. Moench) is one of the main
staple crops for the world’s poorest and food-insecure
Measuring efficiency level of farmers benefit economies by people. It is the second major crop (after maize) across all
determining the extent to which it is possible to raise ecologies in Africa and is one of the main staples for
productivity by improving the neglected source of growth people in Eastern and Southern Africa (ESA). Globally,
(efficiency) with the existing resource base and available sorghum is grown on 46 million hectares accounting for an
technology. However, there is limited number of studies annual production of 60 million tones. Developing
done in this regard in general and In particular, no studies countries account for 90% of total area and 70% of total
had been conducted in the area of production efficiency of output, with Africa and Asia each accounting for 20% to

Technical Efficiency of Smallholder Sorghum Producers in West Hararghe Zone, Oromia Region, Ethiopia
 J. Agric. Econ. Rural Devel. 720

30% of the global production. In Africa sorghum is mainly on the west by Guba Koricha, on the northwest by Mi’eso,
cultivated by small-scale resource poor farmers and on the north by Doba, on the northeast by Tulo, and on the
production is characterized by limited use of fertilizer and east by the Galetti River which separates it from Mesela
improved seeds. and the East Hararghe Zone.

Sorghum, because of its drought resistance, is the crop of The zonal capital, Chiro, is located at about 326 km from
choice for dry regions and areas with unreliable rainfall. Addis Ababa along the Addis Ababa Diredawa main road.
Many annual and perennial species of sorghum are found Chiro district has an estimated total land area of 70,962.08
in the wild form. The greatest variation in the genus is ha out of which the total cultivated land comprises about
found in the northeast quadrants of Africa; north latitude of 49,552.08 ha. The remaining 5774 ha, 9,537 ha and 6099
10°N and east of longitude 25°E. Sorghum is adapted to ha is allocated for grazing, community forest and other
wide range of ecological conditions and can be grown miscellaneous purposes respectively. The major crops
under conditions, which are unfavorable for most of the grown in the study area are cereals (such as sorghum,
cereals. Most East African sorghum is grown between the maize, barley etc), pulses such as (haricot bean),
altitude of 900 and 1500 m.a.s.l. The optimum temperature vegetables (such as onion, tomato, pepper etc.), oil seeds
during the growing season ranged from 27°C to 32°C. The (sunflower, sesame, caster bean, etc.), stimulants (coffee,
minimum and maximum temperatures for growth are 15°C chat etc) and fruit trees. The common cropping system in
and 40°C, respectively. Extremely high temperatures the area is inter-cropping where farmers plant more than
during the grain formation period reduce the seed yield. It two types of crop in the same plot. This is due to the
is well adapted and widely grown where the annual rainfall problem of shortage of land. Farmers use both the Belg
varies from 400 to 700 mm. Sorghum is grown successfully and Meher rains for planting crops like maize, khat and
on many types of soils, except for rough, stony or gravelly haricot bean.
soils. In the wet season, the highest yields are obtained on
sandy soils, but in dry season, it does best on heavy soils.
It can be grown with a wide range of soil pH from 5.0 to 8.5 MATERIAL AND METHODS
and tolerates salinity better than maize stress (Eyob,
2007). Both primary and secondary data were used for this study.
Primary data were collected using semi structured
Sorghum is a dual-purpose crop where both grain and questionnaires in two stages. First a preliminary survey
stock are highly valued outputs. There is a very rich was conducted through focus group discussion (using
genetic diversity of sorghum in eastern Ethiopia. Besides, checklist) to obtain general information about the study
there is a wealth of sorghum farming knowledge and area. Then formal survey data collection was undertaken
systems that have been developed over thousands of with the sampled households and secondary data are
years, as it is adapted to a wide range of environment. It is collected from different published and unpublished
widely produced more than any other crops, in areas materials.
where there is moisture stress (Ibid).
So, the study followed the formal survey procedure where
Sorghum's nutritional profile includes starch, vitamins and data collection for quantitative information is gathered
proteins as main constituents. The essential amino acid using semi-structured questionnaire and selecting a
profile of sorghum protein is claimed to depend on the representative sample from a given population. Due to the
sorghum variety, soil and growing conditions. A wide importance of sorghum and production potential of the
variation has been reported in its contents of several crop in the area, the study was undertaken in Chiro district.
minerals. The mineral fillings are unevenly distributed and Since the sample selected from a given population is
are more concentrated in the germ and the seed coat. In expected to represent the population as a whole,
milled sorghum flours, minerals such as phosphorus, iron, homogeneity of the population is very important. As far as
zinc and copper decrease with lower extraction rates. the agro-ecology and farming system of the study area is
Similarly, piercing the grain to remove the fibrous seed concerned, it is more or less homogenous. Hence, a two-
coat resulted in considerable reductions in the mineral stage random sampling technique was implemented to
contents of sorghum. The presence of anti-nutrition factors draw a representative sample. In the first stage, four
such as tannins in sorghum reduces its mineral availability kebeles from the district were selected randomly. In the
as food. It is important to process and prepare sorghum second stage, following the establishment of a sample
properly to improve its nutrition value. Sorghum is a good frame for sorghum growing farmers in each of the four
source of B-complex vitamins. (Dida et al., 2008). kebeles, the sample households were selected using
simple random sampling (SRS) with probability
Description of the Study Area proportional to size technique. The sample size was
determined by the formula given by (Yemane,1967).
Chiro district is located at 8°55′N latitude and 40°15′E 𝑁
𝑛=
longitude, with elevation ranging from 1400 to 2300 m 1 + 𝑁(𝑒 2)
above sea level. It is bordered on the south by Gemechis,

Technical Efficiency of Smallholder Sorghum Producers in West Hararghe Zone, Oromia Region, Ethiopia
Lemma et al. 721

Where, n is sample size, N is number of household head Though a study done by Kopp and Smith (1980) suggests
and” e “is the desired level of precision. By taking” e” as that functional specification has only a small impact on
8.7%, total number of household head 6035 the sample measured efficiency, as stochastic frontier method
size would be 130. requires a prior specification of the functional form a log
likelihood ration test indicated that Cobb-Douglas
Sorghum production in particular and crop production in production function is the best functional form for this
general in the study area are likely to be affected by study.
random shocks such as weather, pest infestation. In
addition, measurement errors are likely to be high. The A single stage estimation procedure was followed to
difference in output as a result of these random shocks and analysis determinates of TE from a stochastic frontier
measurement errors are not due to operator’s inefficiency production function. In single stage estimation, inefficiency
or misallocation of resources. In such a condition where effects are defined as an explicit function of certain factors
random shocks and measurement errors are high a model specific to the firms and all the parameters are estimated
that accounts for the effect of noise is more appropriate to in one-step using the maximum likelihood procedure. The
choose. To asses such conditions, the stochastic major drawback with the two-step approach resides in the
production frontier was used for its ability to distinguish fact that, in the first step, inefficiency effects are assumed
inefficiency from deviations that are caused by factors to be independently and identically distributed in order to
beyond the control of farmers. The model introduces the use the Jondrow et al. (1982) approach to predict the
disturbance term representing noise, measurement error values of technical efficiency indicators. In the second
and exogenous shocks that are beyond the control of the step, however, the technical efficiency indicators thus
production unit and a component that captures deviations obtained are assumed to depend on a certain number of
from the frontier due to inefficiency. factors specific to the firm, which implies that the TE are
The model can be shown using Cobb-Doulas functional not identically distributed unless all the coefficients of the
form: factors considered happen to be simultaneously null
𝑛

lnY𝑖 = β0 + ∑ β𝑗 𝑙𝑛𝑋𝑖𝑗 + ε 𝑖
𝑗=1 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Where:
ln =denotes the natural logarithm Econometric Results
j = represents the number of inputs used
i = represents the ithnumber of households in the sample The stochastic production frontier was applied using the
Yi = represents sorghum production of the ith households. maximum likelihood estimation procedure. Before model
Xij= denotes jth input variables used in sorghum production estimation, a test was made for multicollinearity among the
of the ith households explanatory variables using the Variance Inflation Factor
β0 = stands for the vector of unknown parameters to be (VIF) and the values of VIF for all variables entered into
estimated the model were below 10, which indicate the absence of
εi = is a composed disturbance term made up of two multicollinearity among the explanatory variables. In
elements (vi and ui) addition, Breusch-Pagan test was also used to detect the
vi - accounts for the stochastic effects beyond the farmer’s presence of hetroskedasticity and the test indicated that
control, measurement errors as well as other statistical there was no problem of hetroskedasticity in the models.
noises For the likelihood estimates of the parameters in the
ui= captures the technical inefficiency in production stochastic production frontier, given the Cobb-Douglas
specification, the coefficients of the input variables such as
The maximum likelihood estimates of the parameters of area under sorghum, amount of organic fertilizer, DAP,
the frontier model are estimated, such that the variance number of oxen, amount of seed used and labour were
parameters are expressed in terms of the found to be significantly related with sorghum production.
parameterization: The coefficients of Area allocated to sorghum, labour,
γ = δ2u / δ2s= [δ2u/ (δ2v+ δ2u)] amount of organic fertilizer is positive and statistically
Where: the γ parameter has a value between 0 and 1. A significant at 1% level of significance. And DAP was
value of γ of zero indicates that the deviations from the positive and statistically significant at 10% level of
frontier are entirely due to noise, while a value of one significance. The amount of seed used in sorghum
would indicate that all deviations are due to technical production was found to be negatively related with
inefficiency. sorghum yield and significant at 1% level of probability.
δ2u - is the variance parameter that denotes deviation from Area allocated to sorghum, amount of organic fertilizer,
the frontier due to inefficiency. DAP and labor force for the production have expected
δ2v -is the variance parameter that denotes deviation from positive sign but seed have negative sign which is not
the frontier due to noise. expected (Table, 1).
σ2s- is the variance parameter that denotes the total
deviation from the frontier.

Technical Efficiency of Smallholder Sorghum Producers in West Hararghe Zone, Oromia Region, Ethiopia
 J. Agric. Econ. Rural Devel. 722

Table 1. Parameters estimates of the frontier model sorghum growing households. In other words, there is a
Variables Coefficient Standard Error possibility to increase yield of sorghum by about 21.7%
Organic fertilizer 0.1989*** 0.0546 using the resources at their disposal in an efficient manner
Labour 0.4903*** 0.1696 without introducing any other improved (external) inputs
Oxen day -0.1531 0.1216 and practices.
UREA 0.1006 0.1871
DAP 0 .0358* 0.0185 Table 2. Estimated technical efficiency of sample
Area 0.9144*** 0.1658 household sorghum producers
Seed -0.3997*** 0.1617 Types of Minimum Maximum Mean Std.
Constant 1.0876*** 0.3923 efficiency Deviation
Likelihood function -36.56 TE .4172 .9312 .7831 0.1015
Gamma(γ) 0.8464*** 0.0164 Source: model output
Lamda (λ) 2.347*** 0.00679
Sigma square 0.398*** 0.0522 It is observed that about 31.8% of the sample households
were operating below the overall mean level of technical
*and *** Significant at 10% and 1%, significance level
efficiency while about 2.3% of the households are
respectively
operating at the technical efficiency level of more than
Source: Model output
90%. However, majority about 68% of the sorghum
growing households were able to attain above the overall
At this juncture, the most important issue to be raised is
mean level of technical efficiency. This might imply that in
which among the two sources of variability contributes
the long run improving the existing level of technical
more to the total variability in output from the frontier point.
efficiency of households alone may not lead to significant
In other words, the relative contribution of both usual
increment in the level of sorghum output. So, in the long
noises and the inefficiency component on total variability
run, it needs attention at policy level to introduce other best
should be determined. The ratio of the standard error of u
alternative farming practices and improved technologies in
(σu) to the standard error of v (σv), known as lambda (λ), is
order to alleviate the overall chronic food shortage.
2.347. Based on λ, gamma (γ) which measures the effect
of technical inefficiency in the variation of observed output
After measuring levels of farmers’ efficiency and
can be derived (i.e. γ= λ2/ [1+λ2]). In this case, the value of
determining the presence of efficiency deference’s among
this discrepancy ratio (γ) calculated from the maximum
farmers, finding out factors causing efficiency disparity
likelihood estimation of the full frontier model was 0.846
among farmers was the next most important step of this
with standard error of 0.016 and it is much higher than its
study. The maximum likelihood estimates showed that
standard error. The coefficient for the parameter γ can be
among 13 variables used in the analysis age, household
interpreted in such a way that about 84.6% of the variability
size, frequency of extension contact, soil fertility, slope and
in sorghum output in the study area was attributable to
livestock unit were found to be statistically significant to
technical inefficiency effect, while the remaining 15.4%
affect the level of technical efficiency of farmers (Table 3).
variation in output was due to the effect of random noise.
This indicates that there is a room for improving output of
Table 3. Maximum likelihood estimates of the factors
sorghum by first identifying those institutional,
determining technical inefficiency
socioeconomic and farm specific factors causing this
Inefficiency Variable Coefficient Standard error
variation (Table 1).
Education 0.0062 0.0042
Estimation of Household Level Technical Efficiency Fragmentations -0.0048 0.0082
Age -0.0071*** 0.0022
The mean level of technical efficiency of sorghum growing Household size -0.0059** 0.0029
sample households was about 78.3%, with the minimum Inter cropping 0.0180 0.0205
and maximum efficiency level of about 41.7 and 93.6%, Off/non farm -0.0298 0.0338
respectively. This shows that there is disparity among Credit -0.0028 0.0035
sorghum producer households in their level of technical Extension contact -0.0055* 0.0028
efficiency which may in turn indicate that there is a room Weeding -0.0022 0.0013
for improving the existing level of sorghum production Soil fertility -0.0203*** 0.0077
through enhancing the level of households’ technical Slope 0.0047** 0.0021
efficiency. Livestock unit -0.0045** 0.0022
Proximity 0.0014 0.0027
The mean level of technical efficiency further tells us that Constant 5.4479 3.9916
the level of sorghum output of the sample respondents can *, **and***Significant at 10%, 5% and 1%, significance
be increased on average by about 21.7% if appropriate level respectively
measures are taken to improve the level of efficiency of Source: model output

Technical Efficiency of Smallholder Sorghum Producers in West Hararghe Zone, Oromia Region, Ethiopia
Lemma et al. 723

Age of household head significance implying that fertility of soil is an important

factor in influencing the level of efficiency in the production
Age of the farmer is the best proxy variable for farming of sorghum. Therefore, development programs in
experience. The result shows that the age has positive and improving and maintaining the fertility of land will have
significant relation with technical efficiency. Thus, middle positive impact in raising efficiency. The study result is
age farmers are more efficient than the very young and similar with Ermiyas et al. (2015) that showed that soil
older ones. This result is similar with the findings of Bekele fertility had positive relationship with efficiency.
(2013) and shumet (2011). Since farming as any other
professions need accumulated knowledge, skill and Livestock holding
physical capability, it is decisive in determining efficiency.
The knowledge, the skills as well as the physical capability The ownership of livestock for smallholder household is
of farmers is likely to increase as their age increases. perceived as prestige and the accumulation of wealth
However, this tends to decrease after a certain age level. status. It systematically influences household efficiency
level through equipping the households to have more
Extension contact income from sale of milk and milk products and sale of a
The advisory service rendered to the farmers in general live livestock to buy improved agricultural technologies
can significantly help farmers to improve their average such as chemical fertilizer, pesticides, etc. Households
performance in the overall farming operation. Specifically having large size of livestock can have better chance to
in the study area, the results of the estimated coefficient of get more oxen draught power and serves for organic
the variable contact with extension workers were found to fertilizer. It is positive and statistically significant at five
be related with the level of technical efficiency of percent level of significance with technical efficiency. This
households positively and statistically significant at ten finding is similar with the finding of Shumet (2012) that
percent level of significance. The result obtained is showed that ownership of livestock had positive
consistence with studies done by Mohammed (2011). His relationship with efficiency.
result show that having extension contact with the advisory
service through either a visit from the farm advisor or
participating in any training courses has significant effect CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
in explaining farmers’ level of technical efficiency.
Thus, the results of the study give information to policy
Household size makers and extension workers on how to better aim efforts
to improve farm productivity as efficiency level and
The result shows that the coefficient of household size is determinant for technical efficiency are identified. The
positive and significant relation with technical efficiency. result of the analysis showed that sorghum producers in
The result is expected that family size is found to the study area are not operating at full technical efficiency
determine efficiency positively. This may be because level which indicates the existence of opportunity for
household with large number of family members may be sorghum producers to minimize cost without
able to use appropriate input combinations. In addition, compromising yield with present technologies available at
family is the main source of labour supply and it is decisive the hand of producers. Therefore, an intervention aiming
in the production of sorghum as labour is a significant to improve efficiency of farmers is important in the study
factor of production. As the frontier estimation shows that area.
the coefficient for labour input is significant and this result
is similar with result of Mustefa (2014). The result of the study shows that soil fertility is a crucial
factor in determining technical efficiency of households.
Slope Therefore, households have to work to improve the fertility
status of the soil though it is difficult to achieve this in the
The result shows that slope determined efficiency short run. Households can do this by applying fertilizers
negatively and it isstatistically significant at five percent that are suitable for the farm and practicing soil
level of significance. This is because as slope increase soil conservation practices. Strengthening soil fertility
erosion also increase and the nutrients (fertilizers) applied maintenance program is required and extension workers
to the soil also lost through erosion and this can reduce the can play a great role in improving the status of the soil by
availability of nutrients to the crop and consequently working closely with the farmers in this regard.
minimize the yield obtained and efficiency of the farmers.
The result is similar to that obtained by Mamushet (2010), Utilizing available resources and technology efficiently
which slope significantly and negatively determines side by side with introducing new agricultural technologies
efficiency of sorghum producer. could help to address the food security problem. So, to
achieve this, extension services should expand to reach
Perceived fertility status of soil
each and every farmer and there is also a need to
The result indicates that the coefficient of fertility of soil is modernize extension services provided so that it can face
positive and statistically significant at one percent level of new challenges and transfer the latest technologies in an

Technical Efficiency of Smallholder Sorghum Producers in West Hararghe Zone, Oromia Region, Ethiopia
 J. Agric. Econ. Rural Devel. 724

efficient way. It is evident from the result of the study that Ermiyas, M. Endrias, G., and Belaineh, L. 2015.
the effect of extension service on technical efficiency of Production efficiency of sesame in Selamago district of
sorghum production was statistically significant. Therefore, South Omo Zone, Southern Ethiopia. Current Research
the government needs to strengthen the extension system in Agricultural Sciences, 2(1): 8-2.
and expand the service to sorghum producer. Eyob, K. 2007. Effect of sorghum planting density and
nitrogenrates on productivity of faba bean (vicia faba l.)
Livestock ownership, which is an indicator of accumulated sorghum (sorghum bicolor l. moench) intercropping
wealth, has positively and significantly affected technical system. A Case of Wukro Maray.MSc Thesis,
efficiency. Households having large size of livestock can Haramaya University, Haramaya, Ethiopia.
have better chance to get more oxen draught power and Forsund, F. R., Lovell, C.K. and Schmidt, P. 1986. Survey
serves for organic fertilizer. This suggests looking for of frontier production functions and their relationships
improving livestock production sub-system through to efficiency measurement. Econometrics Journal
provision of improved veterinary services, feed and water 13:5–25.
supply. Haileselasse, A. 2005. Analysis of technical efficiency in
sorghum production. The case of smallholders’ in
Slope significantly reduced the technical efficiency of Raya- Azebo District Southern Tigray. M.Sc. Thesis,
sorghum producers when lands are vulnerable to erosion Alemaya University, Alemaya, Ethiopia.
damages and their fertility is likely to be poor due to high Jema, H. 2008. Economic efficiency and marketing
run-off. If soil conservation measures such as check dam performance of vegetable production in Eastern and
and water way measures are not practiced, it reduces central parts of Ethiopia, Doctoral Thesis, Acta
efficiency thereby reducing sorghum production. So, University Agriculture Sueciae (SLU) Uppsala,
development agents should encourage households to Sweden.
strengthen the soil conservation measures such as check Jondrow, J., C.K. Lovell, I.S. Materov and P. Schmidt.
dam and water way to reduce soil erosion. 1982. on Estimation of Technical Inefficiency in the
Stochastic Frontier Production Function Model. Journal
of Econometrics, 19: 233–38
REFERENCES Kopp, R.J. and V.K. Smith .1980. Frontier Production
Function Estimates for Steam Electric Generation. A
AGP (Agricultural Growth Program). 2010. Global Comparative Analysis. Southern Economic Journal,
Agriculture and Food Security Programme Request for 47:. 1049–1059.
Funding Public Sector Window. Summary on Lovell, C Fried, H. and Schmidt, S. 1993. Note on theory
Agriculture and Food Security Strategy and Post of productive efficiency and stochastic frontier models.
Compact Policy and Investment Framework. European Research Studies, 13 (4): 109-117.
Battese G.E. and Broca, S.S. 1996. Functional forms of Mohammed, A. 2011. Analysis of technical efficiency
stochastic production functions & model for technical between extension participant and non-participant farm
inefficiency effects: A comparable study of wheat households’ evidence from Tigray Northern Ethiopia
farmers in Pakistan. CEPA Working Papers, No. 4 Thesis, Haramaya University, Haramaya, Ethiopia.
Department of Econometrics, University of New Musa, H. 2013. Economic Efficiency of Smallholder
England, Armidale. Farmers Maize Production: The Case of Arsi Negelle
Bekele, A. 2013. Technical efficiency variation for District of West Arsi Zone. MSc Thesis, Haramaya
smallholder irrigated maize producers: stochastic University, Haramaya, Ethiopia.
Frontier Approach. The case of Tibila surface water Mustefa, B. 2014. Economic efficiency of barely
irrigation scheme. MSc Thesis, Mekelle University, production: the case of chole district, in East Arsi Zone.
Mekelle, Ethiopia. M.S.c. Thesis, Haramaya University, Haramaya,
Bravo-Ureta B.E. and A. Pinheiro. 1997. Technical, Ethiopia.
economic and allocative efficiency in peasant farming: Peter Schmidt. 2000. One-Step and two-step estimation of
evidence from Dominica Republic. Journal of the effects of exogenous variables on technical
Developing Economics, 38(1): 48-67. efficiency levels. American Journal of Economics,
CCoelli, T.J. 1998. An Introduction to Efficiency and 18(2):129–144.
Productivity Analysis. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Shumet, A. 2012. Technicall efficiency in crop production
Boston. in Tigray region, Ethiopia stochastic frontier approach.
CSA (Central Statistical Authority). 2014. Agricultural Global Advanced Research Journal of Agricultural
Sample Surveys Area and Production of Major Crops Science, 2(3): 9-20.
Private Peasant Holdings, Meher Season Volume I.
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

Technical Efficiency of Smallholder Sorghum Producers in West Hararghe Zone, Oromia Region, Ethiopia
Lemma et al. 725

APPENDIX
Table 1. Technical efficiency estimates for each sample households
No Effi- No Effi- No Effi- No Effi- No Effi-
estimate estimate estimate estimate estimate
1 0.882 27 0.785 53 0.847 79 0.801 105 0.889
2 0.578 28 0.881 54 0.853 80 0.770 106 0.875
3 0.858 29 0.845 55 0.852 81 0.817 107 0.855
4 0.921 30 0.868 56 0.814 82 0.785 108 0.783
5 0.784 31 0.874 57 0.823 83 0.733 109 0.816
6 0.418 32 0.473 58 0.747 84 0.827 110 0.874
7 0.841 33 0.822 59 0.792 85 0.752 111 0.818
8 0.565 34 0.589 60 0.863 86 0.780 112 0.936
9 0.887 35 0.863 61 0.861 87 0.871 113 0.823
10 0.664 36 0.877 62 0.813 88 0.510 114 0.844
11 0.563 37 0.853 63 0.803 89 0.861 115 0.822
12 0.466 38 0.858 64 0.854 90 0.812 116 0.895
13 0.851 39 0.762 65 0.862 91 0.780 117 0.495
14 0.867 40 0.839 66 0.812 92 0.867 118 0.863
15 0.748 41 0.837 67 0.801 93 0.843 119 0.885
16 0.576 42 0.877 68 0.813 94 0.750 120 0.875
17 0.632 43 0.836 69 0.734 95 0.777 121 0.735
18 0.818 44 0.800 70 0.781 96 0.760 122 0.654
19 0.780 45 0.885 71 0.833 97 0.828 123 0.828
20 0.654 46 0.868 72 0.814 98 0.833 124 0.898
21 0.624 47 0.554 73 0.852 99 0.873 125 0.516
22 0.543 48 0.464 74 0.664 100 0.807 126 0.848
23 0.795 49 0.884 75 0.701 101 0.917 127 0.785
24 0.855 50 0.855 76 0.701 102 0.719 128 0.788
25 0.893 51 0.858 77 0.534 103 0.617 129 0.782
26 0.855 52 0.832 78 0.524 104 0.728 130 0.778
Source: Own computation.
Table 1. Conversion factors used to estimate TLU Table 3. Multicollinearity test for variables in the model
Animal Category TLU Variable 𝑹𝟐 1-𝑹𝟐 𝟏
𝑽𝑰𝑭 =
Calf 0.25 𝟏 − 𝑹𝟐
Donkey ( young) 0.35 Organic fertilizer 0.793 0.207 4.831
Weaned Calf 0.34 Labour 0.624 0.376 2.659
Camel 1.25 Oxen day 0.288 0.712 1.404
Heifer 0.75 UREA 0.256 0.744 1.344
Sheep and Goat (adult) 0.13 DAP 0.551 0.449 2.227
Cow and Oxen 1 Area 0.667 0.333 3.001
Sheep and goat (young) 0.06 Seed 0.566 0.434 2.300
Horse 1.1 Weeding 0.299 0.701 1.426
Chicken 0.013 Education 0.278 0.722 1.385
Donkey (adult) 0.7 Livestock unit 0.092 0.908 1.101
Source: Storck et al. (1991). House hold size 0.108 0.892 1.121
Age 0.081 0.919 1.088

Source: Own computation

Accepted 9 July 2019

Citation: Lemma A, Legesse B, Ketema M (2020). Technical Efficiency of Smallholder Sorghum Producers in West
Hararghe Zone, Oromia Region, Ethiopia. Journal of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development, 6(1): 718-725.

Copyright: © 2020: Lemma et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons
Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original
author and source are cited.

Technical Efficiency of Smallholder Sorghum Producers in West Hararghe Zone, Oromia Region, Ethiopia