BAHIR DAR UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE AND ENVIRONMENTAL

SCIENCES GRADUATE PROGRAM

ASSESSMENT OF BEESWAX PRODUCTION, QUALITY AND

MARKET CHAINS IN SELECTED DISTRICTS OF SOUTH WOLLO
ZONE, AMHARA REGION, ETHIOPIA

M.Sc. Thesis

By

Addisu Bihonegn Eshetu

March 2017

Bahir Dar, Ethiopia

 BAHIR DAR UNIVERSITY
COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE AND ENVIRONMENTAL
SCIENCES GRADUATE PROGRAM

ASSESSMENT OF BEESWAX PRODUCTION, QUALITY AND

MARKET CHAINS IN SELECTED DISTRICTS OF SOUTH WOLLO
ZONE, AMHARA REGION, ETHIOPIA

M.Sc. Thesis

By

Addisu Bihonegn Eshetu

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

Master of Science (M.Sc.) in Apiculture

Major advisor: Desalegn Begna (PhD)

Co- advisors: Asaminew Tassew (PhD)

Zeleke Mekuriaw (PhD)

March 2017

Bahir Dar, Ethiopia

 THESIS APPROVAL SHEET

As member of the Board of Examiners of the Master of Sciences (M.Sc.) thesis open
defense examination, we have read and evaluated this thesis prepared by Mr. Addisu
Bihonegn entitled “Assessment of Beeswax Production, Quality and Market Chains in
Selected Districts of South Wollo Zone, Amhara Region, Ethiopia”. We hereby certify
that, the thesis is accepted for fulfilling the requirements for the award of the degree of
Master of Science (M.Sc.) in Apiculture.

Board of Examine rs

Name of External Examiner Signature Date

Name of Internal Examiner Signature Date

Name of Chairperson Signature Date

i
 DECLARATION

This is to certify that, this thesis entitled “Assessment of Beeswax Production, Quality
and Market Chains in Selected Districts of South Wollo Zone, Amhara Region,
Ethiopia” submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of the degree
of Master of Science in Apiculture to the Graduate Program of College of Agriculture
and Environmental Sciences, Bahir Dar University, through the department of Animal
Production and Technology, done by Addisu Bihonegn Eshetu (I.D.No.
BDU0702191PR) is an authentic work carried out by him under our guidance. The matter
embodied in this project work has not been submitted earlier for award of any degree or
diploma to the best of our knowledge and belief.

Name of the Student Addisu Bihonegn Eshetu

Signature _____________________________________ Date

Name of the Supe rvisors

1. Desalegn Begna (PhD) ________________________

Major Advisor Signature Date

2. Asamine w Tassew (PhD) ________________________

Co-advisor Signature Date

3. Zeleke Mekuriaw (PhD) ________________________

Co-advisor Signature Date

ii
 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Predominantly, I would like to thank the Almighty God for blessing invaluable gifts of
health, strength, believes, love, hope, patience and protection to me and my families
throughout my study. Had not been the will of God, nothing would ha ve been possible for
all my aspirations to come in to reality.

I am very much indebted to acknowledge my research advisor Dr. Desalegn Begna for
accepting me as his advisee as well as for his earnest and constructive comments
throughout the study and preparation of the manuscript. He has worked hard to keep me
on the right track and accomplish the study timely. I am again thankful to my co-advisor,
Dr. Asaminew Tassew, for his unreserved responsible assistance and support in
scrutinizing and correcting the whole work of this study. I also owe my thanks to my co-
advisor, Dr. Zeleke Mekuriaw for his kind willingness to advise me as well as valuable
guidance and support throughout my research work.

I would like to thank Livestock and Irrigation Value Chains for Ethiopian Smallholders
(LIVES) project for sponsoring the study, which covered the expenses of the research
work. Supreme recognition also forwarded to Amhara Region Agricultural Research
Institute (ARARI) and particularly Sekota Dry land Agricultural Research Center
(SDARC) for offering me the opportunity to pursue this study and to undertake the
laboratory works at the center’s laboratory.

I would like to extend my sincerely thanks to my batch postgraduate fellows in Apiculture

program namely Desta Abi, Etenesh Mekonnen, Mulu Tesfay and Wallelign Wotro. We
have been not only course- mate but also intimate colleagues throughout the course and
thesis work for sharing views, documents and experiences that makes me what I should
be. I would like miss you not forever! My special recognition goes to my colleague, Mulu
Tesfay, for providing unreserved brotherly material and moral support starting from the
course work up to the end of my thesis. Undeniably, Mulu have a exceptional place in my
heart!

I am very much indebted to thank Mesfin Tefera, ILRI- LIVES Project, South Wollo zone
office and all staff members of South Wollo zone livestock department for facilitating and
providing me the required data for my study. I also have a strong desire to send my

iii
gratitude to district level agricultural experts and agricultural DAs in each of the study
kebeles who helped me a lot during data collection.

Sekota Dry land Agricultural Research Center (SDARC) staff members have a titanic
share of thanks for their courage, hospitality and material support during my stay at the
center. Especially, Alemu Tsegaye, Yesuf Ibrahim and Belaynesh Asgedom, their
contribution in laboratory analysis and in building this thesis have no substitute.

Yewagnesh Abebe (Kombolcha), Feleke Abegaz and Mulu Wondimu (Dessie) with their
gorgeous family have to take their immense thank s for their fill at home hospitality and
courage during my stay at South Wollo for the survey work. My keen mother Yenenesh
Eshetie (Tamtrey) deserves a special appreciation for her daily prayer, appreciable support
and care she gave me during my stay at Dessie.

My optimistic mother Debisa Ambaw, my dependable sisters Ayehush Bihonegn, Hareg

Demeke, Mihret Neway and Tsega Bekele please take my premier gratitude with pleasure
for your understanding, courage and taking care of my family during my stay out
circumstance. A person in need is a person indeed! My sons, Beniamer Addisu, Lealem
Addisu and Gizie Addisu have also a share of gratitude for their patience and passing hard
times craving for my presence.

Many people have contributed to this thesis work like Tizita Yesuf (Adigrat Animal health
expert), Bekele Tesfaye (Sinana ARC researcher). Therefore, I have no other opportunity
or platform than this page to forward my special thanks to those who deserve it, for their
contribution to the realization of this work.

Finally, but most extensively, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my lovely
and lively wife W/ro Fetlework Hadera Berhie and my family for being with me all the
time providing a moral support and encouragement. Really, without Fetlework’s
committed support and shouldering the responsibilities of family affairs, it would have
been difficult for me to complete successfully my thesis work in this astonishing manner.
I have no words than proudly to say ‘I LOVE YOU!’

iv
DEDICATION

To my family

v
ABBREVIATIONS/ACRONYMS

% Percent
0
C Degree Celsius

ARARI Amhara Region Agricultural Research Institute

BfD Bees for Development

BoA Bureau of Agriculture

BoFED Bureau of Finance and Economic Development

CBI Centre for the Promotion of Imports from developing countries

CIAFS Capacity to Improve Agriculture and Food Security

CSA Central Statistics Agency

DAs Development Agents

DRMFSC Disaster Risk managenet and Food Security Center

EPCC Ethiopian Population Census Commission

EPOPA Export Promotion of Organic Products from Africa

ETB Ethiopian Birr

FAO Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations

FAOSTAT FAO Statistical Databases (United Nations)

g Gram (s)

GDP Gross Domestic Products

HBRC Holleta Bee Research Center

HCl Hydrochloric Acid

HH Household

ILRI International Livestock Research Institute

KBS Kenya Bureau of Standards

Kg Kilogram (s)

vi
Km Kilometer (s)

Km2 Square Kilometer (s)

KOH Potassium Hydroxide

LIVES Livestock and Irrigation Value Chain for Ethiopian Smallholders

m Meter(s)

M Mole

m.a.s.l. Meters above sea level

mg Milligram (s)

MHPRC Ministry of Health of the People's Republic of China

ml Milliliter (s)

MoARD Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development

MT Metric Tones

NaOH Sodium Hydroxide

PCI Precise Consult International

QSAE Quality and Standards Authority of Ethiopia

SAS Statistical Analysis System

SD Standard Deviation

SDARC Sekota Dry land Agricultural Research Center

SPSS Statistical Package for Social Sciences

SWZDoA South Wollo Zone Department of Agriculture

TBS Tanzania Bureau of Standard

UNDP United Nations Development Programme

USD Unite States Dollar

vii
Assessment of Beeswax Production, Quality and Market Chains in Selected Districts
of South Wollo Zone, Amhara Region, Ethiopia

Addisu Bihonegn1 , Desalegn Begna (PhD) 2 , Asaminew Tassew (PhD) 3 and Zeleke
Mekuriaw (PhD) 4

1
Sekota Dry land Agricultural Research Center, 2 Holeta Bee Research Center, 3 Bahir Dar
University, 4 ILRI-LIVES Project

ABSTRACT

The study was conducted in three ILRI-LIVES intervention districts of South Wollo Zone,
Tehulederie, Kalu and Dessie Zuria, which represent proximity to honey and beeswax
marketing and processing routs. The objective of this work was to assess the status of
beeswax production, its quality state, market chain and main actors. Likewise,
opportunities and constraints of beeswax production, quality and marketing were
identified. This research was conducted through field survey and laboratory analysis. For
the household field survey 135 farmer beekeepers were selected from three purposively
selected districts and 9 kebeles. Beeswax samples were collected from honey extract, ‘Tej
sefef’, old combs and beeswax blocks from agricultural offices. Laboratory diagnosis was
conducted according to the standard protocols of the Ethiopian Beeswax specification ET-
1203-2005 developed by Quality Standard Authority of Ethiopia QSAE, 2005. The survey
result revealed that the honey produced in the study areas was provided to the market as
crude, and there is no trend of beeswax production at the beekeeper’s level. Through the
field survey, it was understood that producers have little knowledge on the importance and
economic benefits of beeswax, its quality and marketing aspects. No formal beeswax
market and linkage was created so far that the main actors identified in the beeswax
market chain are only beekeepers and ‘Tej’ brewers. The laboratory result showed that
the compositional content of beeswax collected from the study areas falls within the range
of good quality parameters set for national and world standards. The mean value for each
parameters are specific gravity (0.9552±0.0034), melting point (61.5628±1.50080 C),
refractive index (1.4439±0.0004), ash content (0.0345±0.0429%), total volatile matter
(0.5491±0.2488%), acid value (18.9155±2.7735), saponification value (91.19±22.3015),
ester value (72.0619±20.2859), ester to acid ratio (3.7211±0.8569), fats and fatty acids
(passed), and paraffin and other waxes (passed). However, melting point, saponification
value, ester value and ester to acid ratio values of beeswax samples from agricultural
offices and old combs show lower result than the national and international limit. In
general, this study identified opportunities and constraints in the study. Hence, beekeepers
should be assisted by extension and training on beeswax collection, extraction, storage
and marketing. Quality checkup and control must be taken on purchasing of beeswax in
bulk.

Key Words: beeswax, production, quality, market chain, Wollo

viii
 Table of Contents
THESIS APPROVAL SHEET........................................................................................................... i
DECLARATION.......................................................................................................................... ii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............................................................................................................. iii
DEDICATION ............................................................................................................................ v
ABBREVIATIONS/ACRONYMS........................................................................................... vi
ABSTRACT .............................................................................................................................viii
LIST OF TABLES................................................................................................................. xiii
LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................................xv
LIST OF APPENDIX TABLES.............................................................................................. xvi
LIST OF APPENDIX PICTURES ......................................................................................... xvii
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 1
1.1. Background and Justification ..................................................................................... 1
1.2. Statement of the Problems ......................................................................................... 3
1.3. Objectives ................................................................................................................ 4
1.4. Research Questions ................................................................................................... 4
CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................................. 5
2.1. Role of Beekeeping ................................................................................................... 5
2.1.1. Bee products 5
2.1.1.1. Honey 5
2.1.1.2. Beeswax 5
2.1.1.3. Pollen 6
2.1.1.4. Propolis 6
2.1.1.5. Royal jelly 6
2.1.1.6. Bee Venom 7
2.1.2. Pollination services 7
2.2. Beekeeping in Ethiopia .............................................................................................. 8
2.3. Major Bee Products in Ethiopia .................................................................................. 9
2.3.1. Honey 10
2.3.2. Beeswax 11
2.3.2.1. Beeswax production and collection 12
2.3.2.2. Beeswax processing and handling 13
2.3.2.3. Beeswax quality 14

ix
 2.3.2.4. Beeswax composition and properties 17
2.3.2.5. Beeswax storage 18
2.3.2.6. Beeswax marketing 19
2.3.2.7. Beeswax utilization 20
2.4. Challenges and Opportunities of Beeswax Production, Quality and Market Chain ....... 21
2.4.1. Challenges 21
2.4.2. Opportunities 22
2.5. Beeswax market chain actors and their contribution................................................... 22
CHAPTER 3. MATERIALS AND METHODS.................................................................................. 24
3.1. Description of the Study Areas................................................................................. 24
3.1.1. Location 24
3.1.2. Altitude and climate 25
3.1.3. Demographic data 26
3.1.4. Livestock potential 26
3.2. Methods of Data Collection ..................................................................................... 26
3.2.1. Scope and coverage 26
3.2.2. Sampling frame and techniques 27
3.2.3. Beeswax sample collection and preparation 27
3.2.4. Laboratory analysis 28
3.2.4.1. Specific gravity at 200 C 29
3.2.4.2. Melting point, 0 C 29
3.2.4.3. Refractive index at 750 C 29
3.2.4.4. Ash, % by mass, max. 30
3.2.4.5. Total volatile matter, % by mass, max. 30
3.2.4.6. Acid value, max. 31
3.2.4.7. Saponification cloud value, min. 31
3.2.4.8. Ester value 32
3.2.4.9. Ester to acid ratio 32
3.2.4.10. Fats and fatty acids 32
3.2.4.11. Paraffin and other waxes 32
3.3. Data Management and Statistical Analysis................................................................ 33
CHAPTER 4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ................................................................................... 34
4.1. Socio Economic Characteristics of Households .......................................................... 34
4.1.1. Household characteristics 34

x
 4.1.2. Educational status of respondents 36
4.1.3. Land holdings of the respondents 36
4.1.4. Livestock and bee colony ownership 37
4.2. Beekeeping Situation of the Study Areas .................................................................. 41
4.2.1. Beekeeping experience of respondents 41
4.2.2. Source of bee colony in the study areas 42
4.2.3. Reasons of engagement in beekeeping 44
4.2.4. Honeybee colony holdings 45
4.2.5. Beehive placement 47
4.2.6. Colony decline 48
4.2.7. Absconding and swarming 49
4.2.8. Honeybee pests and predators 54
4.2.9. Extension and training 56
4.3. Honey Production and Management ........................................................................ 58
4.3.1. Honey production and consumption 58
4.3.2. Honey processing 62
4.3.3. Honey storage 63
4.3.4. Honey market 63
4.4. Beeswax Production, Quality and Marketing............................................................. 66
4.4.1. Uses of beeswax in the study areas 66
4.4.2. Beeswax collection and production 66
4.4.3. Beeswax processing and storage 69
4.4.4. Beeswax adulteration 72
4.4.5. Beeswax market chains 73
4.4.6. Challenges and opportunities in beeswax marketing 74
4.5. Laboratory Analysis of Beeswax ............................................................................... 75
4.5.1. Specific gravity at 200 C 75
4.5.2. Melting point, 0 C 75
4.5.3. Refractive index, at 750 C 76
4.5.4. Ash content, % by mass, max. 76
4.5.5. Total volatile matter, % by mass, max. 77
4.5.6. Acid value, max, (mgKOH/g) 77
4.5.7. Saponification cloud value, min, (mgKOH/g) 78
4.5.8. Ester value (mgKOH/g) 78

xi
 4.5.9. Ester to acid value 79
4.5.10. Fats and fatty acids 79
4.5.11. Paraffin and other waxes 80
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................ 85
5.1. Conclusions ............................................................................................................ 85
5.2. Recommendations .................................................................................................. 87
REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................... 88
APPENDICES ........................................................................................................................ 103
BIOGRAPHY ......................................................................................................................... 126

xii
LIST OF TABLES

Table 2. 1. Quality criteria for beeswax .............................................................................. 16

Table 2. 2. Beeswax specifications of ethiopian and the european pharmacopodia standard

.................................................................................................................................. 17

Table 2. 3. Major and minor components of Apis mellifera beeswax................................. 18

Table 2. 4. Quantity and value of exported beeswax in the last 5 years ............................. 19

Table 4. 1. Sex and marital status of the respondents by districts ....................................... 34

Table 4. 2. Age and family size of households of the study areas ...................................... 35

Table 4. 3. Education status of the household heads of the study areas .............................. 36

Table 4. 4. Land holdings of the respondents in the study areas......................................... 39

Table 4. 5. Livestock and bee colony ownership in the study areas ................................... 40

Table 4. 6. Beekeeping experience of respondents ............................................................. 41

Table 4. 7. Rank index for reasons for engagement in beekeeping .................................... 45

Table 4. 8. Honeybee colony holdings and share o f colony holding .................................. 46

Table 4. 9. Placement of beehives in the study areas .......................................................... 47

Table 4. 10. Reasons of colony decline............................................................................... 49

Table 4. 11. Absconding of honeybees in the study areas .................................................. 51

Table 4. 12. Reproductive swarming of honeybees ............................................................ 53

Table 4. 13. Method of swarm control ................................................................................ 54

Table 4. 14. Honeybee pests and predators ......................................................................... 55

Table 4. 15. Extension and training in the study areas........................................................ 57

Table 4. 16. Honey production of each hive types in the study areas ................................. 60

xiii
Table 4. 17. Honey consumption in the study areas............................................................ 61

Table 4. 18. Honey extraction techniques ........................................................................... 63

Table 4. 19. Honey market and storage in the study areas.................................................. 65

Table 4. 20. Major uses of beeswax in the study areas ....................................................... 66

Table 4. 21. Beeswax collection in the study areas............................................................. 69

Table 4. 22. Beeswax processing and storage in the study areas ........................................ 71

Table 4. 23. Beeswax adulteration practice in the study areas............................................ 73

Table 4. 24. Main challenges of beeswax marketing in the study areas ............................. 74

Table 4. 25. Physical and chemical properties of beeswax produced in the study areas
(N=26)....................................................................................................................... 81

Table 4. 26. Mean comparison of physicochemical properties of beeswax samples

collected from four sources/origins .......................................................................... 82

Table 4. 27. Mean comparison of physicochemical properties of beeswax samples

collected from the study districts .............................................................................. 83

Table 4. 28. Comparison of mean results of beeswax quality in the study areas with
National and International standards (N=26) ........................................................... 84

xiv
LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 3. 1. South Wollo zone and its districts ................................................................... 25

Figure 4. 1. Frequency and percentage of bee colony ownership in the study areas .......... 38

Figure 4. 2. Source of starter bee colony in the study areas................................................ 43

Figure 4. 3. Selling price of bee colony in the study areas ................................................. 43

Figure 4. 4. Methods of increasing bee colony in the study areas ...................................... 44

Figure 4. 6. Honey harvesting frequency ............................................................................ 60

Figure 4. 7. Seasons of honey harvest ................................................................................. 61

xv
LIST OF APPENDIX TABLES

Appendix Table 1. Current global utilization of beeswax ............................................... 104

Appendix Table 2. Laboratory results of beeswax quality analysis (mean value for each
parameter) ............................................................................................................... 105

Appendix Table 3. Methods of chemical solution preparation ......................................... 107

Appendix Table 4. Survey questionnaire for beekeepers.................................................. 108

xvi
LIST OF APPENDIX PICTURES

Appendix Picture 1. Traditional method of predator protection at backyards .................. 117

Appendix Picture 2. Data collection (survey) by the researcher ....................................... 117

Appendix Picture 3.Sample preparation for laboratory analysis....................................... 119

Appendix Picture 4. Beeswax samples prepared for analysis ........................................... 120

Appendix Picture 5. Data collection by the researcher (at SDARC Laboratory) ............. 120

Appendix Picture 6. Model beekeepers, cooperatives ...................................................... 122

Appendix Picture 7. Hanging hives to catch swarms near homestead .............................. 123

Appendix Picture 8. Traditional beekeeping in the study areas ........................................ 123

Appendix Picture 9. Poorly managed FTC apiary site ...................................................... 124

Appendix Picture 10. Other observations on survey data collection ................................ 125

xvii
 CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. Background and Justification

In Ethiopia, agriculture is the major economic activity on which more than 80% of the
population is reliant, accounting for 40% of gross domestic product (GDP) and 83.9%
of exports (UNDP, 2014). It also contributes about 90% to the total export earnings and
70% of the raw materials to agro- industrial sector (Atsbaha Gebre-selassie and Tessema
Bekele, 2012). However, it is still dominated by the smallholders who generate more than
95% of the overall national agricultural outputs (Pica-Ciamarra, 2005).

As an important component of agriculture and rural development program, beekeeping

plays a role in providing nutritional, economic, and ecological security. The business
almost requires less land, capital, and does not take much part of the farmers’ time, and
does not compete with other farming systems for resources (Meaza Gebreyohannes, 2010).
It can be a fascinating hobby, a profitable sideline, or a full- time occupation (Collison,
2004), undertaken by the young and old, men and women; it is a gender inclusive activity
(Meaza Gebreyohannes, 2010).

Beekeeping is important because it directly contributes to the values of the outputs

produced, including honey, beeswax, queen and bee colonies, pollen, royal jelly, bee
venom, and propolis in cosmetics and medicine (Adjare, 1990; Workneh Abebe, 2007).
The honeybee products are non-perishable commodities that can be marketed locally or
abroad (Adjare, 1990).

Another very important contribution of beekeeping is it serves as a source of additional

cash income (Abebe Jenberie et al. 2014) and plays a significant role through plant
reproduction and conservation of the natural environment, and can be integrated with
agricultural practices like crop production, animal husbandry, horticultural crops, and
conservation of natural resources ( Abebe Jenberie et al., 2014; Hossam and Abou-Shaara,
2015).

1
Beekeeping is an ancient practice in the Ethiopian farming communities (Tessega Belie,
2009; Tewodros Alemu, 2010; Assemu Tesfa et al., 2013). According to Johannes
Agonafir (2005), the country has substantial potential in beekeeping with rich flora and
fauna, proper ecological and climatic conditions that favor the existence of enormous bee
colonies (Gidey Yirga and Mekonen Teferi, 2010; Tolera Kumsa and Dejene Takele,
2014) and honeybee subspecies (Amssalu Bezabih et al., 2004). Beekeeping is
significantly contributing to the beekeeper’s livelihood and to the country’s economy. At
different levels significant number of people are engaged in trading of honey and beeswax
and selling of local honey wines (‘Tej’) which create job and self employment
opportunities for large number of citizens (Gidey Yirga and Mekonen Teferi, 2010).

In Ethiopia, about 1.9 million farm households are involved in beekeeping and there are
about 10 million colonies out of the total colonies about 5.92 million are hived (CSA,
2016) and it is estimated that, the country has the potential to produce 500,000 tons of
honey and 50,000 tons of beeswax per annum. Gifted with diverse agro-climatic zones, the
average honey and beeswax production estimates about 45,000 and 5,000 tons per year
(FAOSTAT, 2016). Such an amount puts the country 10 th in honey and 4th in beeswax
production worldwide (Belets Gebremichael and Berhanu Gebremedhin, 2015).

Within 2005-2013, Ethiopian honey production increased 20% from 36,000 MTs to
45,000 MTs (FAOSTAT, 2016). Moreover, the recent production is 50,790.58 tons of
honey in 2015/6 CSA (2016) and about 5,344 tons of beeswax in 2013 (FAOSTAT,
2016). This shows that, though increasing, the country is producing about 10% of its
potential. With more than 1,328,235 honeybee population yearly producing 19,890,422
kilogram of honey (CSA, 2016), beekeeping is a very long-standing and deep-rooted
household activity of the rural communities of Amhara region (Assemu Tesfa et al.,
2013).

Beeswax is one of the most valuable and oldest bee products primarily used to construct
foundations in beekeeping (Nuru Adgaba, 2007; Ayalew Kassaye, 2008; Gemechis
Legesse, 2014). Besides, it is still being used by mankind in various fields such as
cosmetics, foods, pharmaceuticals, engineering and industry (Gemechis Legesse, 2014).

2
South Wollo is one of the major potential zone endowed with diversified honeybee flora,
186,977 beehives, 14.08% of the regional share, of which 183,090 (97.92%) are traditional
(CSA, 2016). About 1,137,859 kg of honey was produced in 2014/5 with productivity of
7.10kg/hive/annum (CSA, 2015). According to Awraris Getachew et al. (2015) traditional
hive types can be good source of beeswax production in order to fulfill beekeepers
beeswax demand in national and world market. Therefore, the traditional production
system is an opportunity for beeswax production.

Indeed, beeswax is one of the primary exportable agricultural products of Ethiopia

(Dayanandan, 2015). The country has been well known in beeswax trade for a long time
and is one of the four biggest wax exporters to the world market amounting to on average
about 347 tons per year in increasing trend from time to time (FAOSTAT, 2016). This
demonstrates that less than 10% of the total estimated beeswax production of the country
is exported. The remaining larger portion of it is either used in local market or wasted.
The local demand is higher for beeswax (SOS Sahel Ethiopia, 2005). Majority of the
produced wax is used for domestic use as candle making in religious purposes. About 80%
of the total Ethiopian honey production goes in to the local honey wine preparation called
‘Tej’ (Hartmann, 2004), which is an opportunity to make use of wax p roduction out of
‘tej’ leftover if we opt to change the situation. Generally, beeswax productivity and
product quality has always been low, leading to high domestic utilization and low export
earnings. Hence, the beekeepers in particular and the country in general are not benefiting
from the sub sector. For that reason, to fully take the advantage of opportunities in
beekeeping sector, and specifically to beeswax, interventions to address constraints and
opportunities are very crucial following the market chains.

1.2. Statement of the Problems

So far, little research works have been done and no compiled information on beeswax
production, its quality and market chain aspect in South Wollo zone. No records reveal the
exact production quantity at the farmers and zonal level. The quality standard of beeswax
in the study areas needs to be verified towards national and international standards.
Beekeepers were not benefitted from the existing honey and beeswax supply to the extent
that should be. In addition, the beeswax market chain derivation and destination together
with its main market actors are not clearly characterized.

3
 1.3. Objectives

The general objective of this study is to deliver basic information on the current beeswax
production, with its quality status and market chains in selected districts of South Wollo
zone, Amhara region, Ethiopia.

Specific objectives:

 To assess the current beeswax production status,

 To identify opportunities and constraints,

 To verify the quality of beeswax,

 To identify the beeswax market chain and main actors in the market chain.

1.4. Research Questions

What is the current status of beeswax production in the study areas?

What seems the quality of beeswax produced in the study areas?
How the marketing of beeswax is undergoing?
Who are the main actors of the beeswax marketing?
What production and quality challenges and opportunities exist in the study areas
along the market chains?

4
 CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1. Role of Beekeeping

Beekeeping is an applied science and art of rearing honeybee colonies for man’s economic
benefits (Qaiser et al., 2013). Studies revealed that beekeeping offer different kinds of
products that include honey and beeswax, propolis, pollen, royal jelly etc (Koshiyama et
al., 2011), contributes cash income for beekeeper's (Mwakatobe and Machumu, 2008), for
poverty reduction, sustainable rural development and natural resources conservation
(Ogaba, 2010; Tewodros Alemu, 2010; Shehadeh, 2012). Moreover, countries earn foreign
exchange from export of bee products (Bradbear, 2009; Meaza Gebreyohannes, 2010).

2.1.1. Bee products

Beekeeping provides an excellent bonus to humans because only bees are capable of
harvesting nectar and pollen that otherwise would be inaccessible to people (Adjare, 1990;
Bradbear, 2003; Melaku Girma et al., 2008; Tewodros Alemu, 2010). Since the honeybee
produces non-perishable marketable commodities, beekeeping is said to be essential
economic sector, which directly contributes in the values of the outputs like honey,
beeswax, queen and bee colonies, pollen, royal jelly, bee venom, and propolis in cosmetics
and medicine (Adjare, 1990; Workneh Abebe, 2007).

2.1.1.1. Honey

Honey is the most important primary product of beekeeping. The bees collect from the
nectar of plants (mainly composed of complex mixture of carbohydrates) by reducing the
water content, store and leave it in honeycombs or honey pots to ripen and mature for their
own consumption (Gebreegziabher Gebremedhin et al., 2013; Oyerinde et al., 2014).

2.1.1.2. Beeswax

Next to honey, beeswax is an important bee product secreted from the wax gland of bee
workers (Boukraâ et al, 2013). It is a mixture of esters, fatty acids, higher alcohols and
saturated hydrocarbons in addition to aromatic substances and pigments (Ghanem, 2011).
Beeswax is one of the most valuable and oldest bee products to be used by mankind (Nuru

5
Adgabe, 2007; Ayalew Kassaye, 2008; Gemechis Legesse, 2014) and still being used in
various fields such as cosmetics, foods, pharmaceuticals, engineering and industry
(Gemechis Legesse, 2014).

2.1.1.3. Pollen

Pollen contains the male gametophytes (Bogdanov, 2015b). Pollination occurs when
pollen is moved within flowers or carried from one flower to another of the same species
by bees and other pollinators (Akangaamkum et al., 2010). Pollen can be collected by
pollen trap from the hive entrance or inside the hive from the comb cells and used as a
dietary supplement and has a history in traditional medicine (CBI, 2009). Pollen is the
bees’ main source of proteins, minerals, fats and other substances (Bogdanov, 2015c).

2.1.1.4. Propolis

Propolis is a resinous substance collected from plant sap and resins (Segeren, 2004;
Tsutsumi and Oishi, 2010) to seal cracks, reduce openings, and strengthen the base of
comb attachment (Bradbear, 2003; Tsutsumi and Oishi, 2010). Propolis displays strong
wide spectrum antimicrobial activity and has been used as a chemotherapeutic agent since
ancient times and still used as treatment agent for numerous diseases including veterinary
medication (Bogdanov, 2015a). Its treatment is under study for HIV and cancer (Tsutsumi
and Oishi, 2010).

2.1.1.5. Royal jelly

Royal jelly or ‘bee milk’ is a thick milky white liquid substance derived from the
pharyngeal glands of the honeybee that feeds bee larvae. Besides, predominantly valued as
a medicine, bio-stimulating, immuno- modulating effects and anti-aging activity for human
beings (Bogdanov, 2015b). The effect of the royal jelly on the human organism in
prevention, prophylaxis and treatment is proved (Menkovska, 2013). Since Royal Jelly is
the only food that queen bees take, and because a queen lays over 2,000 fertile eggs in a
single day, it must be highly rich in nutrients (Alive and Well, 2014). Therefore, royal
jelly helps as diet and prophylactics that it influences different systems of the body as,
cardiovascular, nervous system, heart and blood circulation, respiration, and is more

6
efficient in curing diabetes, cancer, infertility, wounds (Folayan and Bifarin, 2013;
Bogdanov, 2015) asthma, hay fever, liver disease, pancreatitis, sleep troubles (insomnia),
premenstrual syndrome (PMS), stomach ulcers, kidney disease, bone fractures,
menopausal symptoms, skin disorders, and high cholesterol. It is also used as a general
health tonic, for fighting the effects of aging, and for boosting the immune system
(WebMD, 2015).

2.1.1.6. Bee Venom

Honeybee venom, produced by a pair of glands near the sting apparatus in worker bees
(Tsutsumi and Oishi, 2010), is useful for treatment of rheumatism, eye and skin diseases
(Folayan and Bifarin, 2013) since it contains several physiologically active
components.like phospholipase A2, hyaluronidase, acid phosphomonoesterase, α-D-
glucosidase, and lysophospholipase (Boukraâ et al., 2013).

2.1.2. Pollination services

Beekeeping allows to utilize natural resources that otherwise would be wasted, and
contributes to the national food products through pollination services, without affecting
other agricultural activities (Melaku Girma et al., 2008). Although beekeeping is
considered as minor industry, its role of pollination is much higher than purely the value
of the beeswax and honey produced annually. This is due to the rationale of its inter-
relationship with agriculture and dependency of growers on honeybee pollination service
(Collison, 2004). Plant-animal interactions are very vital for sustaining biodiversity. Bees
are recognized as the incredibly important pollinators in almost all ecosystems where
flowers occur (Solomon and Aluri, 2013). They use pollen as a protein source (Bogdanov,
2004a; Burlew, 2010) and nectar as an energy source (Sara et al., 2007). The mutual
assistance of honeybees and plants is important for both of them (Abou-Shaara, 2015).
Therefore, without bees there would be no flowering plants, and vice versa (Bradbear,
2003; 2009).

Many agricultural crops depend on pollination. Almost one-third of all plants or plant
products eaten by humans rely directly or indirectly on bees for their pollinat ion. Above
all, Bradbear (2009) emphasized that without bees biodiversity would not be so reality.

7
Due to the bee’s nature, many ecosystems depend on the pollination of bees for their
existence and for increasing their genetic diversity (cross-pollination). A decline in bee
colonies and bee species could therefore threaten the survival of plant species that depend
on the pollination services of bees. Some types of plants depend uniquely on bees
pollination (Litaer, 2009). Therefore, beekeeping contributes significant role to the earth in
conserving the natural resources and from first to last environmental protection (Abebe
Jenberie et al., 2014). In the global stock, the managed honeybees, are the predominant
and most economically important group of pollinators in the growing cultivation of high-
value, pollination-dependent crops (Greenpeace Research, 2013).

Although not quantified for local conditions (Desalegn Begna, 2015), the economic value
of bee-affected pollination is great (Richards and Kevan, 2002) and its estimation is highly
variable depending on the crop and the market conditions (Hein, 2009). Even though the
value of honeybees in crop pollination is underestimated, it has a significant role in
increasing national food production and regeneration of plant species. As most important
pollinating agents in the world, their pollination service is estimated to be worth over 15
times the value of all hive products together, yet, it is much more difficult to quantify their
benefit (Save the Children UK, 2006; Match Maker Associates, 2007; Tessega Belie,
2009). Worldwide annual total economic value of crop pollination has been estimated to
be €153 billion (Gallai et al., 2009). The leading pollinator-dependent crops are vegetables
and fruits, representing about €50 billion each, followed by edible oil crops, stimulants
(coffee, cocoa, etc.), nuts and spices. The area covered by pollinator-dependent crops has
increased by more than 300% during the past 50 years (Van et al., 2009; Mariken et al.,
2011).

2.2. Beekeeping in Ethiopia

Ethiopia is endowed with huge potential of favorable environment and range of ecology
(Beyene Tadesse and Phillips, 2007; Taye Beyene and Verschuur, 2014a), diverse
honeybee source plants (Haftu Kebede and Gezu Tadesse, 2014), about 5.92 million hived
honeybee colony (CSA, 2016) about one million beekeepers (Tessega Belie, 2009) and
considerable amount of honey and beeswax production. Despite this potential, the sector
was not benefited through production of its maximum potential.

8
As it is acknowledged in different researches, (Tessega Belie, 2009; Gidey Yirga and
Mekonen Teferi, 2010) beekeeping appears as ancient history with long-standing practice
in the rural communities of Ethiopia. Owing to adequate natural resources (Dayanandan,
2015), beekeeping in Ethiopia has a long tradition and indigenous culture (Melaku Girma
et al., 2008; Tessega Belie, 2009; Tewodros Alemu et al., 2015). Honey and beeswax have
also extended traditional and cultural values (Gidey Yirga and Mekonen Teferi, 2010).
Though there is more to be done to develop the sector into a robust industry offer ing
significant income-generating opportunities, Ethiopia, as stated in (BfD, 2008), is a
regional leader in Africa in terms of volumes of honey and beeswax harvested and traded,
and levels of investment in the formal sector.

Even though migratory beekeeping is practiced in some areas of the country (Kerealem
Ejigu, 2005; Solomon Bogale, 2009), majorly, three honey production systems are
practiced in the country. These are traditional, transitional and modern based production
systems (Melaku Girma et al., 2008; Assemu Tesfa et al., 2013; Haftu Kebede and Gezu
Tadesse, 2014). According to Melaku Girma et al. (2008), the current on- farm yields do
not exceed 5 kg, 15 kg and 20 kg, respectively however having a respective potential
annual yields of 10 kg, 40 kg and 60 kg per hive. A sample survey result of CSA shows
that from 5,916,100 beehives in the country, 5,706,959 are traditional which accounts for
96.46% of the system with its complex limitations. Whereas, transitional and frame hives
are newly introduced in the system accounting only for 70,753 (1.20%) and 138,888
(2.34%) respectively (CSA, 2016). Accordingly, more than one million households are
involved in honey production (Awraris Getachew et al., 2012) with an average honey
productivity of 8.30, 18.28 and 15.5kg/hive/year for traditional, transitional and frame
hives respectively (CSA, 2016).

2.3. Major Bee Products in Ethiopia

The major honeybee products produced and sold in Ethiopian context include honey and
beeswax. There is little or no information about the other hive products production and
utilization so far. Other bee products include pollen propolis, royal jelly, bee venom, bee
brood, and package bees (Caroll, 2006; Tewelde Gebremichael, 2006; Gallmann and
Thomas, 2012; Qaiser et al., 2013; Taye Beyene and Verschuur, 2014b; Haftu K. et al.,
2015). These products have privileged demand globally, and they are not yet exploited in

9
the country (Workneh Abebe, 2007). The quantities needed by the market are too small for
cost-efficient production and marketing (CBI, 2009). Moreover, no research has been done
in Ethiopian condition except at Holleta Bee Research Center on the effect of pollen
trapping on brood rearing and honey yield (HBRC, 2012). The study showed that, without
significantly affecting honey yield, considerable amount of pollen can be collected. The
average pollen yield obtained per colony were varied fro m 24.34 gm to 201.58gm with
mean of 98.9gm per month during flowering periods. However, no information is
available on processing, handling and marketing of pollen grain in Ethiopia.

Currently, in Ethiopia as well as in the international market, there is an increasing demand

for honey and beeswax (Save the Children UK, 2006). Ethiopia has an ample population
of bees ready to meet the growing demand of honey and beeswax. Bee products are highly
distributed across the different regions of Ethiopia. However, the most important honey
producing regions are Oromia (3,009,745), Amhara (1,328,235), SNNP (992,633), Tigray
(263,961) and Benshangul-Gumuz (219,448) (CSA, 2016).

2.3.1. Honey

As the report of MoARD (2007) cited in Haftu Kebede and Gezu Tadesse, (2014) and
Tewodros Alemu et al. (2013), Ethiopian honey production accounts for approximately
2.5% of world production and 21.7% of African honey production. Thus, this makes the
country rank 1 st in Africa and 10th in the world. Honey in Ethiopia is used for many
purposes, for direct and indirect consumption. Directly, raw honey is consumed in tea, in
milk or with bread around breakfast time. Indirectly, honey is consumed in ‘Tej’, cakes
and other processed food items. The consumption pattern of the population for honey
fluctuates with income, age group, location and availability (PCI, 2013a).

About 96 per cent of beekeepers follow traditional beekeeping practices with no improved
techniques or technology (Solomon Bogale, 2009; CSA, 2016). Opening and manipulation
is not as such easy in locally made traditional hives that, beekeepers failed to harvest ripe,
pure and sufficient honey from the traditional hive (8-13 kg of crude honey) (Tolera
Kumsa and Dejene Takele, 2014). Due to this, the quality of honey is generally poor
(Bezabih Emana, 2010). The quality deteriorations and lower yield may arise from the

10
challenges of poor technical know-how on the part of bee-keepers on appropriate bee-hive
management and harvesting techniques (PCI, 2013a), farmers mainly use much cow dung
smoke during harvesting to subdue and push away the bees (Awraris Getachew et al.,
2012).

Poor packaging (Bezabih Emana, 2010), storage and transport (Melaku Girma et al., 2008)
also negatively affect quality of honey. Use of heating materials and then squeezing honey
by hand exposes the product to dust and other foreign materials. Honey often exposed to
contamination due to the method of post harvest and storage (Melaku Girma et al., 2008).
None conducive tools are commonly used as honey containers in Ethiopia include skin,
hides, clay pots, gourd pots and tins that have negative effect on the quality of honey
because they absorb moisture and raise the moisture content of the honey, lack cleanliness
and add undesirable odor to honey (Melaku Girma et al., 2008). Farmers do not process
honey, but they chunk the comb honey into a liquid mixture before sale (Haftu K. et al.,
2015). Even though semi-processing increases the values of honey, due to existing
substantial demand for the honey in its crude form, unions are not engaged in processing
(PCI, 2013a).

For most beekeepers, the main challenge for their beekeeping business develop ment to
invest on improved honey production technologies, storage, processing facilities and
packaging is lack of adequate financial resources (Haftu K. et al., 2015). When they pay
money for, people wish for honey and not sugar mixed (Gentry, 1982). Due to this
challenge, in some parts of the country, selling comb honey is very common. This method
of selling honey is not prone to adulteration problem (Melaku Girma et al., 2008). Even if
the beekeepers are not involved in the adulteration, they get the ultimate blame and loss,
for it is their product which loses credibility (Gentry, 1982).

2.3.2. Beeswax

Beeswax is a natural product (Mutsaers et al., 2005: Bogdanov, 2009) produced by worker
honeybees from special glands and molded through the use of their mouthparts, into
combs (MAAREC, 2005). When produced, beeswax is white but quickly darkens from
contamination with pollen and with the bees in the beehive. Beeswax taken from the bees,

11
melted and cleaned by the beekeeper generally is light lemon yellow in color (Bogdanov,
2004b; MAAREC, 2005). Ethiopia, having a huge apicultural resources, is the leading
beeswax producer in Africa, and one of the important beeswax exporter to the world
market (Tessega Belie, 2009; Gemechis Legesse, 2014).

2.3.2.1. Beeswax production and collection

Bogdanov (2009b) stated that it is very difficult to get actual figure of beeswax produced
in the rural beekeepers because most of it is wasted unintentionally. Exceptionally
endowed with honeybee colonies and diverse agro-climatic regions the country produces
about 5,344 tons in 2014 (FAOSTAT, 2016). This figure is estimated without
consideration of the beeswax wasted in the rural areas (Save the Children UK, 2006).
Here, what I observed is that, no data is available on beeswax production quantity at
national level except estimation or extrapolation from honey production and number of
bees.

According to FAO estimate, for the last 10 years, the average annual production of
beeswax in Ethiopia is estimated to be 4,914 tons per year. However, it is estimated that
about 25% of the total beeswax produced is ‘lost’ due to lack of extraction, as most honey
is sold mixed with the wax (Gezahegn Ayele et al., 2006). The above estimate is without
considering much of the beeswax produced in remote areas where it is usually wasted
without harvest. With all this wastage, in 2014 Ethiopia produced 5,344 tons of beeswax,
which is 32.65% of the total beeswax produced in Africa (16,366 tones), 8.08% of the
total beeswax produced globally (66,173 tones) (FAOSTAT, 2016) and this makes
Ethiopia 4th in the world of raw wax production next to China, Mexico and Turkey
(Dayanandan, 2015).

Rural beekeepers are the sources of beeswax production in Ethiopia. In addition, the local
honey brewery industries for making ‘‘Tej’’ and ‘birth’ are primary suppliers of beeswax
(Beyene Tadesse and Phillips, 2007; Ayalew Kassaye, 2008). Beeswax is largely collected
from traditional hives rather than moveable frame hives and the beeswax produced is
estimated to be 8-10% and 0.5-2% of crude honey produced from traditional and movable
frame hives respectively (Johannes Agonafir, 2005). Beeswax is collected in its ‘sefef’ or

12
‘keskes’ from ‘Tej’ brewers throughout the year after the beverage production (Beyene
Tadesse and Phillips, 2007; Nuru Adgaba, 2007a). During the non-honey seasons,
beeswax purification and marketing will be the business’s activity.

The country follows majorly traditional system of beekeeping that has significance in wax
production (Mekonen Teferi et al., 2011; Awraris Getachew et al., 2012; Yetimwork
Gebremeskel et al., 2014). Productivity of beeswax differs in type of hives used. As a case
in point, study on the performance of Apis mellifera spp. on beeswax production in
different type of beehives in enda mekoni woreda, Tigray region showed that traditional
hive (4.124kg) showed significantly higher beeswax production per hive than modern
(0.248kg) and clay frame (0.329kg) hives but no significant difference with KTB hive
(3.205kg) (Gebreagziabher Aregawi et al., 2014). At the same point, study in Southwest
Ethiopia on comparative analysis of colony performance and profit from different beehive
types revealed that Ethio-ribrab (2.92 ± 0.27kg), KTBH (1.57 ± 0.22kg) and traditional
hive (1.54 ± 0.09kg) types can be good source of beeswax production over improved
frame hive (0.3 ± 0.03kg) (Awraris Getachew et al., 2015). A Survey conducted by Haftu
and Gezu on honey production system, challenges and Opportunities in selected areas of
Hadya zone, Ethiopia revealed that, beekeepers did not harvest beeswax because of lack of
knowledge or awareness (39.2%), about the product, lack of beeswax market (21.5%),
lack of processing skill (20.8%) and lack of materials (18.5%) (Haftu Kebede and Gezu
Tadesse, 2014).

2.3.2.2. Beeswax processing and handling

Different kinds of rendering techniques can be employed to get pure beeswax (Krell,
1996). The methods in use are solar-wax- melters, steam- wax- melters, wax presses, wax
and honey separators and electric melters (Bradbear, 2009). Due to lack of knowledge and
skill of honey production, honey and beeswax extraction is still very traditional in Ethiopia
(Gidey Yirga and Mekonen Teferi, 2010). Old combs collected from traditional hives or
‘sefef’ and ‘keskes’ collected from ‘Tej’ leftover is cleansed and formed in to blocks. The
beeswax block, especially rendered by solar melter, is less viable to be affected by the wax
moth (Bogdanov, 2009a).

13
Study result done at Holleta Bee Research Center revealed that the proportion of pure
beeswax obtained from crude beeswax varied from 45.8 % to 92.2% with mean of 73.61%
and from crude honey from 5% to 65.62% with mean of 27.5% (HBRC, 2012). Different
private firms such as Beza Mar, Tutu Mar, Tadele, Eastern Shoa Beekeepers Association
etc are involved in honey and beeswax processing and marketing business (Melaku Girma
et al., 2008). Traditional beeswax extractors are also the other intermediate sources who
process the ‘sefef’ partially to rough beeswax blocks.

2.3.2.3. Beeswax quality

Beeswax produced by the bees immediately used for construction of comb is white in
color. It turns to yellow when the comb is filled with pollen, silk and larval debris (Krell,
1996). It is a highly appreciated product, but it does face competition from substitute
products. Beeswax is a natural product (Mutsaers et al., 2005) and no additives are
allowed (Bogdanov, 2004b). Wax adulteration can be detected by different methods. The
sensory characteristics of beeswax are an important quality criteria. Measures of sensory
and physico-chemical characteristics are adulteration detection methods. Beeswax should
contain minimal amounts of contaminants, as it is used for in cosmetics, food a nd
pharmaceutics (Bogdanov, 2016a). Adulteration and toxic contamination are the main
quality issues nowadays. Unfortunately, there are no maximum residue limits for
contaminants. Thus, beekeepers should keep the use of synthetic chemicals at a minimum
(Bogdanov, 2004b).

Adulteration of beeswax with animal fats and petroleum has also become a great threat to
the industry (Beyene Tadesse and Phillips, 2007). Lack of traceability is one of the major
challenges attributing to the increasing adulteration of beeswax with cheap materials like
animal fat in addition to the ever increasing price that draws attention of the people
involved in the mischief (Gemechis Legesse, 2014). A small part of the beeswax market
consists of organic beeswax, but data are not available on the volume of organic beeswax
(EPOPA, 2006).

The two tests (melting point and saponification cloud point tests) are supporting each other
to confirm beeswax adulteration with animal tallow tested at Holleta Bee Research Center

14
(Nuru Adgaba, 2007b). According to the result, as beeswax samples adulteration with
animal tallow increased, the melting point and saponification cloud point drop down.
Moreover, Out of 8 samples that failed to meet the requirements, three of them were from
intermediary collectors and the remaining was from final processors. This shows that,
adulterations mainly occurs at intermediary processors levels and appear at final
processors (Nuru Adgaba, 2007b).

Ethiopian government set quality standards for beeswax produced in the country
regardless of the type of hives; Ethiopian beeswax is recognized as potentially of high
international quality Gezahegn Ayele et al. (2006) do fit to the internationally required
qualities if properly handled (Beyene Tadesse and Phillips, 2007). The quality criteria
required are sensory and physicochemical parameters. The color of quality beeswax
should be yellow to yellowish brown; the odor of pleasant and honey- like when heated as
well as it should not stick to teeth and the knife up on cutting (Table 2. 1). The physic-
chemical properties of beeswax are described as melting point should range between 61
and 660 C, density 0.950-0.965 g/cm3 , refractive index 1.440-1.445, Saponification value
87-1040C and it should be free from acaricide residues (Table 2. 2).

15
Table 2. 1. Quality criteria for beeswax

Requirements
Parameters
Sensory characteristics

Color Yellow to yellow-brown

Odor Pleasant and Honey- like when heated
Chewing test Should not stick to teeth
Breakage test Should have a fine-granular, blunt, not crystalline structure
Cutting test Should not stick to the knife upon cutting
Consistency Workable with fingers, should not stick to them
Splinters test Scratch with nail or knife, splinters should have a spiral form
Rubbing test Kneading for 10 minutes, wax should be plastic
Physico-chemical properties

Melting point (°C) 61-65

Discoloration (°C) 85°C
Flash point (°C) 204.4°C
Density (g/cm3 ) 0.950-0.965
Refractive index (at 750 C) 1.440-1.445
Acid value 18 – 23
Ester value 70 – 80
Saponification value (°C) 87-104
Peroxide value At least 8
Test for paraffin Absent
Contamination Free of acaricide residues

Source:- (Bogdanov, 2016a)

There are no regulatory institutions whose responsibility is to control the overall quality
issues along the value chain. Weak quality control and standardization is the main
challenge that has to be solved from production to utilization. The current process of
quality standardization takes place through Quality Standards Authority of Ethiopia
(QSAE). Another organization is located at HBRC for laboratory testing of quality in
honey and beeswax.

16
Table 2. 2. Beeswax specifications of ethiopian and the european pharmacopodia standard

Property Specification Ethiopian Standard European Pharmacopeias

Specific gravity at 20o C 0.9550-0.9800 0.950-0.965

Melting point, o C 61-66 61-65
Refractive index at 75o C 1.4400-1.4450 1.440-1.445
Ash % by mass max. 0.20 -
Tot. Volatile matter % mass, max 0.75 -
Acid val.max 17-24 18-23
Saponification value min. 85-105 87-104
Ester value 70-80 70-80
Peroxide value - At least
Fats and Fatty acids To pass test -
Paraffin and other waxes To pass test Absent

Source:- (QSAE, 2005)

2.3.2.4. Beeswax composition and properties

Beeswax is a very stable substance, and its properties change little over time. It is
insoluble in water, resistant to hydrolysis and natural oxidization (Bogdanov, 2009a;
Bradbear, 2009).

Beeswax is brittle at a temperature of below 18°C, solid at room temperature, becomes

soft and pliable at 35 to 40°C and melts at a point of 61-65°C; it does not boil but
decompose at 120o C. There are 74 major and 210 minor components in beeswax. It is
composed of four main types of long chain carbon compounds (Hydrocarbons, Organic
acids, Alcohols and Esters) and 50 aroma compounds (Table 2. 3).

Beeswax is an inert material with high plasticity at a relatively low temperature (around
32o C). Upon heating the physical properties of wax changed. At 30-35o C it becomes
plastic, at 46-47°C the structure of a hard body is destroyed and between 60 to 70°C it
begins to melt. Heating to temperature of 95-105o C leads to formation of surface foam,

17
while at 140°C, the volatile fractions begin to evaporate. After cooling down beeswax
shrinks by about 10% Heating at 120°C for at least 30 minutes causes an increase of
hardness due to the removal of the remaining water (Bogdanov, 2016a). Beeswax is also
insoluble in water and resistant to many acids. It is soluble in most organic solvents such
as acetone, ether, benzene, xylol, toluene, chloroform, tetrachlormethane. However, at
room temperature it does not fully dissolve in any of these solvents, but upon heating
above the wax melting point it is readily soluble in all of them, and also in ethanol (ibid).

Table 2. 3. Major and minor components of Apis mellifera beeswax

Number of components in fraction

Component
Quantity % Major Minor

Monoesters 35 10 10
Diesters 14 6 24
Trivesters 3 5 20
Hydroxy Monoesters 4 6 20
Hydroxy Polyesters 8 5 20
Acid Esters 1 7 20
Acid Polyesters 2 5 20
Hydrocarbons 14 10 66
Free Acids 12 8 10
Alcohols 1 5 ?
Others 6 7 ?
Total 100 74 210

Source:- (Bogdanov, 2016a)

2.3.2.5. Beeswax storage

Beeswax storage should be in cool dry places and never in the same room with any kind of
pesticide. Wax will slowly crystallize over time and consequently become harder, but this
process is reversible without any damage, just as with crystallized honey. The white
bloom, i.e. dust that sometimes appears on the outside of a wax cake or candle consists of
small wax crystals. When melted or pressed with the rest of the wax it reverts to normal

18
beeswax without any residues or impurities. Wax can be stored for very long periods of
time without losing its major characteristics (Krell, 1996). Beeswax withstands the
atmospheric influence and does not need any special storage facilities (PCI, 2013b).
Combs in storage are ideal grounds for the breeding of wax moths. A beekeeper should
take preventive action to protect his unused combs against wax moth attack during storage
to avoid losing valuable combs. Storing combs in moth-tight cupboard or keeping them in
sealed polythene bags (Hamdan, 2016). Beeswax should only be stored in its rendered,
clean form. Before rendering, it will quickly be attacked by wax moths, which are able to
destroy large quantities of wax in short periods. Clean wax in large blocks is not attacked
by wax moths that is common in raw wax materials (Krell, 1996; PCI, 2013b).

2.3.2.6. Beeswax marketing

Globally, the market for organic beeswax forms a small part of the total beeswax market
and expected to grow (CBI, 2009). Ethiopian beeswax is demanded in the local and export
market, but majority of it is devoted in the domestic market (Gezahegn Ayele et al., 2006).
Ethiopian beeswax has a good quality of pliability and yellow coloration so that it is
highly demanded in the global market for blending beeswaxes from other sources
(Gemechis Legesse, 2014; Nuru Adgaba, 2007b). However, beeswax marketing in
Ethiopia is very complex and difficult in matter of traceability (Gemechis Legesse, 2014).
There are no strong producer-buyer relationships in terms of working linkages (Gezahegn
Ayele et al., 2006). Of the total beeswax produced per year, on average about 347 tons has
been exported every year. Ethiopia earns an average of 1.6 to 2.7 million USD every year
from the export of beeswax to international market within the years of 2009-2013 with
increasing trend (Table 2. 4). Even though, Ethiopian beeswax is highly demanded in the
local and global market and Ethiopia earns an increasing trend of export value, no quality
control system applied yet in the local market and international export channels.

Table 2. 4. Quantity and value of exported beeswax in the last 5 years

Year 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total 5yrs

Quantity (tone) 360 311 358 365 341 1735
Value (USD) 1,647,000 1,426,000 1,981,000 2,162,000 2,696,000 9,912,000

Source: (FAOSTAT, 2016)

19
The constraints to marketing of beeswax in the country include lower quality of products,
lack of market information, absence of organized market channel, transportation problem,
lack of appropriate technologies for collecting, processing, packing and storage to keep its
natural quality, lack of government support in promoting market development, and low
involvement of private sector (Meaza Gebreyohannes, 2010). The trouble of adulteration
and traceability also irritated the challenges of marketing channel of both the local and
international beeswax trade (Gemechis Legesse, 2014).

Market chain is the term used to describe the various links that connect all the actors and
transactions involved in the movement of agricultural goods from the producer to the
consumer (Lundy et al., 2004; Surbhin S, 2017). The honey market chain clearly indicated
no defined links established between main actors so far.

2.3.2.7. Beeswax utilization

In areas where most or all of the honey produced is consumed locally, and where there is
no local use for beeswax, pieces of wax comb are often discarded (Bradbear, 2009).
Therefore, a small portion of the produced beeswax is delivered to the market. Beeswax
which otherwise could be collected by beekeepers is wasted (Dayanandan, 2015). Majority
of the wax harvested after rendering used for many purposes in the country. It has become
a traditional religious practice for the Ethiopian Orthodox Church followers to burn
candlesticks called ‘tuaf’, during church ceremonies (Gezahegn Ayele et al., 2006).

Utilization of beeswax for foundation sheet currently creates a local demand (Beyene
Tadesse and Phillips, 2007) due to the introduction of improved frame hives. The amount
and its economic value of beeswax utilized in the religious practice for the Ethiopian
Orthodox Church followers are not yet determined. Therefore, it is a researchable issue to
make use of its economic benefits. Internationally, at present, beeswax is used as
foundations, cosmetics, pharmacy, candles, food processing, physiotherapy and other
purposes (Bogdanov, 2016b). (For detailed global utilization, see Appendix Table 1).

20
 2.4. Challenges and Opportunities of Beeswax Production, Quality and Market
Chain

2.4.1. Challenges

Different research findings in different parts of the country show multiple challenges. At
the farm level, beekeepers faced with challenges that hinder the production of beeswax.
Existence of bee enemies (Teklu Gebretsadik, 2016), drought, absconding and migration
of bee colony, poisonous plants and agrochemical spraying (Assemu Tesfa et al., 2013;
Malede Birhan et al., 2015; Shibru D. et al., 2016), lack of processing and packaging
equipment supply, low productivity, lack of technical knowledge on honeybee
management, lack of skill on how to process, honey sold with wax as crude due to lack of
trust by buyers and adulteration, and lack of honey and beeswax cooperatives (Abrehet
Gebrekristos, 2015). Moreover, smallholders’ inability to access markets, lack of market
linkage, lack of appropriate market channel, lack of market infrastructure are market
related challenges (Tezera Aweke, 2013; Sisay Fikru, 2015). Lack of research conducted
to characterize and document the apicultural resources and associated constraints Sisay
Fikru (2015), poor access to trainings and technical assistance, lack of special skills and
research (Gidey Yirga and Mekonen Teferi, 2010), high cost of modern hives with
accessories, shortage of bee forage and low quality of products are main challenges to be
managed (Taye Beyene and Verschuur, 2014a). Low quality beeswax supply (Abrehet
Gebrekristos, 2015), adulteration of beeswax with animal fats and petroleum, lack of
traceability, lack of quality control and maintenance training and very few quality control
private laboratories, with limited capacity has also become a great threat to the industry
(Gezahegn Ayele et al., 2006; Beyene Tadesse and Phillips, 2007; Hilmi et al., 2012).
There are currently only limited financial services available from mainstream financial
institutions for co-operatives and unions, while trade barriers can prevent small producers
from developing their own brands and market promotion strategies (Oxfam GB, 2011).
Generally, Less attention is given to the sector specifically to beeswax production and
quality.

21
 2.4.2. Opportunities

Generally the country has a huge potential of beekeeping as major opportunities to engage
on beekeeping clearly evidenced by availability of diversified natural bee forage, suitable
agro-ecology, indigenous knowledge and experience, increasing market demand of honey
and bee products due to increasing population in urban and rural areas (Tezera Awoke,
2013; Abrehet Gebrekristos, 2015; Shibru D. et al., 2016). In addition, existence of
flowering plants, ample source of water, availability of honeybee colonies (Tezera Awoke,
2013; Malede Birhan et al., 2015; Shibru D. et al., 2016). Socio-economic value, and
emerging beekeeping approaches like organized unemployed youth groups engaged in
integrated beekeeping with watershed play significant opportunistic roles for beekeepers
to join the sector (Tezera Awoke, 2013). Traditional way of production system specifically
favors beeswax production (Awraris Getachew, 2015). The traditional religious practice of
the Ethiopian Orthodox Church followers religious practice of burning candle sticks called
‘tuaf’’ and the intensity of the improved beekeeping extension in the main beekeeping
potential areas of the country launched by government and NGOs has created a huge
demand of beeswax for foundation sheet making for frame box hives (Gemechis Legesse,
2014).

2.5. Beeswax market chain actors and their contribution

Beekeeper: It is first and basic link in the marketing chain analysis of bee products.
Beekeepers are the primary sources of the products and supply to the second agent. From
the movement he/she decides what to produce, how to produce, how much to produce,
when to produce, and where to sale.

Tej bre wers: they are the major source of supply for beeswax. They purchase the crude
honey from the beekeeper or wholesalers. Sell the ‘Tej’ leftover to the retailers or
wholesalers as ’Sefef’ or ‘Keskes’ or after semi processing to molded beeswax.

Traditional beeswax extractors: During processing, beeswax, often in straw form,

remains as a by-product. Traditional beeswax extractors are intermediate source. They

22
supply the beeswax in rough blocks, and they have processed the raw material once
already.

Wholesalers: they provide the optimum combination of functions and services for
different kinds of retailers, and perform desired distribution functions for processors.

Retailers: Middlemen, which includes supermarkets and other large-scale retailer who
divides large-scale shipments of produce and sell it to consumers in small units. The basic
function they provide is bulk breaking.

Processers: a chain that practice further processing or semi processing and sale for the
final consumers or like exporters, consumers. Processers ma y purchase a bulk of semi
processed beeswax and proceed a final processing.

Exporters: deliver beeswax originated from all over the regions from traditional beeswax
extractors, retailers or wholesalers. Exporters may be processers.

Cons umers: The last link in the marketing chain. The participants may be beekeepers,
BoA, NGOs, Research Centers, pharmaceutical and food processing industries.

23
 CHAPTER 3. MATERIALS AND METHODS

3.1. Description of the Study Areas

The study was primarily conducted in the three ILRI-LIVES Project intervention districts
of South Wollo zone (Tehulederie, Kalu and Dessie Zuria). Even though most of the
beekeeping practice in these areas still exercised in traditional way, the three districts were
selected for this study due to the huge potential and relatively better experience in
beekeeping. In addition, they are close to honey and beeswax marketing and processing
routs. Moreover, these districts are ILRI-LIVES Project intervention areas, which is the
main financial source to conduct this research.

3.1.1. Location

South Wollo zone is one of the 11 zones of Amhara region, having an area of
17,067.45km2 (Wikipedia.org, 2015), located 10.200 - 11.710 N and 38.410 - 40.020 E
North of Ethiopia (GoogleMap, 2016) whose main capital is Dessie town. The zone
consists of 20 districts from which the three districts namely, Tehulederie, Kalu and
Dessie Zuria were selected for this study (Figure 3. 1).

Tehulederie district, having an area of 405.37km2 , located at about 429 Km North of

Addis Ababa. Haik is the administrative capital of the district and Tehulederie is bordered
on the south by Dessie Zuria, on the southwest by Kutaber, on the north by Harbu district
of North Wollo zone, on the northeast by Were babu and on the southeast by Kalu district
(Figure 3. 1). Kalu district having an area of 85154.25km2 , located about 370 Km North of
Addis Ababa. Habru is the administrative capital of the district and Kalu is bordered on
the south by Chefa gula of Oromia zone, on the west by Dessie Zuria, on the northwest
by Tehulederie, on the north by were babo, on the east by Bati and on southeast by Argoba
special district (Figure 3. 1). Dessie Zuria having an area of 937.32km2 , located at about
401 Km North of Addis Ababa. Dessie is the administrative capital of the district and
Dessie Zuria bordered on the south by Were illu and Albuko, on the southwest
by Legambo, on the northwest by Tenta, on the north by Kutaber, on the northeast by
Tehulederie, on the east by Kalu district (Figure 3. 1).

24
Figure 3. 1. South Wollo zone and its districts

Source:- (DRMFSS, 2012)

3.1.2. Altitude and climate

South Wollo covers three main agro-ecological zones, namely: ‘Dega’ (above 2,500
m.a.s.l), ‘Weyna dega’ (between 1,600m and 2,500 m a.s.l) and ‘kolla’ (from 1,300-
1,600m). Most parts of the zone are characterized as mountainous and hilly. The land is
highly degraded and deforested in terms of indigenous trees. The zone is densely
populated with 150-250 persons per km2 (SWZDoA, 2015 unpublished). In most areas of
South Wollo zone, rainfall is bimodal, with longer ‘kiremt’ rains from July to September
and short ‘belg’ rains from March to April. The area has a long-term mean (1162mm)
rainfall per annum. The monthly minimum and maximum temperature is 12.6 0 C and
26.40 C respectively (ibid). Annual average temperature values are highest (17 0 C to 210 C)
in the low lying areas of Kalu and Tehuledere and especially those areas close to the Afar
region, while most of Dessie Zuria district have the lowest temperature ranging from 100 C
to 160 C, because of the high altitude. In these districts, majority of the farmers practice

25
rain fed agriculture but rainfall is either erratic or low in most times. Many areas in Dessie
Zuria receive high rainfall ranging between 1200 and 1400 mm while most areas in Kalu
and Tehuledere get rainfall in the range of 700-1150mm and 1000-1100 mm per year
respectively (ibid).

3.1.3. Demographic data

Based on the 2007 E.C. Census conducted by the Central Statistical Agency of Ethiopia,
South Wollo zone have a total population of 2,518,862 (1,248,698 male and 1,270,164
female), of whom 301,638 live in the urban (146,681 male and 154,957 female) and
2,217,224 in rural area (1,102,017 male and 1,115,207 female). The total population has
an average increase of 18.60% over the 1994 census (EPCC, 2015). Tehulederie
district has a total population of 117,877, of whom 59,300 are men and 58,577 women;
14,745 or 12.51% are urban inhabitants. Kalu district has a total population of 186,181 of
whom 94,187 are men and 91,994 women; 19,810 or 10.64% are urban inhabitants Dessie
Zuria district has a total population of 157,679 of whom 77,626 are men and 80,053
women and all are rural inhabitants (EPCC, 2015).

3.1.4. Livestock potential

South Wollo zone is estimated to possess 1,754,510 cattle, 1,864,453 sheep, 812,473
goats, 78,167 Horses, 39,567 mules, 477,859 donkeys, 17,808 camels, 2,027,578 poultry
and 186,977 bee colonies (CSA, 2016). Of the total bee colonies, 183,090 (97.92%) are
kept in traditional beehives. South Wollo zone covers 17462 Km2 accounting 10.79% of
the regional share and possess 14.08% of the regional bee colony resources. The area also
has highest density of 10.71 bee colonies per Km2 from Eastern Amhara.

3.2. Methods of Data Collection

3.2.1. Scope and coverage

This research was conducted being divided in to two main components: component one
was household survey and component two was sample collection and laboratory analysis
of beeswax quality. Primary data were collected from the respondents using semi-
structured questionnaire (for beekeepers), key informant interview (for other actors) and

26
from the laboratory analysis. Secondary data were collected from available sources: books,
journals, proceedings, thesis, reports and related research publications and internet.

3.2.2. Sampling frame and techniques

The survey covers three purposively selected districts of South Wollo zones according to
their beekeeping potential, experience and access to bee products marketing points. These
districts are Tehulederie, kalu and Dessie Zuria. From each district, three kebeles were
selected purposively according to the above criteria. From each kebele, 15 farmer
beekeepers were purposively selected based on owing bee colonies and experience in
beekeeping using systematic random sampling technique. Generally, from 9 kebeles, 135
beekeepers were selected for the household field survey.

Pretested and modified semi-structured questionnaire (Appendix Table 4) was prepared to

obtain information on the basic demographic data, the current beeswax production status,
trend, and opportunities, constraints and factors affecting beeswax production and quality.
The questionnaire was also aimed to identify beeswax- marketing system and identify the
main actors, through primary data collected from farmers focusing on factors affecting
beeswax market supply, size of output, market information, credit access, access to
market, number of beehives owned, beeswax production cost, annual return from beeswax,
extension service and annual income from other source.

All the available honey and beeswax actors (traders and ‘Tej’ brewers) along the market
chains of the study areas have been included for key informant interview. Open-ended
checklist was prepared for discussion with each of the actors systematically to get relevant
information. More specifically, the checklist for traders tried to include type of business
(wholesaler, retailer, assembler, etc.), buying and selling strategies, source of market
information, and other related data were collected.

3.2.3. Beeswax sample collection and preparation

Following the market chain of the three districts to the main town, beeswax samples were
collected from beekeepers and different market actors including ‘Tej’ brewers. No samples

27
have been taken from cooperatives, local collectors, honey and wax processors and
exporters due to their absence in the study areas. Crude honey and old combs were
collected from beekeepers as well as ‘Keskes’ or ‘sefef’ purchased from ‘Tej’ brewers then
extracted and analyzed in the laboratory. Purchased extracted beeswax blocks at
Agriculture offices has also been included in the analysis.

Before processing beeswax, dark combs and ‘‘Tej sefef’ were first soaked for 24 hours in
water to remove non-wax components (honey, pollen, impurities etc) and minimize the
formation of wax emulsion in the water while melting. The soaked materials were put into
large metal container filled with water, left until all the material were melted and the
contents were poured into sack held by two people and firmly pressed in opposite
direction. The wax and water runs out through an opening from the sack and presser. The
heating and pressing procedures were repeated to drain out almost pure beeswax.

Honey samples from beekeepers, old and broken combs from beekeepers, ‘keskes’ or
‘sefef’ from ‘‘Tej’’ brewers and rendered beeswax from office of agriculture were
collected. Samples so obtained constitute an individual sample representing the actor and
type of sample source. Composite sample of 500 gm were prepared from each of the
samples and divided into two equal parts. O ne for the laboratory analysis and the
remaining is for reference placed at laboratory. The samples were collected with clean, dry
and airtight containers to minimize adventitious contamination and labeled with
appropriate format (QSAE, 2005).

3.2.4. Laboratory analysis

Before physical and chemical analysis, samples were rendered, refined and purified.
Physical and chemical analysis was done at Sekota Dry land Agricultural Research Center.
All procedures were according to the Ethiopian Beeswax Specification ET-1203-2005 of
Quality Standard Authority of Ethiopia (QSAE, 2005) and all chemicals and reagents used
were analytical grade. To identify the possible quality deteriorating factors, samples were
determined for parameters such as specific gravity, melting point, refractive index, ash
content, total volatile matter, acid value, saponification value, ester value, ester to acid
ratio, fats and fatty acids, and paraffin and other waxes were considered. The detailed

28
methodes of beeswax quality laboratory analysis procedures for each parameter are
presnted as follows.

3.2.4.1. Specific gravity at 200 C

Approximately 2 g of the material melted in a porcelain crucible at a temperature of about

100°C and allowed to cool to room temperature. The sample weighed suspended with a
tarred thread after it was stored for 2 hours at a temperature of 20 ± 1 0 C. The mass of the
sample was determined, first in air and then in rectified spirit maintained at 20± 1°C. The
specific gravity at 20o C/20o C of the rectified spirit was measured by means of the specific
gravity bottle. Then, the specific gravity of the sample was determined by the following
formula (QSAE, 2005).

Specific gravity at 20°C/20°C =

Where,
M1 mass in g of the material in air,
d specific gravity of rectified spirit, and
M2 mass in g of the material in alcohol.

3.2.4.2. Melting point, 0 C

The thermometer was dipped and withdrawn at the melted material so as to get the bulb
thinly coated with the wax and let stand for 24 hours. This thermometer was inserted into
the test-tube through the bored cork and then the test-tube was placed in the water-bath.
The temperature gradually rose, at the rate of 1°C in 3 minutes. The temperature at which
a transparent drop forms on the end of the thermometer bulb was recorded as the melting
point of the sample.

3.2.4.3. Refractive index at 750 C

Bench top digital Abbe refractometer was used to measure refractive index. The sample
melted and filtered through fast filter paper to remove any impurities and last traces of
moisture. The temperature of the refractometer was adjusted at 75±10 C by circulating
water from the water bath. Few drops of the sample was placed on the lower prism and the

29
prism closed tightened firmly allowed to stand for one or two minutes. After the sample
has attained the test temperature, the refractive index of the sample read and recorded
following the procedures of ET 1203 (2005) (QAES, 2005).

3.2.4.4. Ash, % by mass, max.

The platinum dish was heated to redness, cooled to room temperature in a desiccator and
weighed. About 50 g of the material was taken in a watch-glass and weighed accurately.
About three-quarters of this quantity was transferred to the platinum dish and heated on a
hot plate so that the material burns gently at the surface. When about half of the material is
burnt away, heating stopped, cooled and the remainder of the material was added. The dish
heated again, as before, until the material completely charred. After that, the material was
incinerated in a muffle furnace at 550°C to 650°C for 1 hour, cooled to room temperature
in desiccators and weighed. Incineration, cooling and weighing was repeated until the
difference between two successive weightings was less than one milligram. The ash
content of the sample was calculated with the following formula (QSAE, 2005).

Ash, percent by mass =

Where,
M2= mass in g of the ash, and
Ml = mass in g of the material taken for the test.

3.2.4.5. Total volatile matter, % by mass, max.

About 10 g of the material was weighed accurately in a suitable dish ,previously dried and
weighed, and placed in an oven maintained at 105 2 0 C for 6 hours. After 6 hours, the dish
was cooled in a desiccator and weighed. The dish heated again in the oven for 30 minutes.
The process repeated until the loss in mass between two successive weightings was less
than one milligram. the lowest mass obtained was record as the total volatile matter of the
sample taken with the following formula (QSAE, 2005).

Total volatile matter at 1050 C percent by mass=

30
Where, M1 mass in gram of the dish with the material before heating

M2 mass in gram of the dish after heating

M3 mass in gram of the empty dish

3.2.4.6. Acid value, max.

The material was mixed to make entirely liquid and accurately about 5 g of the material
was weighed in a 250- m1 conical flask. 75 ml of a mixture of two parts of benzene and
one part of rectified spirit was added. The sample was heated under reflux until it
dissolved, allowed to cool to room temperature and titrated with standard potassium
hydroxide solution using phenolphthalein as indicator until pink color is observed. The
acid value (in mg KOH/g) was calculated by the following formula (QSAE, 2005).

Acid value =

Where, 56.1 is equivalent weight of KOH

V volume in ml of standard potassium hydroxide solution used,
N normality of standard potassium hydroxide solution, and
M mass in g of the material taken for the test.

3.2.4.7. Saponification cloud value, min.

Accurately about 2.0 g of beeswax was weigh in a tarred conical flask, 25 ml of methyl
ethyl ketone added, followed by 25 ml of alcoholic potassium hydroxide solution. Few
pieces of pumice stone were added and the reflux condenser was connected to the flask.
The flask heated on a water-bath or electric hot plate for about 2 hours to boil steadily but
gently. The inside of the condenser washed down with about 10 ml of rectified spirit after
the flask and condenser have cooled. 1 ml of phenolphthalein was added and the residual
potassium hydroxide was titrated with 0.5 M standard hydrochloric acid. A blank assay or
titration was also performed with 25 ml of 0.5 M alcoholic potassium hydroxide. The
following formula was used to determine the Saponification Value according to Ethiopian
Beeswax Specification ET-1203-2005 of Quality Standard Authority of Ethiopia (QSAE,
2005).

31
 Saponification cloud value =

Where, B = volume in ml of standard hydrochloric acid required for the blank,

S = volume in ml of standard hydrochloric acid required for the material,
N =normality of standard hydrochloric acid, and
M = mass in g of the material taken for the test

3.2.4.8. Ester value

The ester value was calculated as the acid value determined subtracted from the
saponification value determined following the procedure of ET 1203 (2005) (QSAE,
2005).

Ester value = Saponification value - Acid value

3.2.4.9. Ester to acid ratio

The ester to acid ratio was calculated by dividing the ester value to the acid value.

Ratio numbe r =

3.2.4.10. Fats and fatty acids

5.0 g of the material was boiled for about 10 minutes with 80 ml of 10% sodium
hydroxide solution replacing the water lost by evaporation. The solution was cooled and
filtered through glass wool. The filtrate solution was acidified with 4N dilute hydrochloric
acid. To pass or fail the test, the solution was observed if it beco mes clear or turbid after
acidification.

3.2.4.11. Paraffin and other waxes

1.0 g of the material weighed and placed in a conical flask fitted with a water-cooled
reflux condenser. 10 ml of alcoholic potassium hydroxide solution was added and boiled
under reflux for one hour. After detaching the flask from the condenser, a thermometer

32
inserted suitably into the liquid in the flask and allowed to cool, stirring constantly. The
material has been taken to pass the test if the following conditions were satisfied:

a. The liquid does not become cloudy at a temperature higher than 61°C but becomes
cloudy at a temperature between 61°C and 59°C, and
b. Precipitation of large flocks occurs at not more than 2°C below the temperature at
which the liquid becomes cloudy.

3.3. Data Management and Statistical Analysis

The collected data were coded and tabulated in Microsoft Excel worksheet for analysis.
The statistical analysis used in the study varied depending on the type of variable and
information obtained. The Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) software version
20 and Microsoft Excel were used to analyze the quantitative data collected in the survey
while data collected from the laboratory was analysed using SAS software version 9.0.
Any item that cannot be captured through quantitative analysis was analyzed qualitatively
based upon interview and group discussion with extension workers and beekeepers. The
tools for quantitative data analysis were descriptive statistics such as percentages,
frequencies, mean and standard deviations. Presence of association between different
beeswax quality parameters of independent samples was tested. Correlation among the
different quality tests were used to justify the standards of beeswax in the study areas.
Generalized Linear Model at P<0.05 level was used to separate the means whenever
ANOVA showed statistically significant difference. The following analysis of variance
model was used for data analysis.

Yij =μ + αi+ Єij

Where: Yij = quality of beeswax

µ = overall mean

αi = the effect of the ith location or source of beeswax

Єij = random error

33
 CHAPTER 4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4.1. Socio Economic Characteristics of Households

4.1.1. Household characteristics

Among 135 sample households interviewed to generate qualitative and quantitative data
on beekeeping, 126 (93.3%) were male headed and the rest 9 (6.7%) were female- headed
(Table 4. 1). The very limited number of female participation in beekeeping in the study
areas might be due to beekeeping is considered as the work of men. Also, women might
not be economically empowered through beekeeping and due to limited number of
interviewed female-headed household that is also reported in most research findings
(Abebe Jenberie, 2008; Adebabay kebede et al., 2008; Kerealem Ejigu et al., 2007; Haftu
Kebede and Gezu Tadesse, 2014). There is also a report indicating cultural barrier to
women to undertake honey harvesting (Hartmann, 2004; Workneh Abebe, 2007). Of the
total households interviewed, 92.59% are married while 3.7%, 2.96% and 0.74% are
widowed, single and divorced respectively (Table 4. 1). Based on the results of this study,
even the participation of women is minimal people regardless of their sex and marital
status undertake beekeeping activities in the study areas. There is no significant variation
(P>0.05) between districts in terms of sex and marital status involved in beekeeping
activity.

Table 4. 1. Sex and marital status of the respondents by districts

Districts (frequency and pe rcentage)

HH
Variable Dessie Total
characteristics Tehulederie Kalu
Zuria
Sex of Male 39(86.66%) 43(95.56%) 44(97.78%) 126(93.33%)NS
household Female 6(13.34%) 2(4.44%) 1(2.22%) 9(6.67)NS
Total 45(100%) 45(100%) 45(100%) 135(100%)
Single 2(4.44%) 1(2.22%) 1(2.22%) 4(2.96%)NS
Married 39(86.66%) 43(95.56%) 43(95.56%) 125(92.59%)NS
Marital status Widowed 3(6.66%) 1(2.22%) 1(2.22%) 5(3.7%)NS
Divorced 1(2.22%) 0(0%) 0(0%) 1(0.74%)NS
Total 45(100%) 45(100%) 45(100%) 135(100%)

NB- HH denoted household, NS= the mean difference is not significant at 0.05 level

34
All the interviewed beekeepers were within the age groups ranging from 20 to 73 years
and majorities (91.11%) of the respondents are found in economically active age groups of
20-60 (Table 4. 2). The age group between 15 and 60 years are considered economically
active age group (Tezera Awoke, 2013). Thus, there is high potential of labor availability
for beekeeping and in most cases, people at younger age are actively engaged in
beekeeping activities (Table 4. 2). According to this study, the mean age of respondents is
43.58±1.18 years. Guesh Godifey (2015) and Alemu Tsegaye (2015) also reported similar
mean age of 45.05±10.45 and 45.02±13.3 years respectively. The result indicated that
there were no significant difference (P>0.05) in age between the studied d istricts.

As could be observed from (Table 4. 2), the family size of the interviewed beekeepers
ranges from 1 to 13. The majority of the respondents (80.7%) had a family size of greater
than four and the mean family size was 5.2 (Table 4. 2). There is no significant difference
(P>0.05) between districts in terms of age of HH but Kalu district have significantly
(P<0.05) higher family size (5.78±2.38) than Dessie Zuria (4.8±1.56). Moreover, female
family size of HH have no significant difference (P>0.05) between districts but Kalu
district have significantly (P<0.05) higher male family size (3.02±1.54) than Dessie Zuria
(2.18±0.96) and Tehulederie (2.44±1.2).

Table 4. 2. Age and family size of households of the study areas

Districts (Mean±SD)
Socio economic indicators
Dessie
Tehulederie Kalu Overall
Zuria
(Mean±SD) 44.62±13 44.02±9.8 42.11±13 43.59±12NS
Range (min- max) 25-73 20-70 23-72 20-73
Age of HH
head 20 - 40 22(33.85%) 18(27.69%) 25(38.46%) 65(48.15%)
41- 60 18(31.03%) 26(44.83%) 14(24.14%) 58(42.96%)
61 and above 6(50%) 1(8.33%) 5(41.67%) 12(8.89%)
Male 2.44±1.2b 3.02±1.54a 2.18±0.96b 2.55±1.297
Family size Female 2.58±1.31 2.76±1.61 2.62±1.11 2.65±1.35NS
Total 5.02±2.05ab 5.78±2.38a 4.8±1.56b 5.20±2.055

NB - Letters in a row with different superscript denote significant differences at p<0.05

- NS denotes no significant differences at p>0.05, SD denotes Standard Deviation

35
 4.1.2. Educational status of respondents

Educational level of the farming households can have significant importance in identifying
and determining the type of development and extension services that need to be designed
for the area. According to this study, about 29.6% of the respondent households have no
educational background while 31.1% of the respondents were with informal education
who can read and write and about 39.3% are at stages of literacy ranging from primary to
secondary school level (Table 4. 3). Therefore, according to the result of this study the
high level of illiteracy (29.6%) in the study areas limits the effectiveness of adoption of
improved beekeeping and requires more emphasis to be placed on practical demonstration
of essential concepts in improved beekeeping. According to the survey result, the sample
households of grade 9 to 12 have significantly (P<0.05) higher bee colony holding (11)
than the lower literacy levels (Table 4. 3). For that reason, the higher the literacy level, the
more the number of colony holding. On the contrary, the number of respondent beekeepers
were significantly (P<0.05) lower for literate than illiterate ones (Table 4. 3).

Table 4. 3. Educational status and mean bee colony holding of the household heads

Respondents Bee colony holding

Educational Status
Frequency Percentage Mean
a
Illiterate 40 29.6 4.625b
a
Basic (Read and write) 42 31.1 5.095b
a
Grade 1-4 22 16.3 4.455b
a
Grade 5-8 26 19.3 5.423b
b
Grade 9-12 5 3.7 11.000a
Total 135 100 5.13

NB- Letters in a column with different superscript denote significant differences at p<0.05

4.1.3. Land holdings of the respondents

The average land holding of the respondents was 1.24±0.72 hectare (Table 4. 4) which is
within the national average land holding of 1.0 - 1.5 hectors/family. However, this result is
lower than the regional average of the Amhara region 1.7ha (Kerealem Ejigu et al., 2009)
and Burie district of Amhara region, 1.77±0.91ha (Tessega Belie, 2009). The average land
holding result of the study areas was also higher than the results obtained from Lasta
district of North Wollo (0.5-0.65ha) (Tezera Awoke, 2013) and South Wollo and Wag

36
Himra Zone (0.6±0.4ha) (Alemu Tsegaye, 2015). Majority (85.19%) of the beekeepers
have lower total land holding (< 2ha) with lower number of bee colony holding per
household. Moreover, the few beekeepers having > 2ha of total land have a better colony
holding per household (Table 4. 4).

The average cropland holding of the sample respondents was 0.79±0.48 hectors. Farmers
from Kalu district have higher cropland holding (0.94±0.49) than Tehulederie and Dessie
Zuria district farmers (Table 4. 4). From the result, about 97.0% of the respondents have
cropland holding of less than 2ha/family. Generally, the result indicated that most
beekeepers posses less lands and this showed that beekeeping needs no larger land owning
and possibly performed without having cropland. With regard to cropland and bee colony
holding relation, almost 96.3% of the respondents have a cropland of ≤1.5ha and an
average of 4.89 bee colonies per HH but few (3.7%) of the beekeepers with >1.5.ha hold
an average colony of 7.11 per HH (Table 4. 4).

4.1.4. Livestock and bee colony ownership

As an integral part of crop-livestock mixed farming system, livestock play a significant

role in alleviating the urgent financial need, dietary requirements, loan repayment, gifts,
fertilizer, fuel, draught power and transport. According to CSA (2016) and observation,
South Wollo zone is a home of diversified livestock species population. The major
livestock reared in the area are cattle, sheep and goat, horse, mule, donkey, camel, poultry
and honeybee. According to the survey result, the mean livestock holding per household
was 4.32±2.33, 1.54±2.18, 0.65±1.26, 0.01±0.09, 0.53±0.68, 4.23±3.28, 0.22±0.64 for
cattle, sheep, goat, horse, mule, donkey, poultry and camel respectively (Table 4. 5).

Besides livestock, beekeeping tackles immediate need of cash income for households.
Accordingly, the study result indicated the mean honeybee colony holding of respondents
was 5.13±5.2 per household (Table 4. 5). During the survey, it was noted that, there are
many beekeepers in the districts with a colony number of 1 to 43 per household
demonstrating that the area is suitable for beekeeping development. The majority (76.3%)
of the farmers participated in the study have a colony number below six. While, 17.78%
and 5.93% of the farmers have six to ten and above 10 colonies per household respectively

37
(Figure 4. 1). The mean honeybee colony holding per household was lower than the result
from Kaffa, Sheka and Bench-Maji zones, which was 14.67 per household, (Awraris
Getachew et al., 2012). However, the result was very comparable with the results from
Kilte Awlaelo, Sekota and Burie districts reported as 5.79, 5.9 and 6.48 colonies per
household respectively (Abebe Jenberie, 2008; Tessega Belie, 2009; Yetimwork
G/Meskel, 2015). The variation could be due to the vegetation cover, rainfall distribution
and availability of different species of honey bee plants favour for the higher colonies to
exist in Kaffa, Sheka and Bench-Maji zones than Kilte Awlaelo, Sekota, Burie and South
Wollo.

120

103
Frequency percent
100

80 76.30

60

40

24

20 17.78

8
5.93

0
1 to 5 6 to 10 11 and above

Figure 4. 1. Frequency and percentage of bee colony ownership in the study areas

38
Table 4. 4. Land holdings of the respondents in the study areas

Districts

Land Holding Tehulederie Kalu Dessie Zuria Total

Mean±SD Range Mean±SD Range Mean±SD Range Mean±SD Range
Crop land 0.76±0.55 0.12 – 2.5 0.94±0.49 0–2 0.68±0.34 0 – 1.5 0.79±0.48 0 - 2.5
Forest land 0.09±0.17 0 – 0.9 0.26±0.37 0 – 1.5 0.15±0.19 0 - 0.75 0.17±0.27 0 – 1.5
Grazing land 0.1±0.16 0 - 0.75 0.1±0.11 0 – 0.42 0.12±0.18 0 – 0.9 0.11±0.15 0 – 0.9
Others* 0.07±0.13 0 - 0.75 0.26±0.21 0 - 0.75 0.2±0.23 0 – 0.9 0.18±0.21 0 – 0.9
Total 1.01±0.68 0.14 – 2.84 1.57±0.76 0.5 – 3.25 1.15±0.6 0.48 – 2.75 1.24±0.72 0.135 – 3.25
Crop land Total land
Land holding Mean Cum Mean Cum
Respondents % colony Mean colony Respondents % colony Mean colony
<=0.5 ha 67 49.63 4.95 4.95 27 20.00 3.67 3.67
>0.5 to 1 ha 39 28.89 4.51 4.73 37 27.41 5.08 4.48
>1 to 1.5 ha 24 17.78 5.21 4.89 32 23.70 5.125 4.625
>1.5 to 2ha 4 2.96 12.5 6.79 19 14.07 4.37 4.56
>2 ha 1 0.74 10 7.43 20 14.81 7.95 5.24

 Note - Others include land allocated for irrigation, vegetables and residences
SD denotes Standard Deviation

39
Table 4. 5. Livestock and bee colony ownership in the study areas

Districts
Li vestock
Tehulederie Kalu Dessie Zuria Total
Species
Average SD Mi n Max Average SD Mi n Max Average SD Mi n Max Average SD Mi n Max
Oxen 1.91 0.92 0.00 4.00 2.51 1.25 1.00 6.00 2.07 0.89 1.00 4.00 2.16 1.06 0.00 6.00
Cow 0.89 0.61 0.00 2.00 1.47 0.89 0.00 4.00 1.31 0.73 0.00 3.00 1.22 0.79 0.00 4.00
Calf 0.76 0.65 0.00 2.00 1.20 1.27 0.00 7.00 0.84 0.64 0.00 2.00 0.93 0.92 0.00 7.00
Cattle 3.56 1.82 1.00 8.00 5.18 2.90 1.00 13.00 4.22 1.85 1.00 8.00 4.32 2.33 1.00 13.00
Sheep 1.20 1.62 0.00 5.00 1.49 2.29 0.00 10.00 1.93 2.53 0.00 7.00 1.54 2.18 0.00 10.00
Goat 0.47 0.92 0.00 4.00 0.38 0.91 0.00 4.00 1.11 1.68 0.00 5.00 0.65 1.26 0.00 5.00
Horse 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.15 0.00 1.00 0.01 0.09 0.00 1.00
Mule 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.27 0.45 0.00 1.00 0.09 0.29 0.00 1.00
Donkey 0.56 0.66 0.00 2.00 0.22 0.52 0.00 2.00 0.82 0.72 0.00 3.00 0.53 0.68 0.00 3.00
Chicken 3.93 3.14 0.00 10.00 3.73 3.60 0.00 12.00 5.02 3.00 0.00 14.00 4.23 3.28 0.00 14.00
Bee colony 3.98 1.92 1.00 10.00 5.51 5.51 2.00 37.00 5.91 6.79 2.00 43.00 5.13 5.20 1.00 43.00
Camel 0.11 0.32 0.00 1.00 0.56 0.99 0.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.22 0.64 0.00 4.00

NB- SD denotes Standard Deviation

40
 4.2. Beekeeping Situation of the Study Areas

4.2.1. Beekeeping experience of respondents

Beekeeping is a discipline that based on experience and interest. The level of beekeepers
experience is the number of years that an individual was continuously involved in
beekeeping after he/she own colony. Differences in beekeeping experience might be
responsible to influence the attitude and adoption of new beekeeping technologies
(Hussien Adal et al., 2015). Accordingly, the majority (31.85%) of the beekeepers had
more than 15 years of beekeeping exercise (Table 4. 6). This resut agrees with the findings
of Alemu Tsegaye (2015) who reported 41.1% experienced beekeepers in South Wollo
and Wag Himra zones and Abebe Jenberie (2008) who reported 16.5 years as an average
experience of the beekeepers in sekota ditrict. The recently engaged beekeepers that have
less than 5 years of experience were only 24% of the total respondents (Table 4. 6).
Moreover, from my observation during the study period, more experienced beekeepers
have better understanding and they are more curious about their colony management like
pest and predator prevention, shelter preparation, provision of dearth period
supplementary feeds, swarm management, quality honey production and other seasonal
management. This result was in line with the results of Adebabay Kebede et al. (2008) and
Alemu Tsegaye (2015). According to the survey result, as beekeepers acquire experience
they keep a better colony number and gain enhanced honey production than the less
experienced ones (Table 4. 6).

Table 4. 6. Beekeeping experience of respondents

Experience Mean colony Mean honey

Frequency Percent holding production

1-5 years 32 23.70 3.79 7.9

5-10 years 34 25.19 6.03 10.9

10-15 years 26 19.26 4.5 9.5

more than 15 years 43 31.85 4.96 11.4

41
 4.2.2. Source of bee colony in the study areas

Different sources of starter bee colonies of the respondents presented in (Figure 4. 2). The
majority (45.19%) of the respondents in the study areas get their starter bee colony from
swarm catching. Swarm catching includes the natural swarm of their colonies, hanging
baits to catch others’ swarm and searching for natural bee nest in forests. From the
discussion made with farmers, the main reasons the beekeepers practice swarm catching is
that it is cost free, convenient to keep in traditional beehives and lack of knowhow of
artificial means of queen rearing techniques. The above result is in line with the result of
Alemu Tsegaye (2015) and Haftu Kebede and Gezu Tadesse (2014) who reported that
50.3% and 60.3% of the respondents at South Wollo and Wag Himra zone and Hadya
zone respectively started beekeeping by catching swarms. On the other hand, 17% of the
respondents buy colonies and 17% of the respondents get colonies from parents as a gift or
inheritance (Figure 4. 2). According to the discussion made with beekeepers, newly
engaged beekeepers that get their starter colony from their parents have more experience
than those started from training or by their motivation. Where people are actively engaged
in helping older beekeepers from an early age, they accumulate experience from fellow
beekeepers and gradually become independent beekeepers (Adebabay Kebede et al.,
2008).

According to this study, 94.1% of the respondents agree that colony selling is practiced in
the study areas with an average current price of 936.22 ETB. The price of an established
traditional colony differs from kebele to kebele or farmer to farmer ranging from 300 to
1500ETB (Figure 4. 3). According to the discussion, beekeepers agree on the increasing
trend of bee colony price from time to time due to the increasing demand of bee colony
and the decreasing trend of bee colony in the study areas (Table 4. 10). To increase their
bee colony majority (75.56%) of the respondent beekeepers acquire through catching
swarm bees and the rest through buying, splitting, overcrowding and/or the comb ination of
them (Figure 4. 4).

42
Figure 4. 2. Source of starter bee colony in the study areas

Figure 4. 3. Selling price of bee colony in the study areas

43
 Catching swarm Catching swarm
and overcrowding bees, Buying and
2% Spliting
Catching swarm
1%
and spliting
2%

Catching swarm
bees and Buying
12%

Overcrowding
1% Catching swarm
bees
Spliting 76%
1%

Buying
5%

Figure 4. 4. Methods of increasing bee colony in the study areas

4.2.3. Reasons of engagement in beekeeping

According to the survey result, 39.89% of the respondents need primarily to keep bees
because they get money from the sale of honey, bee colony. Furthermore, 38.80% of the
respondent beekeepers in the study areas are dictated to keep bees based on local
knowledge with product orientation largely for home consumption as food, drink and
medicine respectively. More specifically, 52.99% and 30.60% of the respondents prefer
primarily to keep bees for income generation and home consumption respectively. While,
69.77% and 18.6% of the respondents put home consumption and hobby as secondary
preference respectively (Table 4. 7). This result is in line with Alemu Tsegaye (2015)
about 94.8% of respondents beekeepers need to produce attractive comb honey for both
sale and home consumption. However, Guesh Godifey (2015) reported beekeepers in
Tigray region keep their bee colonies for both producing honey and selling honeybee
colony (59.4%), honey only (34.9%) and selling honeybee colony only (5.7 %) because
honeybee colony marketing in Tigray region is carried out at central market places and
individual producer’s apiary. Apart from these reasons, some extension-supported
beekeepers and youths were involved into beekeeping through the interest and support
from GOs and NGOs as means of job creation and income generation (Table 4. 7. ).

44
Table 4. 7. Rank index for reasons for engagement in beekeeping

Priority Frequency (%) Index Overall

Reason value Rank
1st 2nd 3rd Total

Home Consumption 41(30.60) 30(69.77) - 71(38.80) 0.37 2

Income 71(52.99) 2(4.65) - 73(39.89) 0.44 1
Hobby 14(10.45) 8(18.60) 6(100) 28(15.30) 0.13 3
Other (Training) 8(5.97) 3(6.98) - 11(6.01) 0.06 4
Total 134 43 6 283 1

Index = sum of (3*ranked 1 st + 2* ranked 2nd +1* ranked 3rd ) for individual reason
divided by the sum of (3*ranked 1st + 2* ranked 2nd +1* ranked 3rd ) for over all reasons.

4.2.4. Honeybee colony holdings

The average honeybee colony holding of the sample respondents were 4.1, 0.21 and 0.81
for traditional, top bar and moveable frame hives respectively (Table 4. 8). Even though
the product volume and quality of product is low (Miklyaev et al., 2014; Tessega Belie,
2009), beekeepers preferred traditional hives for its low input price and low wage rate
(Miklyaev et al., 2014), availability (Adebabay Kebede et al., 2008), convenience to
construct, quantity of wax produced and less dependency on external inputs and
convenient to be used as a bait hive (Tessega Belie, 2009). Almost 80% of the hives in the
study areas were traditional (Table 4. 8) and the figure is higher (88.83%) in Tehulederie
than Kalu (81.85%) and Dessie Zuria (72.18%) districs (Table 4. 8). The ratio of
traditional beehive in the study areas seems low probably due to the selected beekeeper
respondents are engaged with better number of frame hives. In the study areas, three
beekeeping production systems were identified: traditional, transitional and modern
honeybee production systems. Accordingly, 79.94%, 4.04% and 16.02% of the honeybee
colonies of the area were kept in traditional, transitional and frame hives respectively
(Table 4. 8). Alemu Tsegaye (2015) also reported the same result of 74.02% of honeybees
were kept in traditional hives. Adebabay Kebede et al. (2008) report was higher (99.7%)
for Amhara region. However, the regional higher figure might be due to the production
system is dynamic that there were changes through time.

45
Table 4. 8. Honeybee colony holdings and share of colony holding

Tehulederie Kalu Dessie Zuria Overall

Parameters
Total Mean±SD Total Mean±SD Total Mean±SD Total Mean±SD

Traditional 159 3.53±1.92 203 4.51±5.51 192 4.27±6.79 554 4.10±2.60NS

Number of Transitional 2 0.04±1.95 5 0.11±2.83 21 0.47±2.86 28 0.21±1.82NS

Beehives Frame 18 0.40±0.21 40 0.89±0.38 53 1.18±3.13 111 0.81±4.13NS
Total 179 3.98±1.92 248 5.51±5.51 266 5.91±6.79 693 5.13±5.20NS
Tehulederie Kalu Dessie Zuria Over all
Parameters
Total % Total % Total % Total %
Share of colony Traditional 159 88.83 203 81.85 192 72.18 554 79.94
holding Transitional 2 1.12 5 2.02 21 7.89 28 4.04
Frame 18 10.06 40 16.13 53 19.92 111 16.02
Total hives 179 100 248 100 266 100 693 100

NB- SD denotes Standard Deviation

46
 4.2.5. Beehive placement

In the study areas, 80.38% of total colony and 73.88% of traditional colonies are placed at
backyards indicating that backyard beekeeping is a common practice of honey production
in the study areas. The traditional colonies backyard placement figure is higher in
Tehulederie 86.03% than Kalu (69.76%) and Dessie Zuria (69.55%) (Table 4. 9). Where
trees are abundant, few beekeepers (0.14%) hang traditional hives on tree branches for
catching swarms (Appendix Picture 7). The result of the study agree with the findings of
Adebabay Kebede et al. (2008), Alemu Tsegaye (2015), Kerealem Ejigu (2005), Nebiyu
Yemane and Messele Taye (2013) and Haftu Kebede and Gezu Tadesse (2014) who
reported that the beekeepers at each of their respective study districts kept majority of their
colonies around the backyards of their homestead. Backyards are easier for frequent
inspection and other hive managements (including swarm prevention, pest and predator
control and honey production quality and quantity) compared with free apiaries (Kerealem
Ejigu et al., 2009). No beekeepers put their hives inside their house and hang on trees in
forests (Table 4. 9).
Table 4. 9. Placement of beehives in the study areas

Districts
Placement of hives Tehulederie Kalu Dessie Zuria Total
Hive Type Freq % Freq % Freq % Freq %
Traditional 154 86.03 173 69.76 185 69.55 512 73.88
Backyard Transitional 2 1.12 2 0.81 0 0.00 4 0.58
Frame 18 10.06 16 6.45 7 2.63 41 5.92
Traditional 0 0.00 22 8.87 4 1.50 26 3.75
Apiary site Transitional 0 0.00 3 1.21 21 7.89 24 3.46
Frame 0 0.00 23 9.27 45 16.92 68 9.81
Traditional 5 2.79 7 2.82 3 1.13 15 2.16
Under the eaves
Of the house Transitional 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00
Frame 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.38 1 0.14
Traditional 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00
Inside the house Transitional 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00
Frame 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00
Traditional 0 0.00 1 0.40 0 0.00 1 0.14
Hanging on trees
near homestead Transitional 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00
Frame 0 0.00 1 0.40 0 0.00 1 0.14
Traditional 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00
Hanging on
trees in forests Transitional 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00
Frame 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00
Total 179 248 266 693

47
 4.2.6. Colony decline

Despite the potential of the study areas for beekeeping, in recent years, there has been a
decreasing trend of honeybee colony populations. According to this study, 96.3% of the
respondents agreed on the decreasing trend of bee colonies due to different threatening
factors on bees and their products. To this fact, 60.74%, 46.67%, 45.93%, 27.41% and
22.22% of the respondents agree that the main reasons for the colony decline are chemical
application, lack of management, predators, pests and drought respectively (Table 4. 10).
No respondents identified disease as a threatening factor for colony decline in the study
areas (Table 4. 10) and this might be due to they didn’t observed or no disease occurred so
far. These agree with the results of Alemu Tsegaye (2015), Adebabay Kebede et al.
(2008), Kerealem Ejigu (2005), Tessega Bellie (2009) and Tewodros Alemu (2010) who
reported the decreasing trend of honeybee populations and their products in Wag Himra
and South Wollo zones, Amhara Region, Enebse, Bure and Sekota districts respectively
due to multiple reasons.

Unwise application of agro-chemicals is a very significant threatening factor for the

decline of many bee colonies particularly in the study areas (Alemu Tsegaye, 2015) and in
the region/country at large (Desalegn Begna, 2015). According to the discussion made
with beekeepers, extension agents and district experts, agro-chemical regularly applied by
the time of July to November to control and/or treat animal and crop pest and diseases.
The result of Desalegn Begna (2015) also showed that more than 80% of pesticides
applied in March, June, July, September and October. According to this study, the
intensity of chemical application is higher in Kalu following the prevailing irrigable area.
The application time is set by Knapsack owners or renters (Desalegn Begna, 2015).
Nevertheless, respondents have also complained that they were facing a threat from wider
agro-chemical application by non-beekeepers. However, 82.4% of the respondent
beekeepers in South Wollo and Wag Himra zone (Alemu Tsegaye, 2015) and 54% of the
respondent beekeepers in Mecha, Dangla and Guangua districts (Desalegn Begna, 2015)
were using agro-chemicals in their localities.

48
Table 4. 10. Reasons of colony decline

Is there absconding Frequency %

Yes 130 96.30
No 5 3.70
Reason Frequency %
Absconding 22 16.30 (6)
Swarming 19 14.07 (7)
Diseases 0 0.00
Pests 39 28.89 (4)
Predators 62 45.93 (3)
Chemical Application 85 62.96 (1)
Drought 31 22.96 (5)
Lack of Bee forages 14 10.37 (9)
Lack of Water 9 6.67 (10)
Lack of management 63 47.41 (2)
Unknown reason 17 13.33 (8)
Others (theft, mich, tila) 4 2.96 (11)

NB: ( ) order of importance

4.2.7. Absconding and swarming

Honeybee colonies abandon their hive at any season of the year for different reasons
(Bradbear, 2009). Absconding is a common phenomenon, especially in case of ill
management as a response to disturbance (Saha, 2005). The study revealed that
absconding is very serious and 98.52% of the respondents in the study areas agreed the
existence of absconding in their site/ locality due to many reasons. The major reasons
being pest attacks, unknown reasons, drought, management problem, chemical
application, feed shortage and traditional belief taking the share of 28.99%, 20.03%,
17.92%, 14.98%, 4.23%, 3.91% and 3.91% respectively (Table 4. 11). Pest attack, mainly
wax moth, is prominently serious problem so that the study areas can be identified as a
hotspot area for wax moth infestation that was observed from the absconded colonies.
Appendix Picture 9 supports the summarized result. The report by Assemu Tesfa et al.
(2013) indicated the causes of absconding to be incidence of pests and predators, poor

49
management, and excessive weather conditions (sun, wind and rain). The report by
Adebabay et al. (2008) supports this finding as the main causes for colony absconding
were incidence of pest, poor management, bad weather and others. The respondent
beekeepers also indicated that absconding was more prevalent at dearth period especially
from April to June, which lined with the result of Alemu Tsegaye (2015) reported as
prevalent at March to June with a peak time at June. During prolonged dearth periods,
most weak hives that could not be kept strong enough throughout the year abscond in
relation to the scarcity of bee forage.

The mean number of bee colony absconded in the sample respondents was 2.23 per
household with a minimum of 1 colony and maximum of 26 bee colonies within the last
three years (Table 4. 11). This figure agrees with the result of Tessega Belie (2009), 2.6
bee colonies absconded per household. From the total of absconded colonies, 81.2% were
from traditional hives due to the reasons of inconveniency for management, easily
attacked by pests, large volume and unknown reasons (Table 4. 11). Frame hives (9.02%)
were also absconded because they were blamed to be infected by pests like wax moth, get
cold and cannot be sealed if cracked. However, this may not guarantee that because the
proportion of traditional hives was 80% (Table 4. 8). Beekeepers in the study area tried to
control absconding through frequent inspection (21.80%), feeding and watering (17.59%),
pest control (11.09%), cleaning sites (10.90%) and other options focusing on minimizing
the risk and increasing the strength of colonies. However, more number of beekeepers
(19.50%) used no control option for their bees to save them from absconding ( Table 4.
11).

There is a traditional belief of “chereka bikult”, calculation of working date related to the
onset of moon, which most of the beekeepers don’t know how they can count or calculate
but knowledgeable people can be consulted if beekeepers need to get in to their hives for
honey harvest or any management. Therefore, according to the discussion made with
beekeepers, timing of beehive inspection is a vital issue to minimize the risk of “chereka
bikult”. Beekeepers believe that if they open their hive without calculation of “chereka
bikult”, Ants and wax moth attack the colony and cause bees abscond. The issue might be
new question that needs a research.

50
Table 4. 11. Absconding of honeybees in the study areas

Parameter Response Freq %

Yes 133 98.52
Is there absconding
No 2 1.48
Number of absconding Min max average
(within the last 3years) 1 26 2.23
Hive types Freq %
Traditional 108 81.20
Type of hives absconded Transitional 0 0.00
Frame 12 9.02
All types 13 9.77
Reason of Absconding Response % Rank
Absence of forage 16 2.61 8
Chemical Application 26 4.23 5
Drought 110 17.92 3
Feed Shortage 24 3.91 6
Management Problem 92 14.98 4
Pest attacks (wax moth, ants) 178 28.99 1
Predators 9 1.47 10
Traditional belief of “chereka bikult” 24 3.91 7
Unknown reason 123 20.03 2
Water Shortage 12 1.95 9
Total 614 100.00
Control measure of absconding Response % Rank
Frequent inspection 114 21.80 1
No control 102 19.50 2
Feeding and watering 92 17.59 3
Pest control 58 11.09 4
Cleaning site 57 10.90 5
Cut old combs 24 4.59 6
Ash dusting 21 4.02 7
Intensive management 18 3.44 8
Timing of inspection (traditional belief) 16 3.06 9
Smoking 10 1.91 10
leave honey on harvest 6 1.15 11
Plastering hive with cow dung 5 0.96 12
Total 523 100

51
Swarming is the natural way honeybee colonies reproduce. That means some workers
move from the colony with virgin or mated queens to a new place and cooperate to build
their nest. Swarming behavior gives an extension to the life of honeybee colonies where
the mother colony can live for a long time and multi-swarms can result from it (Abou-
Shaara and Hossam F., 2015). About 93.3% of the respondents approved the existence of
swarming in the study areas (Table 4. 12). Although there exist small portion of swarming
in frame hives (5.56%), most frequent swarming observed in traditional hives (91.27%)
due to overcrowding effect of its small volume and the temperature maintenance quality of
the hives constructed locally (Table 4. 12). In contrast to absconding, swarming is more
prominent from Pagumie to October and this is in lined with the result of Gallmann and
Thomas stated as absconding was frequent in September and during winter until April in
the Supé and Bonga regions respectively (Gallmann and Thomas, 2012).

Construction of a new nest with wax requires a sufficient amount of food and larger
number of bees (Abou-Shaara and Hossam F., 2015). According to the discussion made
with beekeepers, expecting the above scenario cannot easily done by a small group of
bees, beekeepers kill the successive swarms after catching the first one to three strong
swarms. According to the result of the survey, most of the beekeepers agree on the
frequency of swarming to be every year (70%) and once in two years (15.38%) if
conditions are favorable (Table 4. 12).

52
Table 4. 12. Reproductive swarming of honeybees

Response Frequency Percent Cumulative %

Parameter

No 9 6.7 6.7
Is there swarming
Yes 126 93.3 100.0

Traditional 115 91.27 91.27

From which type of hive Frame 7 5.56 96.83

All 4 3.17 100.00

Every three years 4 3.08 3.08

Every year 91 70.00 73.08

Four or five years 1 0.77 73.85

Not known 9 6.92 80.77

Frequency of swarming
Once in two years 20 15.38 96.15
Three to five years 1 0.77 96.92

Two to four years 2 1.54 98.46

Two to three years 2 1.54 100.00

Swarm control is important to minimize the risk of escape of honeybee and enter to
someone else’s bait hive. Beekeepers in the study areas use different kinds of swarm
control techniques so that the honeybees cannot escape out of their control and/or produce
only honey. The incidence of swarming was controlled by removal of queen cells before
they hatch and swarm (25.85%), reuniting swarm back to mother colony by killing the
queen (20.31%), harvest honey comb ( 19.38%) and smoking the hive with ‘white Adrus’
(12.31%) (Table 4. 13). Tessega Belie (2009) also reported ways of swarm control at
Burie district to be removal of queen cell (46.2%), killing queen of swarm and reuniting
colony to its mother (28.2%), suppering (2.6%) and use large volume of hive (1.7%).
There are traditional thinking that bees get sterile and become honey producers when
smoked with different kinds of ingredients like white ‘Adrus’, camel dung, mule bone,
bamboo root, ‘kosso’ tree flower. Very few beekeepers tried ‘Adrus’ but most of the
beekeepers did not try but they believe about it.

53
Table 4. 13. Method of swarm control

Parameter Response Frequency Percent Rank

Removal of queen cells 84 25.85 1

Harvest honey comb 63 19.38 3

Return back to mother colony 66 20.31 2

Supering 20 6.15 6

Use large volume hive 27 8.31 5

Smoking the hive with ‘white Adrus’ 40 12.31 4

Method of swarm Cut brood combs 4 1.23 9

control Cut old combs 4 1.23 9

Regular inspection 6 1.85 7

Attach queen excluder at entrance 2 0.62 11

Smoking with camel dung 2 0.62 11

Smoking with mule bone 5 1.54 8

Smoking with bamboo root 1 0.31 13

Smoking with ‘kosso’ flower 1 0.31 13

4.2.8. Honeybee pests and predators

Generally, the honeybee’s life and their product are endangered and more specifically the
honeybee production system of the study areas reported to face with multitude challenges
and among which pests and predators are major threats, which leads the colonies to
abscond or die (Table 4. 11). Many research findings also confirmed pests and predators
as a major threatening factors for honeybees and beekeeping business (Adebabay Kebede
et al., 2008; Assemu Tesfa et al., 2013; Alemu Tsegaye, 2015; Guesh Godifey, 2015;
Haftu K. et al., 2015; Teklu Gebretsadik, 2016).

The results from the survey study have identified birds, ants, wax moth (Galleria
mellonella), lizards, honey badger (Mellivora capensis), spider, wasps, beetles, bee lice
(Braula coecal.) and termite are the major honeybee pests and predators in order of their
decreasing importance (Table 4. 14). The cross sectional study results of Alemu Tsegaye

54
(2015) from South Wollo zone and Wag Himra zone have indicated that the major pests
and predators were ants, wax moths, bee eating birds, varroa mites, wasps, lizards, spiders,
bee lice, death head hawks moth and hamagot in order of importance. Ants, birds, spiders,
mites, wax moth, beetle, bee mice, honey badger, cat worm and lizards were identified as
major bee pests and predators at Asgede Tsimbla district of Tigray region (Gidey Yirga,
2012). Ants, wax moth, bee-eater birds, spider, bee lice, honey badger, termite, small hive
beetles and snake were the most harmful pests in order of importance in Amhara region
(Adebabay Kebede et al., 2008). Guesh Godifey (2015) identified Ants (24.8%), wax
moth (24.7%), bee-eater birds (15.9%), honey badger (13.7%), spiders (12%), parasitic
mites (9.9%), lizards (9%) and dead hawks moth (5.4%) as most harmful pests from
selected zones of Tigray region. Teklu Gebretsadik (2016) also identified ant (80%),
honey badger/Hamagot (74%), Beetles (57%), birds (51%), wax moth (50%), spider
(45%), mites (43%), lizard (35%), bee lice (30) and Toads (23%) in Sidama and Gedeo
zones of Southern Ethiopia. From all the above research findings birds, ants, wax moth
were top three threatening honeybee pests and predators that need prompt action to control
or manage their consequence.

Table 4. 14. Honeybee pests and predators

Relative degree of importance

Honeybee Pest and Predators Score Index Rank
1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th
Birds 40 54 22 7 - - - 742 0.260 1
Ants 53 19 31 11 2 - - 690 0.242 2
Wax moth 13 20 24 14 4 5 - 409 0.144 3
Lizard 13 21 15 17 5 2 1 380 0.133 4
Honey badger 7 6 12 20 4 3 - 243 0.085 5
Spiders - 6 13 5 8 2 3 152 0.053 6
Wasps 3 5 7 - 5 1 2 105 0.037 7
Beetles - 1 4 9 6 1 - 82 0.029 8
Bee lice - 2 3 - 3 - 1 37 0.013 9
Termite - 1 - 1 - - - 10 0.004 10
Total 2850

Index = sum of (7*ranked 1st + 6* ranked 2nd +5* ranked 3rd +4* ranked 4th +3* ranked 5th
+2* ranked 6th +1* ranked 7th ) for individual reasons divided by the sum of (7*ranked 1 st +
6* ranked 2nd +5* ranked 3rd +4* ranked 4th +3* ranked 5th +2* ranked 6th +1* ranked 7th )
for over all reasons.

55
 4.2.9. Extension and training

Beekeeping extension service in Ethiopia was started by the Ministry of Agriculture in

1978 to improve traditional methods of beekeeping through the adoption o f better methods
and techniques (PCI, 2013a). Extension and training packages are crucial for the
government sector wide technology and innovation interventions, d isseminating
government policy and regulations. Based on the result of this study, only 17.78% of the
beekeepers received beekeeping extension service from the district development agents
and they are aware of improved beekeeping technologies. However, the rest, of the
respondents (82.22%) did not receive any beekeeping extension service (Table 4. 15). This
result different from the result of Yetimwork G/Meskel (2015) which stated 75% of the
beekeepers received beekeeping extension service but in line with the result of Adebabay
Kebede et al. (2013) who reported that only 33.2% of the sample respondents had the
chance of getting extension service delivery.

The extension services delivered to the study beekeepers were provision of inputs (like
smoker, hives, beeswax, extractor, casting mold, beekeepers suit), field observation,
training and follow up, provision of starter colony and money. The above result s howed
that the beekeeping extension service delivered is still at infant stage or the service was
professionally biased to other field of studies. The government, through extension agents,
predominantly delivers the extension service. On the other hand, NGOs like LIVES
project have a vital role in provision of inputs and training via governments’ extension
agents. According to the discussion made with extension agents, the methods of
beekeeping extension support implemented through individual and group contact between
the beekeepers and the extension agent. The estimated number of households participated
in honey and wax development package out of all livestock extension packages during the
reference period of 2015/16 in the country was 13,329 (4.56%). Out o f which 4,359
(32.7%) are in Amhara region. Unlike the country and the region, no honey and wax
development packages practiced in South Wollo zone (CSA, 2016). This implies that
either the emphasis given to the sub-sector is low or if there exists a package delivered,
there was no data collected.

Beekeeping training develops the beekeepers’ self-confidence in the technology and

increases the productivity of the beekeepers. In the study areas, GOs and NGOs organize

56
beekeeping trainings offered on general beekeeping, bee management, hive product
handling, transitional hive construction and colony multiplication. Out of 135 sample
beekeeper respondents, only 38.82% have taken beekeeping training from the BoA and
NGOs (LIVES, Concern etc) while 61.48% of the respondents have no access to training
(Table 4. 15). This result agreed with the result of Workneh Abebe (2007) who reported
that only 30% of the sample respondents had got training. The trained beekeepers
explained that the training has helped them to improve the management of bee colonies
and maintain the quality of their products. Besides, newly engaged farmers are encouraged
to buy frame beehive after training because of the increased understanding about the
importance of framed hive. Beekeepers of the study areas get trainings from Jari queen
rearing center, Kombolcha, Dessie, Harbu and FTCs of the respective kebeles. Besides the
kebele FTCs, Jari Queen rearing centers’ involvement on beekeeping training was of great
importance to support apiculture development in the study districts (Kahsay Berhe, 2013).
The distribution of training was not fair that some of the beekeepers take up to four
training and experience sharing in different time and places while others take once or not
at all. Bureau of Agriculture (50.7%), LIVES Project (38.03%) and other NGOs
predominantly organize beekeeping trainings to the beekeepers of the study areas (Table 4.
15).

Table 4. 15. Extension and training in the study areas

Parameters Variable frequency Response %

Did you get beekeeping extension Yes 24 17.78

service No 111 82.22
Yes 52 38.52
Do you take beekeeping training
No 83 61.48
Organizer frequency Response %
BoA 36 50.70 (1)
LIVES 27 38.03 (2)
Training Organizers
Concern 1 1.41 (4)
Livestock Agency 1 1.41 (4)
Other NGOs 6 8.45 (3)
NB: ( ) order of importance

57
 4.3. Honey Production and Management

4.3.1. Honey production and consumption

The honey production in the country is increasing though it is in a state of traditional low
productive systems (Gemechis Legesse, 2015). However, in the study areas, as per the
interviewed respondents, the honeybee colony number (Table 4. 10), honey production
and productivity per hive are in a decreasing state due to many reasons. Alemu Tsegaye
(2015) also reported 84.9% of the respondents have agreed on a decreasing trend in the
number of honeybee colonies and their products from time to time due to the availability
and occurrence of various threatening factors at South Wollo and Wag Himra zones.

The overall mean productivity of all types of colonies in the study areas is
7.14kg/hive/year. The average annual honey production of traditional, transitional and
frame hive was 5.99±18.2, 7.86±13.24 and 14.47±69.88 kg per hive respectively (Table 4.
16). This result is lower than the national report of 5-8 kg (crude honey/hive), 10-15 kg
(crude honey/hive, and 20-25 kg/hive respectively Nuru Adgaba (2007a). However, it is
lower than the result reported from Central zone of Tigray region, which was 22.6±13.2,
20.0±0.0, and 31.2±13.3 kg of honey for traditional, transitional and frame hives
respectively (Haftu K. et al., 2015).

Beekeepers failed to harvest ripe, pure and sufficient honey from the traditional hives. The
traditional hive’s honey production is lower than the result obtained from Kilte Awlealo
district of Tigray region (7.66±4.03 kg) Yetimwork G/Meskel (2015) and the national
average of 8.3 kg of crude honey per colony per harvest (CSA, 2016). As per the
discussion made with beekeepers, no / less pure honey harvested from frame hive by
honey extractor, rather beekeepers experience cut harvesting techniques like in the case of
traditional beehives.

The frequency of harvest per season or year depends on the availability of flowering
plants, length of flowering time and rainfall patterns in the study areas. September,
October, November and December (more dominantly October) were the main flowering
months of the year and regarded as the main honey flow and harvesting season whereas,
April, May and June (more dominantly June) were considered as the minor honey flow

58
season if there exist a rain in their preceding months (Figure 4. 6). Based on the results of
this study, within these major harvesting periods, 11.85%, 77.04% and 11.11% of the
respondents harvested once, twice and three times a year respectively (Figure 4. 5), which
indicated the presence of high potentiality of the area for beekeeping and honey
production. The honey harvesting frequency of Kilte Awlealo district was once (61.5%),
twice (36.5%) and three times (1.9%) a year (Yetimwork G/Meskel, 2015) and similarly
60.3%, 32.8% and 6.2% of the respondents from selected districts of Tigray region
harvested honey once, twice and three times respectively (Guesh Godifey, 2015). Assemu
Tesfa et al. (2013) reported October, November and December as main honey flow season
and May, April and June as secondary harvesting periods of Western Amhara. Moreover,
a study report of Abebe Jenberie et al. (2014) stated August to October is the major and
March to May is the minor honey flow periods of Sekota district. Conversely, Awraris
Getachew et al. (2015) reported April-June as major and November and December as
minor honey flow seasons at Bonga Agricultural Research Center, Kaffa zone, Southwest
Ethiopia.

In the study areas, about 91.94% of the respondents reported to sell their produce retaining
some of it for their home consumption (Table 4. 17). Awraris Getachew et al. (2012),
Shibru D. et al. (2016), Abrehet Gebrekristos (2015) and Tezera Aweke (2013) reported
equivalent figures of about 97%, 95.8%, 85% and 80%, respectively, of their respondents
sell their honey. All of the respondents in the study areas consume honey at home as food,
medicine, beverage and cultural and ritual ceremonies at a ratio of 31.25%, 56.25%,
6.25% and 5.83% respectively (Table 4. 17). Even though, the amount used at home
depends on the produce they get each year, 11.85% of the respondent beekeepers use all of
their honey produced at home with their family members while 8.15% of the respondents
do not know the amount they used for their home consumption (Table 4. 17). The average,
minimum and maximum honey consumption per household was 6kg, 1kg and 25kg
respectively. Majority (91.94%) of honey produced but beyond consumption was sold
with average price of 146.50±30.49 ETB ranging from 90 to 200 ETB (Table 4. 19).

59
Table 4. 16. Honey production of each hive types in the study areas

Tehulederie Kalu Dessie Zuria Overall

Parameters
Total Mean±SD Total Mean±SD Total Mean±SD Total Mean±SD
Traditional 822 9.25±12.54 1210 5.96±22.55 1284 6.69±16.74 3316 5.99±18.2
Honey Transitional 10 8.95±1.49 60 12±5.16 150 7.14±22.36 220 7.86±13.24
Production
from (kg) Frame 159.5 15.86±8.31 734 18.35±81.95 713 13.44±89.33 1606 14.47±69.88
Overall 991.5 8.08±8.07 2004 8.07 ±96.06 2147 5.54±88.84 5142 7.42±76.16

NB- SD denotes Standard Deviation

Honey Harvesting Frequency

11% 12%

Once
Twice
Three times

77%

Figure 4. 5. Honey harvesting frequency

60
Table 4. 17. Honey consumption in the study areas

Parameters Variable Frequency %

Did you consume honey Yes 135 100

All 16 11.85
Unknown 11 8.15
How much you consume Others 108 80
Mean±SD Min Max
5.98±5.54 1 40
As food 75 31.25
As medicine 135 56.25
Uses of Honey As beverage (‘Tej’ or ‘Birth’) 15 6.25
Ritual Ceremony 14 5.83
Gift to others 1 0.42
Sale 114 91.94
Store 1 0.81
Honey beyond consumption
Both sale and store 8 6.45
Give to family 1 0.81

100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
October, November, …
October to December, …

October to December, …
September and …
September to October …

October, December,…
Oct to December, April…

Aug to Sept, Oct to …

October to December
October
November

October, April, June

October and December

September, June
October and June
September to October

Oct to Dec, March, June

Sept to Oct, Jan, June

Sept to Oct, April, June

Tehulederie Dessie Zuria Kallu Overall

Figure 4. 6. Seasons of honey harvest

61
 4.3.2. Honey processing

Sample respondents of the study areas were asked “Do you strain honey from traditional
and transitional hive?” and most of them (91.85%) responded as they were producing and
selling only crude honey or comb honey without straining/extraction. Lacks of awareness
(66.67%), lack of straining materials (51.85%) and consumers’ preference to buy crude
honey (24.44%) were described as the main reasons for not straining honey in the study
areas (Table 4. 18). Nevertheless, some of the beekeepers 7.41% put the honey under the
sun and filter with a sieve mostly for home consumption. According to the discussion
made with beekeepers, the main rationale behind using or selling crude/comb honey were
the honey easily harvested and prepared for sale, the honey cannot be stored for long time
without losing its feature, local consumers and traders prefer to see the comb honey as
harvested and this type of honey fetches a premium price. Moreover, this is the only way
of communication that the consumer can be sure the honey is not adulterated in any way.

Out of the total beekeeping respondents of the study areas, only 28 (20.74%) of them have
a frame hive. Those beekeepers with frame hive were also asked whether they use
extractor or not and 25 (89.29%) of them replied ‘No’ for that reason, no extraction
method they exercise for frame hives (Table 4. 18). Accordingly, beekeepers cut and
use/sell the honey as crude or comb the same as that of traditional or transitional hive
honey harvesting. The discussion made with beekeepers revealed that, even though most
of the beekeepers agreed cutting combs of frame hives was a major problem, which leads
to decrease the productivity of the hive and worse the adoption of the frame hive.
Beekeepers are not willing to use extractor because no or less extractor was available in
the study areas and they were not easily accessed. In addition, beekeepers blame the poor
extension, training and follow up of extension agents (See Section 4.2.9 Extension and
training).

62
Table 4. 18. Honey extraction techniques

Parameters Variable Frequency %

Yes 8 5.93
Strain honey from
No 124 91.85
traditional hive?
Yes/No (home/sale) 3 2.22
Lack of awareness 90 66.67
Lack of materials 70 51.85
Reasons of not straining Consumers preference 33 24.44
Reduce honey 1 0.74
Small production 2 1.48
How do you process No processing 123 92.59
honey? Melting under the sun and sieving 10 7.41
Do you use honey extractor Yes 3 10.71
(for frame hive)? No 25 89.29
How do you harvest? Cut and use/sell as crude 31 96.88
Use sieve 1 3.12

4.3.3. Honey storage

According to the survey result from the study areas, 64.66% of the beekeepers sell their
honey immediately after harvest as per the preference of the consumers because the honey
cannot be stored for longer time as it is harvested crude. However, 9.02%, 19.55%, and
6.77% of the beekeepers store their honey 3-6 months, 9 months to 1 year and 1 to 2 years
respectively. The main storage containers were plastic containers (84.93%), stainless steel
(8.99%), paint containers (4.79%) and can (1.37%) (Table 4. 18).

4.3.4. Honey market

In the study period and areas, the average, minimum and maximum price of honey per
kilogram was 146.50, 90 and 200 ETB travelling about 7.89 km to sell their product in
nearest market place (Table 4. 19). Their most important buyers were direct consumers

63
(82.12%), traders (16.56%) and ‘Tej’ brewers (1.32%) in the nearby markets. The local
‘Tej’ brewers also buy directly from market during market days of the area and might be
considered as traders. Beekeepers that sell their honey from Dessie Zuria fetch relatively
better price (Table 4. 19). Similarly, in Adwa and Ahferom Districts of Tigray region,
majority (62%) of honey production sold to consumers directly (Abrehet Gebrekristos,
2015). This is resulted from the lack of formal market linkage between all other market
actors. Majority of honey is sold for individual consumers and ‘Tej’ brewery at lower price
in the local market of Lasta district, Amhara region (Tezera Awoke, 2013).

Majority (45.97%) of the honey harvested in the study areas was sold at home while the
remaining (54.03%) was travelled to the nearby markets of the district towns, namely,
Dessie, Harbu and Haik cities with a ratio of 41.79%, 29.85% and 28.36% respectively.
Mostly October was the main honey- marketing month, which accounts 70.16% of the
beekeepers response (Table 4. 19). There are few licensed honey traders in the study areas
stationed. Even though there are many honey traders that sell at Dessie collecting from
different places, only three legally registered honey traders were included in the target
group discussion. The honey market chain clearly indicated no defined links and proper
market channels established so far in the study area.

64
Table 4. 19. Honey market and storage in the study areas

Mean±SD Min Max

Overall 146.50±30.49 90 200

Price of Honey Tehulederie 132.03±32.16 90 200
(ETB) Kalu 151.16±29.23 90 200
Dessie Zuria 154.30±26.29 100 200
Distance traveled (Km) 7.89±11.47 0 42
Parameters Variable Frequency %
Consumers 124 82.12
Major buyers Traders 25 16.56
‘Tej’ brewers 2 1.32
Sell at home 57 45.97
Market places
Travel to market places 67 54.03
Haik 19 28.36
Dessie 28 41.79
Harbu 20 29.85
October 87 70.16
November 5 4.03
December 4 3.23
Season of honey market October to December 17 13.71
September to October 5 4.03
October to November 3 2.42
October to January 3 2.42
Sell immediately after harvest 86 64.66
3 to 6 months 12 9.02
How long you store honey
9 month to 1 year 26 19.55
1 to 2 years 9 6.77
Storage materials Plastic containers 124 84.93
Stainless steel 13 8.99
Painting containers 7 4.79
Can 2 1.37

65
 4.4. Beeswax Production, Quality and Marketing

4.4.1. Uses of beeswax in the study areas

Internationally beeswax has many uses, as an ingredient for a wide variety of consumer
and industrial products. In Ethiopia, the most important users of beeswax are candle
producers and "tuaf " producers. The Ethiopian Orthodox Church uses beeswax made
‘tuaf’ every day. On the other hand, in the study areas 41.56% of the respondents do not
know its importance (Table 4. 20). As to my observation, the reason not to know the
importance may be, most of the respondents were Muslim religion followers so that they
never used ‘tuaf’ at all. However, few of the respondents know that beeswax is used for
frame hive foundation sheet making, for candle or ‘tuaf’ making, smoking hives to catch
swarms, smoking died bodies to soften and put for some time, and casting gold and metal
objects in the ratio of 13.64%, 12.34%, 10.39%, 5.19% and 5.19% respectively (Table 4.
20).

Table 4. 20. Major uses of beeswax in the study areas

Freq %
Uses of Beeswax
I don't know 64 41.56
For foundation sheet 21 13.64
For candle or ‘Tuaf’ making 19 12.34
Smoke hive for baiting swarms 16 10.39
Smoking died bodies (soften) 8 5.19
For Casting gold 8 5.19
For baking injera ‘Masesha’ 6 3.90
To Smear top bars 6 3.90
For Cattle Medicine 6 3.90

4.4.2. Beeswax collection and production

Beekeepers in the study areas were asked whether they collect beeswax or not at home,
and most (88.89%) of them did not collect at all (Table 4. 21). As about 91.94% of the
respondents sell their produce (Table 4. 17), 64.66% of the beekeepers sell their honey

66
immediately after harvest (Table 4. 19) and 91.85% respondents produce and sell only
crude honey without straining/extraction (Table 4. 18), the tendency to produce or collect
beeswax becomes minimal in the study areas. There are also critical reasons not to
produce beeswax in the study areas. These were lack of awareness, knowledge gap about
the use and economic value, and lack of market that collect beeswax from producers in the
rate of 80%, 59.17% and 55.83% respectively. Beekeepers that collect beeswax at home
replied they collect from discarded, old and broken combs (93.33%), empty combs during
harvesting (46.67%), uncapping and spout beeswax (13.33%) and absconded colony
(6.67%) (Table 4. 21). However, according to the discussion made with the beekeepers,
the production of beeswax from these sources was minimal that they cannot use it or sell it
immediately, but attacked by wax moth and discarded after some time. This result is
similar to the result of Haftu Kebede and Gezu Tadesse (2014) stated as none of the
beekeepers at Hadya zone collect crude beeswax because of lack of knowledge or
awareness (39.2%), about the product, lack of beeswax market (21.5%), lack of processing
skill (20.8%) and materials (18.5%).

Generally, it is difficult to estimate beeswax production directly. Nevertheless, it can be

calculated from the assumption that the beeswax production in a traditional beehive is 8 to
10% (Johannes Agonafir, 2005) of the honey yield. In the study period, there were 554
traditional hives in the study areas and the average honey production per traditional hive
was 5.99 kg (Table 4. 8). Therefore, the annual beeswax production of the respondents in
the study areas can be estimated as-

= 5.99 * 0.08 * 554 to 5.99 * 0.1 * 554

= 265.48 to 331.85 kg

The current beeswax price in the area ranges from 250 to 300 ETB. Average cost of
beeswax produced can be calculated as (taking the minimum price):

67
Cost of beeswax = Average beeswax produced * Price

= 265.48 kg * 250 ETB to 331.85 kg * 250ETB

= 66370 to 82962.5 ETB

Therefore, 265.48 to 325.86 kg of beeswax was the estimated amount that would have
been produced or 66,370 to 82,962.5 ETB was the amount that would have been earned
from the respondent beekeepers in the study areas within the study period. Due to the
above study, though the traditional production system favor the collection and production
of beeswax, the main challenges faced beeswax production mainly on product quantity,
quality and skill.

68
Table 4. 21. Beeswax collection in the study areas

Collect beeswax at home Freq %

Yes 16 11.85
No 120 88.15
Total 135
If Yes, how do you collect Freq % Rank
From crude honey extraction 0 0.00 -
Discarded, old and broken combs 14 93.75 1
Empty combs during harvesting 7 43.75 2
Collection after honey utilization 0 0.00 -
Uncapping and spout beeswax 3 18.75 3
absconded colony 1 6.25 4
Total 25
If No, what is the reason Freq % Rank
Lack of awareness 96 80.67 1
Lack of processing skills 9 7.56 4
Lack of market 67 56.30 3
Lack of processing materials 7 5.88 5
Don’t know the use and economic value 71 59.66 2
Lack of Training 6 5.04 6
Trap enemy 3 2.52 9
Small production 5 4.20 7
Lack of interest 4 3.36 8
Danger for Frame hive 2 1.68 10
Total 270

4.4.3. Beeswax processing and storage

In the country, beeswax that could be harvested by beekeepers is wasted because

beekeepers do not bother to collect and render it into marketable blocks (Gemechis
Legesse, 2014). The same is true in the study areas that, the production was insignificant
to proceed to processing, handling and storage. From those few (24) beekeepers that

69
collect beeswax, 75% of them were processing by boiling water and wax together, sieving
through sack and settle in container or render by simple manual sack extraction method
(Table 4. 22). Water and other non-wax components fall out and the wax quality improved
when melted wax settled. The materials used during rendering of beeswax in the study
areas were sack, sieve, fire (heat source), cooking utensils, water, stick, and bucket. After
extraction, beekeepers put the molded beeswax because it can be stored for longer time
without attacked by wax moth. The processed beeswax was used for foundation sheet
making (37.5%) but much of the beekeepers that collect and process beeswax (31.25%)
discard it without utilizing. According to the discussion made with the beekeepers, most of
them discard processed or unprocessed beeswax due to wax moth attack when put at
home, lack of knowledge on its importance and lack of local market. Therefore, they were
forced to discard after putting it for some time. Only very few (6.25% for each) of the
respondents used beeswax for smoking hives to bait swarm, sell or give to jewelers and
used as a smear for frame hives (Table 4. 22).

From respondents having frame hives (28), 75% of them give no beeswax foundation
sheet for their frame hives but honeybees build by themselves. Moreover, 10.71% 7.14%,
3.57% and 3.57% of them obtain beeswax, for their frame hive foundation sheet making,
from their own hives and government, from own hive, from government, and from own
hive and neighbor respectively (Table 4. 22). According to the discussion made with
beekeepers, beekeepers do not want to use beeswax foundation sheets. The main reasons
were lack of awareness, lack of casting mold, lack of interest, and fear of absconding of
colonies due to adulterated beeswax foundation. Respondents who store beeswax for some
time use sacks, plastic materials, cloths and any materials that can preserve for longer time
devoid of wax moth attack.

70
Table 4. 22. Beeswax processing and storage in the study areas

Beeswax Extraction methods used Frequency Percent

Sack extraction 12 75.00
No processing 4 25.00
Total 16
What did you do with your processed beeswax
Discard due to wax moth attack 5 31.25
Give to jeweler friend 1 6.25
Do nothing 1 6.25
Sell to jeweler 1 6.25
Smoke hives to bait swarms 1 6.25
Used for frame hive (foundation sheet making) 6 37.50
Used for frame hive (frame smearing) 1 6.25
Total 16
Source of beeswax for frame hives
Government 1 3.57
Own 2 7.14
Own and government 3 10.71
Own and neighbors 1 3.57
Use no wax, bees build by their own 20 75.00
Total (having frame hive) 28
How long you store your wax
For a month 2 12.5
For a week before melting, unlimited after molding 1 6.25
For two weeks 1 6.25
Greater than a year 1 6.25
I don't know 4 25
For 1 year if processed 2 12.5
Stay longer (unlimited) if melted and molded 5 31.25
Total 16
Materials used to store beeswax
Any materials 2 12.50
Cloths 2 12.50
Cloths and Sacks 2 12.50
Plastic materials 3 18.75
Plastic materials and Cloths 2 12.50
Plastic materials and Sacks 1 6.25
Sacks 4 25.00
Total 16

71
 4.4.4. Beeswax adulteration

Beekeepers were asked whether there is any wax adulteration practice in the areas or not
and only 4 (2.96%) know with low extent while majority (97.04%) of the respondents do
not know the existence of beeswax adulteration at all (Table 4. 23). The main reasons of
adulteration were increasing the volume of beeswax sold and getting extra money. All of
those beekeepers, who know little about adulteration, agreed that merchants from other
cities are the main adulterators of beeswax. Nevertheless, the figure is very low to
conclude that merchants are the only adulterators of beeswax. Beeswax purchased from
merchants of other cities by bureau of agriculture and given to beekeepers for the
foundation sheet making was the main challenge in adulteration that bees refuse to build
foundation sheet and abscond. Majority of the respondents (50%) observed the adulterated
beeswax purchased by agricultural offices and 25% of the respondents do not know the
season of adulteration (Table 4. 23). This distribution system is fragmented chain that
renders traceability a significant challenge. From those who know about adulteration, 75%
of them agreed that adulterants and beeswax mixed by melting together. Beekeepers try to
differentiate adulterated and pure beeswax by its color (27.27%), casting (27.27%), odor
(18.18%), burning (18.18%) and bee visit (9.09%) (Table 4. 23). The main challenges of
beeswax quality are little is known about quality issue and its detection techniques by the
beekeepers and other actors in the study areas.

72
Table 4. 23. Beeswax adulteration practice in the study areas

Is there wax adulteration practice Freq %

Yes 4 2.96
No 131 97.04
Who are adulterators
Merchants from other cities 4 100
Season of adulteration
I don’t know 1 25
When Government buy 2 50
May/June 1 25
Adulterants used
Animal tallow 3 75
Candle, animal tallow 1 25
How adulterants are mixed
Melting and mixing 3 75
I don’t know 1 25
How do you differentiate
Color (other than yellow) 3 27.27
Odor (non pleasant) 2 18.18
Casting test (stick on mold) 3 27.27
Burning (smoky, can’t burn easily) 2 18.18
Bees don’t visit 1 9.09
Have you encountered proble m
Yes 2 50
No 2 50

4.4.5. Beeswax market chains

Only one beekeeper (6.25%) collects, process his beeswax and sell to local jewelers, and
another one (6.25%) give to jeweler as friendly. Therefore, jewelers are main market
destinations for the local wax collectors in the study areas (Table 4. 22). No supply of
crude beeswax to the market that the distribution system or chain was not clearly defined.
The major actors in this fragmented and undefined market and the major source of supply
for beeswax raw materials (‘Tej sefef’) were ‘Tej’ houses. According to the discussion
made with ‘Tej’ brewers, there are people who periodically collect the straw of the
byproduct of ‘Tej’, which is known to be ‘sefef’. The ‘Tej’ brewers sell the ‘sefef’ at 50-75
birr/kg.

73
There are no strong producer - buyer relationships in terms of working linkages and no
processors and exporters of beeswax exist in the study areas (SWZDoA, 2015
unpublished). No beeswax marketing information was gathered regarding where they sell,
who are buyers, who determine price, when they sell with the reason they choose this
season, the seasonal price fluctuation with its lowest and highest price season and reason
for seasonal fluctuation, price of crude and extracted beeswax, annual income from
beeswax. This is because almost all (93.75%) of the respondents do not sell beeswax at
local market (Table 4. 22), rather crude honey was sold immediately after harvest (Table
4. 19). Therefore, to this fact, there are no more actors involved in beeswax market other
than beekeepers and the local honey ‘‘Tej’’ and ‘birth’ brewers.

4.4.6. Challenges and opportunities in beeswax marketing

The study areas have untapped potential of traditional beekeeping, they are close to the
main market rout and beeswax is not used as ‘Tuaf’ which is an opportunity to be engaged
in beeswax marketing. The main challenges of beeswax marketing in the study areas
include absence of supply and demand or nonexistence of buyer and seller (36.30%), no
one is involved in buying of beeswax (25.19%), knowledge gap about importance
(17.78%), lack of market information (16.3%), no established beeswax marketing system
at all (8.89%) and others in order of their importance (Table 4. 24).

Table 4. 24. Main challenges of beeswax marketing in the study areas

Main challenges of beeswax marketing Frequency Percentage

No buyer and seller (Supply and demand) 49 36.30(1)
No buyer 34 25.19(2)
knowledge gap about importance 24 17.78(3)
Lack of market information 22 16.30(4)
No marketing system at all 12 8.89(5)
No beeswax sold at local market 9 6.67(6)
No trend of selling 5 3.70(7)
lack of training 4 2.96(8)
small supply 2 1.48(9)
No pure beeswax 1 0.74(10)
honey sold as crude 1 0.74(11)
Total 163

NB: ( ) order of importance

74
 4.5. Laboratory Analysis of Beeswax

Beeswax is a natural product and no additives are permitted. Examination of the sensory
characteristics (e.g. odour and colour) of beeswax allows a simple and quick quality check
but this does not guarantee that the wax has not been ad ulterated, although in some cases
they can give hints on possible adulteration. Thus, determination of physicochemical
characteristics at laboratory is significant in this regard. The results of the study for
beeswax physicochemical properties produced in South Wollo zone are indicated below.

4.5.1. Specific gravity at 200 C

The specific gravity of beeswax is the ratio of the mass of the sample specimen at specific
temperature to that of an equal volume of rectified spirit (alcohol) at the same temperature.
The change in specific gravity of beeswax indicates the contamination with other
materials. The specific gravity of sample collected from the study areas range from 0.9485
to 0.9624 with mean value of 0.9552 (Table 4. 25). The sample collected from old combs
(0.9514) and beeswax blocks of agricultural offices (0.9534) was significantly lower
(P<0.05) than honey extract (0.9565) and ‘‘Tej sefef’ (0.9566) (Table 4. 26) showing that
specific gravidity of beeswax influenced by its origin. However, there were no significant
difference (P>0.05) between beeswax samples collected from the three districts of the
study areas (Table 4. 27). Bekele Tesfaye (2015) reported similar result (0.9598). Solomon
Getachew (2007) also reported lower result for specific gravity of 0.9497 for beeswax
from honey extract but similar result of 0.9619 for beeswax from ‘‘Tej sefef’ respectively.
The present result well met the national and international standards (Table 4. 28).

4.5.2. Melting point, 0 C

The melting point is an important physical property of a beeswax used to identify as an

indication of its purity. The melting point of solid is defined as the temperature at which
the solid exists in equilibrium with its liquid under an external pressure of one atmosphere
(Bonvehi and Bermejo, 2012). The melting point of average of triplicate from each sample
beeswax was measured as 61.560 C ranging from 58.3 to 68.50 C (Table 4. 25). The result
indicated no significant difference (P>0.05) in melting point among the samples collected
from the three districts of the study areas (Table 4. 27) and the four sources from which

75
the beeswax sample taken (Table 4. 26). Nuru Adgaba (2007b) and Bekele Tesfaye (2015)
reported acceptable mean beeswax melting point of 62.5 o C and 62.39o C values
respectively. Though the result showed no statistical difference among the sources,
samples collected from beeswax blocks of agricultural offices demonstrate lower results of
60.43o C ranging from 58.33o C to 64.5o C and samples collected from old combs show
lower results of 60.6o C ranging from 59.3o C to 62.0o C (Table 4. 26). These results did not
pass the national and international standards (61-65o C). Moreover, the overall mean
melting point of the examined samples (61.560 C) was within the acceptable range of
Ethiopian and European standards but fail to fall within the required limits of Kenya and
Tanzania (Table 4. 28). The melting points of beeswax gradually decline with increased
proportion of adulteration with cheaper materials like animal tallow (Nuru Adgaba, 2007).

4.5.3. Refractive index, at 750 C

The refractive index determination is a method to measure the ratio of the velocity of light
in air to that in the sample. Generally, when light proceeds from one medium into another,
the direction changed at the boundary surface. This phenomenon is refraction. The mean
refractive index of beeswax samples collected from the study areas was 1.4439 at 750 C
(Table 4. 25). Bekele Tesfaye (2015) reported similar figure of refractive index of 1.4426.
According to the result, there was no significant difference (P>0.05) between districts
(Table 4. 27). However, there was significantly (P<0.05) lower refractive index (1.4434)
of beeswax obtained from old combs than beeswax from ‘‘Tej sefef’ (1.4440) and honey
extract (1.4440) (Table 4. 26). Generally, the current study indicated that the result was
within the limits of Ethiopian and International quality standards, (Table 4. 28) showing it
was free of contamination.

4.5.4. Ash content, % by mass, max.

Ash is as inorganic substances remaining in the residue after ignitio n. The ash content is
calculated after burning and weighing (MHPRC, 2010). Ash content determination of
beeswax is important because it represents its mineral content (Nyau et al., 2013). The
maximum ash content allowed for refined beeswax by the Ethiopian standard was 0.2% by
mass (QSAE, 2005) and 0.6 for Kenyan standard (KBS, 2013) and Tanzanian standard
(TBS, 2010) (Table 4. 28) The mean value of current study result showed wa s by far

76
below the maximum limits, 0.0345% ranging from 0.006% to 0.1899% by mass (Table 4.
25). There was significant difference (P<0.05) in ash content between beeswax from
Tehulederie (0.5794) and Dessie Zuria (0.0173) (Table 4. 26). Moreover, there was
significant difference (P<0.05) in ash content between beeswax sample obtained from old
combs (0.0853), beeswax block (0.0110) and honey extract (0.0213). However, there was
no significant difference (P>0.05) between beeswax obtained from beeswax block
(0.0110) and honey extract (0.0213) (Table 4. 28). The higher ash content in old combs
may be due to the higher accumulation of minerals for the eggs laid for the successive
generation of honeybees. Similarly, Solomon Getachew (2007) reported ash content of
0.0367 and 0.0267 for honey extracted comb and ‘Tej sefef’ respectively.

4.5.5. Total volatile matter, % by mass, max.

In beeswax, volatile matters are those substances, other than moisture, that are given off as
gas and vapor during combustion in dry oven out of air contact. Results might be
influenced by differences in temperature and in time or rate of heating beyond permissible
tolerances (Rees et al., 1957). The total volatile matter of the collected beeswax samples
ranged from 0.2331 to 1.2450% with mean value of 0.5491% (Table 4. 25). The mean
result fulfills the national and international standard, 0.75% and Tanzanian standard, 1%
(Table 4. 28) (QSAE, 2005). Falling into the required national and international standard
limit suggests that the beeswax produced in South Wollo zone is of required quality.
Bekele Tesfaye (2015) reported comparable result (0.3335). The current result indicated
beeswax from ‘Tej sefef’ (0.8077) was significantly higher (P<0.05) from beeswax blocks
of agricultural offices (0.3101), old combs (0.5246) and honey extract (0.5491) (Table 4.
26). The result indicated no significant difference (P>0.05) in total volatile matter among
the samples collected from the three districts of the study areas (Table 4. 27).

4.5.6. Acid value, max, (mgKOH/g)

The acid value is the number of milligrams of potassium hydroxide (KOH) required to
neutralize the free acids in 1 g of sample. The current mean beeswax acid value result was
18.92 ranging from 14.38 - 23.42 (Table 4. 25). Beeswax from the study areas is natural
with no/less contaminants that the test results fall within the range of national and
international requirements, 17-24 mgKHO/g (Table 4. 28). Nuru Adgaba (2007b) and

77
Bekele Tesfaye (2015) reported acceptable mean acid value of 21.66 ± 2.26 ranging from
14.70 to 26.18 and 22.33±0.39 ranging from 19.17 – 23.84 of Ethiopian beeswax. The
result indicated no significant difference (P>0.05) in acid value among the samples
collected from the three districts of the study areas (Table 4. 27) and the sources of
beeswax samples (Table 4. 26).

4.5.7. Saponification cloud value, min, (mgKOH/g)

The saponification value is the number of milligrams of potassium hydroxide required to

hydrolyze 1 g of sample beeswax. Determining the saponification cloud point is an easy,
sensitive and best method for determining adulteration of beeswax. However, the method
is limited to detecting quantities greater than 1 % of high melting point (80-85 °C) paraffin
waxes, or more than 4-5 % of low melting (50-55°C) paraffins (Bonvehi and Bermejo,
2012). The mean saponification cloud value of the study areas was 91.19 ranging from
48.80 to 123.40 mgKOH/g (Table 4. 25). Similarly, Bekele Tesfaye (2015) reported an
acceptable saponification value of 98.04 (ranging from 93.50 to 104.25). The mean
saponification value of the study districts was within the national and international
standards (Table 4. 28). The result indicated no significant difference (P>0.05) in
saponification value among the samples collected from the three districts of the study
areas (Table 4. 27) and the sources of beeswax samples (Table 4. 26). Regardless of
statistical non-significance, the mean values of beeswax collected from office of
agriculture (74.65±22.49) and old combs (76.35±22.64) demonstrate that, these samples
did not fulfill the required minimum value 85-105. Lower saponification values than the
required limit give an idea about existence of adulteration (Nuru Adgaba, 2007b).
However, the result cannot confirm the amount and type of adulterants used so that it
requires further detailed analysis.

4.5.8. Ester value (mgKOH/g)

The ester value is the number of milligrams of potassium hydroxide (KOH) required to
saponify the esters in 1 g of sample and determined by difference of saponification value
from acid value. The mean result of ester value in mgKOH/g was 72.06 ranging from
33.74 - 100.65 (Table 4. 25). Bekele Tesfaye (2015) and Nuru Adgaba (2007b) reported
mean saponification value of 75.58 and 77.78 for three districts of Bale zone, and Holleta

78
Bee Research Center respectively. The current laboratory result indicated no significant
difference (P>0.05) in ester value among the samples collected from the three districts of
the study areas (Table 4. 27). However, numerically, the average ester value of beeswax
collected from Tehulederie district (67.69) was lower than the lower limit of national and
international requirements (70-80). The average ester value of beeswax collected from
honey extract (81.49) was significantly higher (P<0.05) than beeswax blocks of
agricultural offices (55.76) (Table 4. 26). Moreover, beeswax samples collected from
beeswax blocks of agricultural offices (55.76) and old combs (59.10) show lower value
than the required national and international limit (70-80) showing that beeswax from these
sources or district contains less amount of saponifiable matter. The ester value show
similar trend with saponification value because both of the values are dependent on the
number of milligrams of potassium hydroxide (KOH). Nevertheless, generally, the overall
mean ester value result of the current study meets the quality standard limits of national
and international (Table 4. 28).

4.5.9. Ester to acid value

The ratio of ester values to acids, a parameter determined in the pharmacopoeia gives
information whether pure natural beeswax is changed significantly by prolonged or
excessive heating leading to greater degradation and loss of esters (Tulloch, 1980). The
value is determined by dividing ester value to acid value. The mean value of ester to acid
was 3.72 ranging from 2.13 - 4.94 (Table 4. 25). The eater to acid ratio of beeswax samples
collected from honey extract (4.17) was significantly (P<0.05) higher than that of beeswax
samples collected from beeswax blocks of agricultural offices (2.85) (Table 4. 26). The
result indicated no significant difference (P>0.05) in ester to acid value among the samples
collected from the three districts of the study areas (Table 4. 27). The mean result falls
within the Kenyan standard limit, 3.0-4.3 (Table 4. 28).

4.5.10. Fats and fatty acids

All of the beeswax samples collected from the study districts, boiled with 10% NaOH,
show clear solution after acidification with 4N HCl and passed the test (Table 4. 25)
falling in the standard of national and international requirements (Table 4. 28).

79
 4.5.11. Paraffin and other waxes

When paraffin and other waxes are absent in beeswax sampled, the liquid does not become
cloudy at a temperature higher than 61 0 C. All of the beeswax samples collected from the
study areas passed the test that the liquid solution after it was boiled under reflux for one
hour and allowed to cool stirring constantly become cloudy at the mean temperature of
60.42±0.64 0 C and the mean difference between the temperature of cloud and precipitatio n
of large flocks was 1.811±0.049 0 C. The result was in line with the national and
international requirements (Table 4. 28).

80
Table 4. 25. Physical and chemical properties of beeswax produced in the study areas (N=26)

No. Sample (N = 26)

parameters Range Mean ±SD
1 Specific gravity 0.9485 – 0.9624 0.9552±0.0034
0
2 Melting point ( c) 58.3 - 64.5 61.5628±1.5008
3 Refractive Index 1.4430 - 1.4444 1.4439±0.0004
4 Ash content (% by mass) 0.006 - 0.1899 0.0345±0.0429
5 Total Volatile Matter (% by mass) 0.2331 - 1.2450 0.5491±0.2488
6 Acid Value 14.38 - 23.4238 18.92±2.7735
7 Saponification Value (0 c) 48.80 - 123.40 91.19±22.3015
8 Ester value 33.74 - 100.65 72.27±20.4608
9 Ester to Acid Ratio 2.1328 - 4.9360 3.80±0.9936
10 Fats and Fatty acid - Passed (clear Solution)
11 Paraffin and other waxes 59-610C Passed (60.42±0.64 0 C)

Notice:- N=Number of sample, SD= Standard Deviation, - = not available

81
Table 4. 26. Mean comparison of physicochemical properties of beeswax samples collected from four sources/origins

Source/Origin (Mean ±SD)

No. Characteristics Beeswax Block Honey Extract Old Comb ‘Tej Sefef’ Overall

(N=5) (N=12) (N=4) (N=5)

1 Specific gravity 0.9534±0.0043ab 0.9560±0.0023a 0.9514±0.0035b 0.9566±0.0015a 0.9552±0.0034
2 Melting point (0 c) 60.4333±2.6289 62.1569±0.7846 60.5833±1.3642 62.0500±0.4108 61.5628±1.5008NS
3 Refractive Index 1.4438±0.0005ab 1.4440±0.0002a 1.4434±0.0005b 1.4440±0.0004a 1.4439±0.0004
4 Ash content (% by mass) 0.0110±0.0046b 0.0213±0.0102b 0.0853±0. 0853a 0.0487±0.0413ab 0.0345±0.0429
5 Total Volatile Matter 0.3101±0.0635b 0.5491±0.2182b 0.5246±0.1651b 0.8077±0.2755a 0.5491±0.2488
6 Acid Value 18.8980±3.1521 19.7215±2.0976 18.0932±1.4968 19.5477±3.7450 18.9155±2.7735NS
7 Saponification Value (0 c) 74.6544±27.711 101.1657±4.1222 76.3537±31.4929 95.6534±25.7808 91.19±22.3015NS
8 Ester value 55.7564±24.7162b 81.4925±3.6239a 59.0971±28.6155ab 76.1057±22.8729ab 72.0619±20.2859
9 Ester to Acid Ratio 2.8542±0.8329b 4.1691±0.3844a 3.2875±1.1144ab 3.8598±0.8967ab 3.7211±0.8569

Notice:- Letters with different superscripts within a row are significantly different (P<0.05), N= Number of sample, SD= Standard Deviation

82
Table 4. 27. Mean comparison of physicochemical properties of beeswax samples collected from the study districts

Districts (Mean ±SE) Overall

No.
Characteristics Tehulederie Kalu Dessie Zuria (N=26)

(N=10) (N=7) (N=9)

1 Specific gravity 0.9548±0.0048 0.9551±0.0031 0.9557±0.0015 0.9552±0.0034NS
2 Melting point (0 c) 61.9350±1.6466 60.8905±1.6730 61.7622±1.1435 61.5628±1.5008NS
3 Refractive Index 1.4438±0.0005 1.4439±0.0004 1.4439±0.0003 1.4439±0.0004NS
4 Ash content 0.5794±0.0616a 0.0209±0.0153ab 0.0173±0.0062b 0.0345±0.0429
5 Total Volatile Matter 0.5792±0.1802 0.6361±0.3416 0.4479±0.2238 0.5491±0.2488NS
6 Acid Value 19.2516±2.6714 18.8792±2.8757 19.6210±2.3452 18.9155±2.7735NS
7 Saponification Value (0 c) 86.4938±25.1332 91.7174±26.4019 95.9998±16.3397 91.19±22.3015NS
8 Ester value 67.6877±22.2238 72.2063±24.5444 76.8097±15.1407 72.2746±20.4608NS
9 Ester to Acid Ratio 3.5152±0.7965 3.6321±0.9994 4.0192±0.8198 3.7995±0.9936NS

Notice: Letters with different superscripts within a row are significantly different (P<0.05), NS= no significant difference (P>0.05),
N=Number of sample observed

83
Table 4. 28. Comparison of mean results of beeswax quality in the study areas with National and International standards (N=26)

No Curre nt study Ethiopian Kenyan Standard Tanzanian Standard European

Characteristics/Specification result Standard (CD /05-1279:2013) (TBS/ AFDC Pharmacopeias
Mean ±SD (ET 1203/2005)* ** 17/4049)*** (ET 1203/2005) *
1 Specific gravity, at 20o C 0.9552±0.0034 0.9550-0.9800 0.9500 - 0.9600 0.9500 - 0.9800 0.950 - 0.965

2 Melting point, o C 61.56±1.5008 61 - 66 62 - 65 62 - 65 61 - 65

3 Refractive index, at 75o C 1.4439±0.0004 1.4400-1.4450 1.4398 -1.4455 1.4398 – 1.4455 1.440-1.4450

4 Ash, % by mass, max. 0.0345±0.0429 0.20 0.6 0.6 -

5 Tot. Volatile matter, % mass, max 0.5491±0.2488 0.75 - 1 -

6 Acid value, max 18.9155±2.7735 17-24 17-24 17-24 18-23

7 Saponification value, min. 91.19±22.3015 85-105 - 87-104 87-104

8 Ester value 72.27±20.4608 70-80 70-79 70-79 70-80

9 Ester to Acid ratio 3.7995±0.7965 - 3.0 - 4.3 - -

10 Fats and Fatty acids Passed To pass test To pass test To pass test -

11 Paraffin and other waxes Passed To pass test To pass test To pass test Absent

Notice:- N=Number of sample, SD= Standard Deviation, - = not available

Source:- * (QSAE, 2005) ** (KBS, 2013) *** (TBS, 2010)

84
 CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1. Conclusions

Even though it is still traditional, beekeeping in South Wollo zone is an ancient activity as
a sideline with other farming activities, performed by economically active age groups (20-
60 years), regardless of their sex and marital status but with higher illiteracy level. Less
number of women participates in the sector. Majority of the beekeepers had more than 15
years of beekeeping exercise and most of the beekeepers got their colony through catching
swarm. In the study areas, three beekeeping production systems have been identified.
These are traditional beekeeping practiced in back yard, transitional and frame beehive
beekeeping.

According to the results of this study, there is a decreasing trend of bee colony and the
main reasons were chemical application, lack of management, predators, pests and
drought. Absconding is also a major bottleneck for beekeeping in the study areas.
Beekeepers rarely inspect their colonies by considering the onset of moon to decide the
date of inspection and this practice is believed as ‘Chereka bikult’. This traditional belief
has significant negative effect on management of honeybees. Beekeepers fear to inspect
due to wax moth and ants attack if unknowingly inspected. Swarming is prevalent mostly
in traditional hives due to overcrowding effect of its small volume and the temperature
maintenance quality of the hives constructed locally. The results from the survey study
have identified birds, ants, wax moth (Galleria mellonella), lizards, honey badgers
(Mellivora capensis), spiders, wasps, beetles, bee lice (Braula coecal.) and Termites were
the major honeybee pests and predators. The beekeeping extension service delivered is
unsatisfactory that, majority of the respondents did not receive any beekeeping extension
service.

The country at large and specifically the study area experience traditional beekeeping
production system, which is a big opportunity if beeswax production is the ultimate output
besides honey production.

Based on the findings of this study, majority of the respondents did not collect beeswax at
all (those collect beeswax discard after some time) due to lack of awareness, knowledge
85
gap about the use and economic value, and lack of market that collect beeswax from
producers. Moreover, 91.85% respondents produce and sell only crude honey without
straining/extraction and most of the beekeepers sell their honey immediately after harvest
with no value addition including honey straining/extraction. Therefore, the beeswax to be
produced is still wasted.

According to the study results, majority of the beekeepers do not use beeswax foundation
sheet for their frame hive rather, honeybees build by themselves. This is due to the reasons
of lack of awareness, lack of casting mold, lack of interest, and fear of absconding.
Beekeepers and other actors in the study areas know very little about beeswax
adulteration, quality issue and its detection techniques.

The major challenges of beeswax marketing were absence of supply and demand or
nonexistence of buyer and seller, no one is involved in buying of beeswax, knowledge gap
about importance, lack of market information and no established beeswax marketing
system at all. There is no defined beeswax- marketing channel, information and tradeoff
and no defined market chain established so far. Based on this, it can be concluded that
beekeepers did not fully benefited from this sub-sector. In addition to the beekeepers, the
local honey brewery for making ‘‘Tej’’ and ‘birth’ are primary suppliers of beeswax. No
other actors are involved in beeswax production and trade.

The laboratory result showed that the mean values of compositional content of beeswax in
the study areas falls in the range of good quality compared to national and world standards
set for quality determination. However, beeswax samples collected from beeswax blocks
purchased by agricultural offices from city markets and delivered to beekeepers and
beeswax collected from old combs show lower values of melting point, saponification
value, ester value and ester to acid ratio.

86
 5.2. Recommendations

According to the present study results, the following points can be forwarded and
recommended

Great emphasis should be given to training and extension programs for the
community focusing on the practical aspects of general beekeeping, and more
specifically on honeybee management, pest and predator prevention and/or control,
beeswax collection, extraction, storage and utilization.
Timing of beehive inspection is a vital issue to minimize the risk of ants and wax
moth attack of the colony due to “chereka bikult”. The issue might be new question
that needs further research on its relationship.
Adoption, promotion and scaling up of beeswax processing technologies and
establishing honey and wax processing facilities plays a paramount importance in
improving production and productivity of beeswax.
Encourage agents and investors to be engaged in beeswax production and trade and
avail every honey and beeswax market information at institutional level. The
beeswax marketing system will be established by then.
Quality control and standardization is the main challenge that has to be solved
from production to utilization. Therefore, quality assurance and check up should be
done on purchasing of a big blocks of beeswax mainly by government and NGOs
to deliver to the beekeepers.
The mean values of the quality parameters of the current lab analysis methods tell
us only the existence of adulteration, to get a clear picture of adulterants exist in
the beeswax, research should focus on other techniques like detection of beeswax
adulteration using high temperature gas chromatography is recommended.
The current study of beeswax quality parameters only focuses on the variations
among different districts and source/origin. To obtain the complete picture of
beeswax quality, further value chain study should focus on other sources (local
collector, wholesalers, processor, and exporters) on a wider geographical scale.
Generally, an integrated effort of different stakeholders is required in improving
the quantity, quality and market of beeswax produced a nd awareness creation
should focus on the importance, market value and economic benefit of beeswax to
the country for the local beekeepers, extension agents and higher officials.

87
 REFERENCES

Abebe Jenberie, Alemu Tsegaye and Addisu Bihonegn. 2016. Identification and
characterization of honeybee flora in Wag-Lasta area, Amhara region. In Solomon
Abegaz and Likawent Yeheyis (Eds.), Amhara Regional Agricultural Research
Institute Livestock Research Directorate. Procceding of the 9th Annual Regional
Conference On Completed Livestock Research Activities. 227–250. Retrieved from
http://www.arari.gov.et/images/Proceedings of the 9th all.pdf

Abebe Jenberie, Amssalu Bezabeh and Kefelegn Kebede. 2014. Floral phenology and
pollen potential of honeybee plants in North- East dry land areas of Amhara region,
Ethiopia. IOSR Journal of Agriculture and Veterinary Science (IOSR-JAVS), 7(5),
36–49. Retrieved from http://iosrjournals.org/iosr-javs/papers/vol7- issue5/Version-
1/H07513649.pdf

Abebe Jenberie. 2008. Honeybee Floral Phenology, Pollen Potential, Honey Quality and
Management of Beekeeping in three Agro–ecologies of Sekota Woreda, Wag-Himra
Zone, Amhara Region, Ethiopia. MSc Thesis. Mekelle University, Faculty of Dry
land Agriculture and Natural Resources, Mekelle, Ethiopia. 121pp.

Abou-Shaara and Hossam F. 2015. The origin of honeybees’ life: A viewpoint. Journal of
Entomology and Zoology Studies, 3(1), 239–241. Retrieved from
http://www.entomoljournal.com/vol3Issue1/pdf/3-1-65.1.pdf

Abou-Shaara, H. F. 2015. Potential Honeybee Plants of Egypt. Cercetari Agronomice in

Moldova, 48(2), 99–108. http://doi.org/10.1515/cerce-2015-0034

Abrehet Gebrekristos. 2015. Honey and Beeswax Value Chains Analysis: The Case of
Adwa and Ahferom Districts, Central Tigray, Ethiopia. M.Sc. Thesis. Mekelle
University, Mekelle, Ethiopia. 88pp. Retrieved from
https://cgspace.cgiar.org/bitstream/handle/10568/77372/thesis_ abrehet_2015.pdf

Adebabay Kebede, Kerealem Ejigu, Tessema Aynalem and Abebe Jenberie. 2008.
Beekeeping in the Amhara Region. (Abebe Kirub, Ed.). Bahirdar, ethiopia: Ethiopian
Institute of Agricultural Research (EIAR). Retrieved from http://www.eiar.gov.et

Adjare, S. O. 1990. Beekeeping in Africa. FAO Agricultural Services Bulletin 68/6 Food
and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations. Rome, Italy. Retrieved from
http://www.fao.org/docrep/t0104e/t0104e00.htm

Akangaamkum, A. D., Agbenorhevi, M. and Okudzeto, C. 2010. The Honey Industry in

Ghana: An Overview of Synthesis Report, Final Version. Accra, Ghana. pp52.

88
Alemu Tsegaye. 2015. Potential Threats to Honeybee Health with Emphasis on Varroa
mite in South Wollo and Waghimra Zones of Amhara Region, Ethiopia. MSc Thesis.
Bahir Dar University, Bahir Dar, Ethiopia. 135pp.

Alive and Well. 2014. Royal Jelly, Honey, Bee Pollen & Propolis Information. Retrieved
July 1, 2015, from
http://www.yahwehsaliveandwell.com/pages/royaljelly_info.htm#4

Amssalu Bezabeh, Nuru Adgaba, Radloff, S. E., Hepburn, H. R. 2004. Multivariate

morphometric analysis of honeybees (Apis mellifera) in the Ethiopian region.
Apidologie, 35(1), 71–81. http://doi.org/10.1051/apido

Assemu Tesfa, Kerealem Ejigu and Adebabay Kebede. 2013. Assessment of Current
Beekeeping Management Practice and Honeybee Floras of Western Amhara,
Ethiopia. International Journal of Agriculture and Biosciences, 2(5), 196–201.
Retrieved from http://www.ijagbio.com/pdf- files/volume-2-no-5-2013/196-201.pdf

Atsbaha Gebre-selassie and Tessema Bekele. 2012. A Review of Ethiopian Agriculture:

Roles, Policy and Small-scale Farming Systems, 36–65. Retrieved from http://global-
growing.org/sites/default/files/GGC_Ethiopia.pdf

Awraris Getachew Shenkute, Yemisrach Getachew, Dejen Assefa and Nuru Adgaba.
2012. Honey production systems ( Apis mellifera L .) in Kaffa , Sheka and Bench-
Maji zones of Ethiopia. Journal of Agricultural Extension and Rural Development,
4(19), 528–541. http://doi.org/10.5897/JAERD12.088

Awraris Getachew, Amenay Assefa, Hailemariam Gizaw, Nuru Adgaba, Dejen Assefa and
Zerihun Tajebe. 2015. Comparative Analysis of Colony Performance and Profit from
Different Beehive Types in Southwest Ethiopia. Global Journal of Animal Scientific
Research, 3(1), 178–185. Retrieved from
https://www.academia.edu/12219910/Comparative_Analysis_of_Colony_Performanc
e_and_Profit_from_Different_Beehive_Types_in_Southwest_Ethiopia

Ayalew Kassaye. 2008. Honey and Beeswax Value Chain of BOAM Programme.
Establishment of Apiculture Data Base in Ethiopia. SNV Netherlands Development
Organization. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

Azene Bekele, T. 2007. Useful trees and shrubs of Ethiopia: Identification, Propagation
and Management for 17 Agroclimatic Zones. In B. Tengnas, Ensermu Kelbessa,
Sebsibe Demissew, and Patrick Maundu (Eds.), . East Africa Region, Nairobi, Kenya:
RELMA in ICRAF Project.

Bekele Tesfaye. 2015. Beekeeping Practices, Factors Affecting Production, Quality of

89
 Honey and Beeswax in Bale Zone, Oromia Region. MSc Thesis. Haramaya
University, School of Animal and Range Sciences, Haramaya, Ethiopia. 122pp.
Retrieved from
http://213.55.85.90/bitstream/handle/123456789/2471/Bekele's%20Thesis%20in%20PDF.pd
f?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

Belets Gebremichael and Berhanu Gebremedhin. 2015. Analysis of access to apiculture

supporting services by smallholder farmers in northern Ethiopia. Journal of
Development and Agricultural Economics, 7(1), 29–37.
http://doi.org/10.5897/JDAE2014.0565

Beyene Tadesse and Phillips, D. 2007. Ensuring Small Scale Producers in Ethiopia to
Achieve Sustainable and Fair Access to Honey Markets, (April).

Bezabih Emana. 2010. Market Assessment and Value Chain Analysis in Benishangul
Gumuz Regional State, Ethiopia. Final Report By SID-Consult-Support Integrated
Development.

BfD. 2008. Bee products in ethiopia. Ethiopian Bee Products Seminar at the International
Livestock Research Institute, Addis Ababa. Bees for Development, (82), 5.

Bogdanov, S. 2004a. Beeswax: quality issues today. Bee World, 85(4), 46–50. Retrieved
from www.ibra.org.uk

Bogdanov, S. 2004b. Quality and standards of pollen and beeswax. Apiacta, 38, 334–341.

Bogdanov, S. 2009a. Beeswax: Production, Properties Composition and Control. In The

Beeswax Book (pp. 1–17).

Bogdanov, S. 2009b. Beeswax: Uses and Trade. In The Beeswax Book (pp. 1–16).

Bogdanov, S. 2015a. Propolis: Composition, Health, Medicine: A Review. In Bee Product

Science (pp. 1–40). Muehlethurnen, Switzerland. Retrieved from http://www.bee-
hexagon.net/files/file/fileE/Health/PropolisBookReview.pdf

Bogdanov, S. 2015b. Royal Jelly, Bee Brood: Composition, Health, Medicine: A Review.
In Bee Product Science (pp. 1–35). Retrieved from http://www.bee-
hexagon.net/files/file/fileE/Health/RJBookReview.pdf

Bogdanov, S. 2015c. The Bee Pollen Book. Bee Product Science. Muehlethurnen,
Switzerland. Retrieved from www.bee-hexagon.net 8

90
Bogdanov, S. 2016a. Beeswax: Composition and Control. In Beeswax Book (pp. 1–18).
Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Stefan_Bogdanov/publication/304012435_Bees
wax_Production_Properties_Composition_Control/links/5762c6ca08ae0eda643110f6
/Beeswax-Production-Properties-Composition-Control.pdf

Bogdanov, S. 2016b. Beeswax: History, Uses and Trade. Beeswax Book, (April), 1–17.
Retrieved from http://www.bee-
hexagon.net/download/download.php?key=I4COWDXWjzYA51vp

Boukraâ, L., Abdellah, F. and Ait-abderrahim, L. 2013. Antimicrobial Properties of Bee

Products and Medicinal Plants, 960–970. Retrieved from
http://www.formatex.info/microbiology4/vol2/960-970.pdf

Bradbear, N. 2003. Beekeeping and Sustainable Livelihood. Diversification booklet 1.

FAO, 65.

Bradbear, N. 2009. Bees and their role in forest livelihoods. A guide to the services
provided by bees and the sustainable harvesting, processing and marketing of their
products. In Non-Wood Forest Products. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations Regional Office for Africa. Retrieved from
ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/012/i0842e/i0842e00.pdf

Burlew, D. A. 2010. The Effects of Pesticide-Contaminated Pollen on Larval Development

of the Honeybee, Apis mellifera. The Evergreen State College.

Cargill, M. and O’Connor, P. 2009. Writing scientific research articles: strategy and
steps. Vasa.

Caroll, T. 2006. A Beginner’ s Guide to Beekeeping in Kenya: Preview. Nakunu, Kenya:

lulu.com, United States of America. Retrieved from
http://www.apiconsult.com/beekeeping-beginner’s-guide.htm

CBI. 2009. CBI Market Survey-The Honey and Other Bee Products Market in the EU.
Retrieved from http://www.fepat.org.ar/files/eventos/759630.pdf

CIAFS. 2012. Capacity to Improve Agriculture and Food Security. The world market for
honey. Market Survey#1. Retrieved from www.ethiopia-ciafs.org

Collison, C. H. 2004. Beekeeping Basics. College of Agricultural Sciences Cooperative

Extension, Mid-Atlantic Apiculture Research and Extension Consortium -
MAAREC.

91
CSA. 2015. Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia Central Statistical Agency (CSA).
Agricultural Sample Survey 2014/15 [ 2007 E.C.] volume II: Report on Livestock and
Livestock Characteristics (Private Peasant Holdings). Statistical Buletin 578 (Vol.
II). Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

CSA. 2016. Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia Central Statistical Agency (CSA).
Agricultural Sample Survey 2015/16 [ 2008 E.C.] volume II: Report on Livestock and
Livestock Characteristics (Private Peasant Holdings). Statistical Bulletin 583 (Vol.
II). Addis Ababa, Ethiopia:. Retrieved from
http://www.csa.gov.et/images/general/news/live_stock_2015_16

Dayanandan, R. 2015. Opportunities and Challenges of Apiculture in Ethiop ia!!

SCHOLARS WORLD-IRMJCR, 3(1), 15–24.

Desalegn Begna. 2015. Assessment of Pesticides Use and its Economic Impact on the
Apiculture Subsector in Selected Districts of Amhara Region , Ethiopia.
Environmental & Analytical Toxicology, 5(2), 2–5. http://doi.org/10.4172/2161-
0525.1000267

Donaldson, J. S. 2002. Pollination in Agricultural Landscapes: A South African

Perspective, (Henning 1985), 97–104.

DRMFSS. 2012. Administrative Region, Zone and Woreda Map of Amhara. Desaster Risk
Management and Food Security Sector. Retrieved from
www.dppc.gov.et/downloadable/map/administrative/2005/amhara.pdf%0A

EPCC. 2015. Ethiopia Population Census Commission. 2007 Population and Housing
Census. Statistical Report for Amhara Region. Addis Ababa.

EPOPA. 2006. Export Opportunities for African Organic Honey and Beeswax: A Survey
of the MArkets in Germany, the United Kingdom, and the Netherlands. Retrieved
from http://www.grolink.se/epopa/Publications/Market-
studies/EPOPA_marketsurveyhoney-Jan06-web.pdf

FAO. 2012. Non Wood Forest Products. (H. Lehoux & A. Chakib, Eds.) National Report
2012. FAO. Retrieved from http://www.fao.org/forestry/nwfp/78836/en/eth/

FAOSTAT. 2016. FAOSTAT data. Statistical Database. Livestock Primary. Retrieved

January 29, 2017, from http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/QL

Folayan, J. A and Bifarin, J. O. 2013. Profitability analysis of honey production in Edo

North Local Government Area of Edo State , Nigeria, 2(February), 60–64.

92
Gallai, N., Salles, J. M., Settele, J. and Vaissière, B. E. 2009. Economic valuation of the
vulnerability of world agriculture confronted with pollinator decline. Ecological
Economics, 68(3), 810–821. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.06.014

Gallmann, P. and Thomas, H. 2012. Beekeeping and honey production in southwestern

Ethiopia, 1–24. Retrieved from
http://www.learningforlife.ch/media/DIR_76001/76253729aa011222ffff8015a42636
5.pdf

Gebreagziabher Aregawi, Mohammed Tilahun, S K Gangwar, Girmay Gebresamuel and

Girmay Tesfay. 2014. Performance of Apis Mellifera Spp. on Honey and Beeswax
Production in Different Type of Beehives in Enda Mekoni Woreda, Tigray Region,
Ethiopia. Global Journal of Bio-Science and Biotechnology, 3(3), 324–329.

Gebreegziabher Gebremedhin, Gebrehiwot Tadesse and Etsay Kebede. 2013.

Physiochemical characteristics of honey obtained from traditional and modern hive
production systems in Tigray region, northern Ethiopia. Momona Ethiopian Journal
of Science (MEJS), 5(1), 115–128. Retrieved from
http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=cookie,ip,shib&db=a
wn&AN=mejs-85335&site=ehost-
live%5Cnhttp://www.ajol.info/index.php/mejs/article/view/85335

Gemechis Legesse Yadeta. 2014. Beeswax Production and Marketing in Ethiopia:

Challenges in Value Chain. Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, 3(6), 447–451.
http://doi.org/10.11648/j.aff.20140306.12

Gemechis Legesse Yadeta. 2015. Honey production and marketing in Ethiopian. American
Journal of Life Sciences, 3(1), 42–46. http://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajls.20150301.18

Gentry, C. 1982. Small Scale Beekeeping. Peace Corps office of Information Collection
and Exchange. Washington, DC.

Gezahegn Ayele, Nebil Kellow and Samru Mehary. 2006. Strategic Options for Quality
improvement of Ethiopian Beeswax exports. Prepared for: The Stakeholders of the
Honey and Beeswax value chain Co-ordination Group First. First Consult PLC.

Ghanem, N. B. 2011. The antimicrobial activity of some honeybee products and some
Saudi folkloric plant extracts. Journal of King Abdulaziz University - Science, 23(2),
47–62. Retrieved from
http://www.kau.edu.sa/Files/320/Researches/61528_32477.pdf

Gidey Yirga and Mekonen Teferi. 2010. Participatory Technology and Constraints
Assessment to Improve the Livelihood of Beekeepers in Tigray Region, Northern

93
 Ethiopia. MEJS. Mekelle University, Biology Department, College of Natural and
Computational Sciences, P.O. Box 3072, Mekelle, Ethiopia.

Gidey Yirga. 2012. Assessment of beekeeping practices in Asgede Tsimbla district,

Northern Ethiopia: Absconding, bee forage and bee pests. African Journal Of
Agricultural Reseearch. http://doi.org/10.5897/AJAR10.1071

GoogleMap. 2016. South Wello - Google Maps. Retrieved July 1, 2015, from
https://www.google.com.et/maps/place/South+Wello/@10.9135298,39.3113136,9z/d
ata=!4m2!3m1!1s0x16464f8080934afd:0xaaae3789508cb9c8

Greenpeace Research. 2013. Bees in Decline: A Review of Factors that put Pollinators
and Agriculture at Risk (Vol. 1). Amsterdam, Netherlands.

Guesh Godifey. 2015. Epidemiology of Honey Bee Disease and Pests in Selected Zones of
Tigray Region, Northern Ethiopia. MSc Thesis. Bahir Dar University. Bahirdar,
Ethiopia, 124 pp. Retrieved from
https://cgspace.cgiar.org/bitstream/handle/10568/77370/thesis_Guesh_2015.pdf?sequ
ence=1

Haftu K., Daniel D., Gebru B., Tsegay G., Guash A., Guesh G., Mulualem Z. and
Gebrekiros G. 2015. Analysis of Honeybee Production Opportunities and Challenges
in Central Zone of Tigray, Northern Ethiopia. International Journal of Scientific and
Research Publication, 5(4).

Haftu Kebede and Gezu Tadesse. 2014. Survey on honey production system, challenges
and Opportunities in selected areas of Hadya Zone, Ethiopia. Journal of Agricultural
Biotechnology and Sustainable Development, 6(6), 60–66.
http://doi.org/10.5897/JABSD2014.0232

Hamdan, K. 2016. Preventing beeswax combs from wax moth damage. Retrieved from
http://countryrubes.com/template/images/Preventing_beeswax_combs_from_wax_m
oth_damage.pdf

Hartmann, I. 2004. “ No Tree, No Bee, No Honey, No Money”: The Management of

Resources and Marginalisation in Beekeeping Societies of South West Ethiopia. In
Briding Scales and Epistemologies, Alexandria, March 17 – 20, 2004, (pp. 1–12).

HBRC. 2012. Holleta Bee Research Center. Apiculture Research Achievements in

Ethiopia: Oromia Agricultural Research Institute Holeta Bee Research Center. (G.
Legesse, K. Wakjira, A. Bezabeh, D. Begna, and A. Addi, Eds.). Holleta, Ethiopia.

Hein, L. 2009. The Economic Value of the Pollination Service , a Review Across Scales,

94
 (Tansley 1935), 74–82.

Hilmi, M., Bradbear, N., and Mejia, D. 2012. Beekeeping and Sustainable Livelihoods.
(second edi). Rome: Rural Infrastructure and Agro-Industries Division. Food and
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. 82pp. Retrieved from
http://www.fao.org/docrep/006/y5110e/y5110e00.htm#Contents

Hussien Adal, Zemede Asfaw, Zerihun Woldu, Sebsebe Demissew and Damme, P. van.
2015. An iconic traditional apiculture of park fringe communities of Borena Sayint
National Park , north eastern Ethiopia An iconic traditional apiculture of park fringe
communities of Borena Sayint National Park , north eastern Ethiopia. Journal of
Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine. http://doi.org/10.1186/s13002-015-0051-1

Johannes Agonafir. 2005. SNV Support to Business Organisations and Thier Access to
Markets (Boam) Strategic Intervention Plan on Honey & Beeswax Value Chains,
(August).

Kahsay Berhe. 2013. Diagnosis and intervention plans for South Wollo zone, Amhara
Region. Retrieved from https://lives-ethiopia.wikispaces.com/file/view/South+Wollo-
+zonal+report-+final.pdf

KBS. 2013. Kenya Beeswax Standard. Specification for natural beeswax. CD /05-1279:
2013.

Kerealem Ejigu, Tilahun Gebey and TR, P. 2009. Constraints and prospects for apiculture
research and development in Amhara region, Ethiopia. Retrieved March 21, 2015,
from http://www.lrrd.org/lrrd21/10/ejig21172.htm

Kerealem Ejigu. 2005. Honeybee Production System, Opportunities and Challenges in

Enebse Sar Midir Woreda (Amhara Region) and Amaro Special wereda (SNNPR).
MSc. thesis. Alemaya University, Ethiopia. 133 pp.

Koshiyama, A. S., Lorenzon, M. C. A. and Tassinaria, W. D. S. 2011. Spatial

Econometrics Applied to Study the Influencing Factors of Honey Prices in Brazil.
Brazilian Journal of Operations & Production Management, 8(1), 121–132.
http://doi.org/10.4322/bjopm.2011.007

Krell, R. (1996). Value-Added Products from Beekeeping. FAO Agriculture Services

Bulletin No. 124. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
Retrieved from http://www.fao.org/docrep/w0076e/w0076e00.htm#con

95
Litaer, C. 2009. Impact of beekeeping on forest conservation, preservation of forest
ecosystems and poverty reduction. XIII World Forestry Congress. Buenos Aires.
http://docplayer.net/21622856-Impact-of-beekeeping-on- forest-conservation-
preservation-of-forest-ecosystems-and-poverty-reduction-charlotte-lietaer-1.html

Luesman, C. "12. 2011. Determining the Feasibility of Implementing a Beekeeping

Cooperative in the Bloomington- Normal, Illinois Area. In Outstanding Senior
Seminar Papers. Paper 8. Retrieved from
http://digitalcommons.iwu.edu/envstu_seminar/8

Lundy, M., Gottret, M. V., Cifuentes, W., Ostertag, C. F., Best, R., Peters, D. and Ferris,
S. 2004. Increasing the Competitiveness of Market chains for Smallholder producers
Manual 3: Territorial Approach to Rural Agro-enterprise Development. International
Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT), 1–117. Retrieved from http://www.icra-
edu.org/objects/anglolearn/Manual_3_Market_Chain_Competitiveness.pd f

MAAREC. 2005. Beeswax. Mid Atlantic Apicultural Research and Extension Consortium
(MAAREC), 3(9), 1–5.

Malede Birhan, Selomon Sahlu, & Zebene Getiye. 2015. Assessment of Challenges and
Opportunities of Bee Keeping in and Around Gondar. Academic Journal of
Entomology, 8(3), 127–131. http://doi.org/10.5829/idosi.aje.2015.8.3.95133

Mariken Kjøhl, Nielsen, A. and Stenseth, N. C. 2011. Potential effects of climate change
on crop pollination. In Pollination Services for Sustainable Agriculture. Roma, Italy.

Match Maker Associates. 2007. Honey and Beeswax Value Chain Analysis in Tanzania.
Study Commissioned By Traidcraft and Small and Medium Enterprize
Competitiveness Facility and Conducted By Match Maker Associates Limited.,
(July).

Meaza Gebreyohannes, B. 2010. Socio-Economic Analysis of Market Oriented Beekeeping

in Atsbi Wemberta District of Eastern Zone, Tigray Region. MA Thesis. Mekelle
University, Department of Management. 104 pp.

Mekonen Teferi, Gidey Yirga, Tewelde Hailemichael and Solomon Amare. 2011.
Prospects of beekeeping in the Northern Ethiopian highlands. Scientific Research and
Essays, 6(29), 6039–6043. http://doi.org/10.5897/SRE11.185

96
Melaku Girma, Shifa Ballo, Azage Tegegne, Negatu Alemayehu and Lulseged Belayhun.
2008. Approaches, methods and processes for innovative apiculture development:
experiences from Ada’a-Liben Woreda Oromia Regional State, Ethiopia. In
Improving Productivity and Market Success (IPMS) of Ethiopian Farmers project,
working paper 8. ILRI (International Livestock Research Institute). (p. 48). Nirobi,
Kenya. Retrieved from
http://dspace.ilri.org:8080/bitstream/10568/480/1/Apiculture_IPMSWP8.pdf

Menkovska, M. 2013. The Newest Experience with Effervescent Tablets Containing

Royal Jelly as Functional Food on Packing, Dosage and Synergistic Action in
Prevention, Prophylaxis and Healing. Journal of Food Processing & Technology,
4(10). http://doi.org/10.4172/2157-7110.1000272

MHPRC. 2010. National Food Safety Standard. GB 5009.4-2010. Determination of Ash in

Foods, 3–6.

Miklyaev, M., Jenkins, G. P. and Barichello, R. R. 2014. Honey Production in Ethiopia: A

Cost-Benefit Analysis of Modern Versus Traditional Beekeeping Technologies. JEL.

Mutsaers, M., Blitterswijk, H. Van, Leven, L. van ’t, Kerkvliet, J. and Waerdt, J. van de.
2005. Bee products. Properties, Processing and Marketing. In M. Mutsaers (Ed.),
Agrodok Series 42. Wageningen, the Netherlands.

Mwakatobe, A and Machumu, R. 2008. Beekeeping for poverty reduction and biodiversity
conservation. Bees for Development Journal 101.

Nebiyu Yemane and Messele Taye. 2013. Honeybee production in the three Agro-
ecological districts of Gamo Gofa zone of southern Ethiopia with emphasis on
constraints and opportunities. Agriculture and Biology Journal of North America,
4(5), 560–567. http://doi.org/10.5251/abjna.2013.4.5.560.567

Nuru Adgaba. 2007a. Atlas of pollen grains of major honeybee flora of Ethiopia. Holeta
Bee Research Centre., pp 152.

Nuru Adgaba. 2007b. Physical and Chemical Properties of Ethiopian Beeswax and
Detection of Adulteration. Ethiopian Journal of Animal Production (EJAP), 7(1), 39–
48.

Nyau, V., Mwanza, E. and Moonga, H. 2013. Physico-chemical qualitites of honey

harvested from different beehive types in Zambia. African Journal of Food,
Agriculture, Nutrition and Development, 13(2), 7415–7427.

Ogaba. M. 2010. Household poverty reduction through beekeeping amongst uganda rural

97
 women. In Apimondia. Kampala, Uganda.

Oyerinde A. A., Chuwang P.Z., O yerinde G. T. and Adeyemi S. A. 2014. Assessment of

the impact of climate change on honey and propolis porduction in Nigeria
maintenance. Academia Journal of Environmental Sciences, 2(3), 37–42.

PCI. 2013a. Honey Sector Investment Opportunity Brief. Commercial Farm Based
Collection Centers and Integrated Beekeeping. Addis Ababa. Retrieved from
http://preciseethiopia.com/download/investment_opportunities/Honey%20Sector%20
Opportunity%20Brief%20-%20Integrated%20Beekeeping.pdf

PCI. 2013b. Honey Sector Investment Opportunity Brief. Honey and Beeswax Refinery
Plant in High Potential Regions. Addis Ababa. Retrieved from
http://preciseethiopia.com/download/investment_opportunities/Honey%20Sector%20
Opportunity%20Brief%20-%20Honey%20&%20Beeswax%20Processing.pdf

Pica-Ciamarra, U. 2005. Livestock Policies for Poverty Alleviation: Theory and Practical
Evidence from Africa, Asia and Latin America, Pro-poor Livestock Policy Initiative,
PPLPI Working Paper. (No. 27).

Qaiser, T., Ali, M., Taj, S. and Akmal, N. 2013. Impact Assessment of Beekeeping in
Sustainable Rural Livelihood. Journal of Social Sciences, 2(2), 82–90. Retrieved
from http://www.centreofexcellence.net/J/JSS/Vol2/No2/article5,2_2_pp82-90.pdf

QSAE. (2005). Quality and Standards Authority of Ethiopia (QSAE). Ethiopian Standard,
Beeswax-Specification; ES 1203 (2005).

Rees, O. W., Coolican, F. A. and Pierron, E. D. 1957. Comparison of Methods for

Determination of Volatile Matter and Ash in Coal. Retrieved from
https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/bitstream/handle/2142/35126/comparisonofmeth240re
es.pdf?sequence=2

Richards, K. and Kevan, P. 2002. Aspects of Bee Biodiversity, Crop Pollination, and
Conservation in Canada. In Kevan P and Imperatriz Fonseca VL (Eds.), Pollinating
Bees-The Conservation Link Between Agriculture and Nature - Ministry of
Environment (pp. 77–94). Brasilia.

Saha, J. C. . C. 2005. Beekeeping for rural development, its potentiality and beekeeping
against poverty - bangladesh perspective. Development, 139.

Sara, D. L., Kai, D., Thomas, E., and Nico, B. 2007. Original article Foraging loads of
stingless bees and utilisation of stored nectar for pollen harvesting *, 38, 125–135.

98
Save the Children UK. 2006. Improving Honey Production and Marketing in Sekota
District (Final Report). Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

Segeren, P. 2004. Beekeeping in the tropics (Agrodok 32). Wageningen, the Netherlands:
Agrodok.

Serra Bonvehi, J. and Orantes Bermejo, F. J. 2012. Detection of adulterated commercial

Spanish beeswax. Food Chemistry, 132(1), 642–648.
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2011.10.104

Shehadeh, N. H. 2012. Beekeeping for Poverty Alleviation and Sustainable Rural

Livelihood. Project Developoment Report. EWB-Lebanon.

Shibru D., Asebe G. and Megersa E. 2016. Identifying Opportunities and Constraints of
Beekeeping: The Case of Gambella Zuria and Godere Weredas, Gambella Regional
State, Ethiopia. Entomology, Ornithology & Herpetology, 5(3).
http://doi.org/10.4172/2161-0983.1000182

Sisay Fikru. (2015). Review of Honey Bee and Honey Production in Ethiopia. Journal of
Animal Science Advances, 5(10), 1413–1421.
http://doi.org/10.5455/jasa.20151019083635

Solomon Abegaz and Likawent Yeheyis (Eds.). 2016. Procceding of The 9th Annual
Regional Conference On Completed Livestock Research Activities. 9-20 March,
2015, Amhara Region Agricultural Research Institute, Bahir Dar, Ethiopia. Retrieved
from http://www.arari.gov.et/images/Proceedings%20of%20the%209th%20all.pdf

Solomon Bogale. 2009. Indigenous knowledge and its relevance for sustainable
beekeeping development: A case study in the highlands of Southeast Ethiopia.
Retrieved March 26, 2015, from http://www.lrrd.org/lrrd21/11/boga21184.htm

Solomon Getachew. 2007. Evaluation of Imported and Local Wax for Cheese Processing.
Master of Engineering in Food Engineering Thesis. Addis Ababa University,
Technology Faculty, Chemical Engineering Department Food Engineering Program,
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. 81 pp.

Solomon, J. and Aluri, R. 2013. Biodiversity: A Function of Plant-Animal Interactions in

the Eastern Ghats Forest Ecosystem. International Journal of Chemical,
Environmental & Biological Sciences, 1(2), 345–347.

SOS Sahel Ethiopia. 2005. SOS Sahel Ethiopia and Amhara Beekeepers Cooperatives

99
 Bees’ Products Marketing Strategy; Smallholder Apiculture Development and
Marketing Programme in Amhara Region.

SWZDoA. 2015. South Wollo Zone Department of Agriculture. Annual Report. (Amharic
version). Dessie, Ethiopia.

Taye Beyene and Verschuur, M. 2014a. Assessment of constraints and opportunities of

honey production in Wonchi district South West Shewa Zone of Oromia , Ethiopia.
American Journal of Research Communication, 2(10), 342–353. Retrieved from
www.usa-journals.com

Taye Beyene and Verschuur, M. 2014b. Assessment of the performance of wonchi

beekeepers’ association: a case of wonchi district, south west shoa zone of oromia,
ethiopia. European Journal of Physical and Agricultural Sciences, 2(2), 15–30.

TBS. 2010. Beeswax – Specification, TBS/ AFDC 17(4049), 17(4049), 1–11.

Teklu Gebretsadik. 2016. Survey on honeybee pests and predators in Sidama and Gedeo
zones of Southern Ethiopia with emphasis on control practices. Agriculture and
Biology Journal of North America, 7(4), 173–181.
http://doi.org/10.5251/abjna.2016.7.4.173.181

Tessega Belie. 2009. Honeybee production and marketing systems: Constraints and
opportunities in Burie District of Amhara Region, Ethiopia. MSc Thesis, Bahir Dar
University. Bahirdar, Ethiopia. pp116.

Tewelde Gebremichael. 2006. Study on identification and establishment floral calendar of

honey plants in Atakilty Kebele, Tigray, Ethiopia. M.Sc. Thesis. Addis Ababa
University. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. 72pp.

Tewodros Alemu, Eyassu Seifu and Amssalu Bezabih. 2013. Physicochemical Properties
of Honey Produced in Sekota District, Northern Ethiopia. International Food
Research Journal, 20(6), 3061–3067.

Tewodros Alemu, Eyassu Seifu and Amssalu Bezabih. 2015. Postharvest handling,
opportunities and constraints to honey production in northern Ethiopia. Livestock
Research for Rural Development, 27(5). Retrieved from
http://www.lrrd.org/lrrd27/5/tewo27091.html

Tewodros Alemu. 2010. Assessment of Honeybee Production Practices and Honey

Quality in Sekota Woreda of Waghimra Zone, Ethiopia. M.Sc. Thesis. Haramaya
University, Department of Animal Sciences. Haramaya, Ethiopia. 122 pp.

100
Tezera Awoke Baynes. 2013. Honey Market Constraints and Opportunities in The Case of
Lasta Woreda North Wollo Zone, Amhara Regional State, Ethiopia. MA Thesis.
Mekelle University, College of Business and Economics, Department of
Management. Mekelle, Ethiopia. 115 pp.

Tolera Kumsa and Dejene Takele. 2014. Assessment of the Effect of Seasonal Honeybee
Management on Honey Production of Ethiopian Honeybee (Apis mellifera) in
Modern Beekeeping in Jimma Zone. Journal of Agriculture and Environmental
Management, 3(5), 246–254. Retrieved from
http://www.apexjournal.org/rjaem/archive/2014/May/fulltext/Kumsa and Takele.pdf

Tsutsumi, L. H. and Oishi, D. E. 2010. Farm and Forestry Production and Marketing
Profile for Honeybees (Apis mellifera). In C. R. Elevitch (Ed.), Specialty Crops for
Pacific Island Agroforestry. (pp. 1–29). Holualoa, Hawai‘i: Permanent Agriculture
Resources (PAR). Retrieved from http://agroforestry.net/scps

Tulloch, A. P. 1980. Beeswax – composition and analysis. Bee World, 61, 47–62.

UNDP. 2014. United Nations Development Programme-Ethiopia. Annual report. Annual

Report. Retrieved from https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/scr/2016/cr16322.pdf

Van, H., Valk, D. and Koomen, I. 2009. Climate Change and Crop Pollination. In
Potential Effect of Climate Change and Crop Pollination (pp. 1–12).

WebMD. 2015. royal jelly_ Uses, Side Effects, Interactions and Warnings.

Wikipedia.org. 2015. South Wollo Zone - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Retrieved
July 15, 2015, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Wollo_Zone

Workneh Abebe, Puskur, R. and Karippai, R. S. 2008. Adopting improved box hive in
Atsbi Wemberta district of Eastern Zone, Tigray Region: Determinants and financial
benefits. Improving Productivity and Market Success of Ethiopian Farmers. IPMS
Working Paper, (10).

Workneh Abebe. 2007. Determinants of Adoption of Improved Box Hive in Atsbi

Wemberta District of Eastern Zone, Tigray Region. MSc. Thesis. Haramaya
University, Ethiopia. 131 pp.

Yetimwork Gebemeskel Gebru. 2015. Characterization of Beekeeping Systems and Honey

Value Chain, and Effects of Storage Containers and Durations on Physico-Chemical
Properties of Honey in Kilte Awlaelo District, Eastern Tigray, Ethiopia. PhD Thesis.
Addis Ababa University, College of Veterinary Medicine and AgricultureDepartment
of Animal Production Studies. PhD Program in Animal Production, Debrezeit,

101
 Ethiopia.157pp. Retrieved from
http://etd.aau.edu.et/bitstream/123456789/7610/1/Yetim Final Phd thesis 2015.pdf

Yetimwork Gebremeskel, Berhan Tamir and Desalegn Begna. 2015. Characterization of

bee-keeping systems and honey marketing in Eastern zone Tigray, Ethiopia.
Livestock Research for Rural Development, 26(175). Retrieved from
http://www.lrrd.org/lrrd26/10/yeti26175.htm

Yirga, G. and Teferi, M. 2010. Participatory Technology and Constraints Assessment to

Improve the Livelihood of Beekeepers in Tigray Region, northern Ethiopia. Momona
Ethiopian Journal of Science. http://doi.org/10.4314/mejs.v2i1.49654

102
APPENDICES

103
List of Appendix Tables
Appendix Table 1. Current global utilization of beeswax

Product category Products Characteristics

Candles Candles (poured into moulds or dipped) Solidity, slow burning, therapeutic effect
Wax foundation Rolled and poured wax foundation sheets Production increase of honey
Art Wax figures and statues Melting and molding properties, solidity and resistance against
melting
Sculptures Metal castings, modelling, jewellery, lost wax casting Plasticity, mouldability, melting properties
Engraving Glass and metal engraving Protection against etching acid, resist technique
Processed food Confectionery, bakery, packaging, Coating of jellied Separation agent, preservation, anti-sticking agent
sweets and liquorice
Pharmaceuticals Drugs, pills, capsules, salve and ointments Consistency, binding agent, time release mechanism, drug carrier
Physiotherapy Compresses Warmth retaining capacity
Natural therapy Ear plugs Softness, impermeabilty
Cosmetics Creams, lotions, lipstick, mascara, eye shadows, Emollient and emulsifier. Improvement of appearance,
deodorants, hair creams, depilatories, hair conditioners consistency and sensitivity to melting
Textiles Batik Waterproofing, paint resistant, resist technique
Handicrafts Eco design Plastering agent for artisans
Musical Flutes, didgeridoo, violins, drums Softness of mouth parts and reduction of porosity
instruments
Varnishes and Paintings, art restoration, metal, wood and leather Protection, impermeability for air, humidity and pests
polishes treatment
Industrial products Anti-corrosion rust inhibitor, lubricants Decrease viscosity, drawing agent, prevention of corrosion

Source: (Bogdanov, 2016b)

104
Appendix Table 2. Laboratory results of beeswax quality analysis (mean value for each parameter)

No
District Origin SG MP RI AC TVM AV SV EV EAR FFA POW
1 TDr Hny 0.9647 61.6 1.4438 0.0260 0.5480 20.0234 100.76 80.73 4.03 Pass Pass
2 TDr TjSf 0.9681 61.8 1.4442 0.1159 0.7640 19.8862 98.29 78.40 3.94 Pass Pass
3 TDr Hny 0.9664 62.0 1.4440 0.0359 0.7771 18.9697 103.19 84.23 4.44 Pass Pass
4 TDr Hny 0.9736 63.5 1.4436 0.0220 0.7900 18.2211 95.31 77.09 4.23 Pass Pass
5 TDr TjSf 0.9698 62.0 1.4444 0.0519 0.4814 14.5668 53.13 38.57 2.65 Pass Pass
6 Klu TjSf 0.9664 62.0 1.4440 0.0459 1.2450 22.7467 123.40 100.65 4.43 Pass Pass
7 TDr BwB 0.9681 64.5 1.4442 0.0080 0.4004 23.2261 103.53 80.30 3.46 Pass Pass
8 TDr Hny 0.9681 63.5 1.4442 0.0060 0.4582 22.4256 106.14 83.71 3.73 Pass Pass
9 DsZu TjSf 0.9680 61.8 1.4441 0.0180 0.7452 17.1151 101.60 84.48 4.94 Pass Pass
10 Klu Hny 0.9680 61.5 1.4441 0.0200 0.6354 14.3809 105.43 91.04 6.33 Pass Pass
11 Klu Hny 0.9681 61.3 1.4442 0.0379 0.8128 20.9810 95.89 74.91 3.57 Pass Pass
12 DsZr TjSf 0.9659 62.8 1.4433 0.0120 0.8027 23.4238 101.85 78.42 3.35 Pass Pass
13 Klu Hny 0.9680 62.4 1.4441 0.0080 0.7523 18.8259 103.64 84.82 4.51 Pass Pass
14 TDr OCb 0.9594 59.5 1.4430 0.1199 0.5162 15.0558 48.80 33.74 2.24 Pass Pass
15 TDr OCb 0.9593 59.3 1.4430 0.1899 0.7606 14.4648 49.36 34.90 2.41 Pass Pass
16 DsZr Hny 0.9647 62.5 1.4438 0.0160 0.6529 21.5948 107.31 85.71 3.97 Pass Pass
17 DsZr Hny 0.9663 62.6 1.4439 0.0323 0.3628 21.6662 100.15 78.48 3.62 Pass Pass

105
No
District Origin SG MP RI AC TVM AV SV EV EAR FFA POW
18 TDr BwB 0.9599 61.7 1.4437 0.0187 0.2957 21.2217 106.42 85.20 4.01 Pass Pass
19 DsZr Hny 0.9681 62.0 1.4442 0.0156 0.2687 17.9402 101.85 83.91 4.68 Pass Pass
20 DsZr Hny 0.9663 61.0 1.4439 0.0162 0.2975 18.4121 97.54 79.13 4.30 Pass Pass
21 DsZr Hny 0.9681 62.0 1.4442 0.0204 0.2331 17.1067 96.79 79.68 4.66 Pass Pass
22 Kalu OCb 0.9663 62.0 1.4439 0.0178 0.4147 20.1199 103.57 83.45 4.15 Pass Pass
23 DsZr OCb 0.9647 61.5 1.4438 0.0138 0.4067 19.3857 103.68 84.30 4.35 Pass Pass
24 Klu BwB 0.9663 58.3 1.4439 0.0090 0.2462 16.6308 55.70 39.07 2.35 Pass Pass
25 Klu BwB 0.9594 58.7 1.4431 0.0076 0.3467 17.3615 54.39 37.03 2.13 Pass Pass
26 DZr BwB 0.9681 59.0 1.4442 0.0118 0.2617 16.0501 53.23 37.18 2.32 Pass Pass

NB: Districts TDr = Tehulederie, Klu=Kalu, DsZr= Dessie zuria Origins Hny= Beeswax sample from honey extract, Tjsf= from ‘Tej sefef’, BwB= from
beeswax blocks of agricultural offices, OCb= from old combs. Parameters SG= Specific gravity, MP= Melting point, RI= Refractive index, AC= Ash
content, TVM= Total volatile matter, AV=Acid value, SV=Saponification Value, EV= Ester Value, EAR= Ester to acid ratio, Fats and fatty acid and POW=
paraffin and other waxes

106
Appendix Table 3. Methods of chemical solution preparation

Alcoholic Potassium Hydroxide Solution approximately 0.5 N: Dissolve 30 g of

potassium hydroxide in rectified spirit and make up to 1 liter. Allow to settle overnight in
a dark place, decant the clear liquid and keep in a bottle closed tight with cork or rubber
stopper.

Phenolphthalein Indicator: Dissolve 0.1 g of phenolphthalein in 60 ml of rectified spirit

and dilute with water to 100 ml.

Standard Potassium Hydroxide Solution 0.5 N: Dissolve 28.05g of potassium

hydroxide in distilled water and make up to 1 liter. This process is exothermic, so add
KOH slowly.

Standard Hydrochloric Acid 0.5 N: add 42.4 ml of HCl to a half filled flask and make
up to 1 liter.

Sodium Hydroxide Solution - 10 percent: dissolve 100g of NaOH and dissolve in a

beaker with about 50 ml of water and make up to 1 liter.

Standard Hydrochloric Acid - approximately 4N: add 33.9ml of HCl in a half distilled
water filled flask and make up to 100ml.

107
 Appendix Table 4. Survey questionnaire for beekeepers

Bahir Dar University, College of Agriculture and Environmental Sciences, Department of

Animal Production and Technology, Apiculture program.

Questionnaire for “Assessment of Beeswax Production, Quality and Market Chains in

Selected Districts of South Wollo Zone, Amhara Region, Ethiopia”

Introduction

The objective of this questionnaire is to collect information that will help to assess the current
beeswax production status, to determine the quality of beeswax, and to investigate beeswax market
chain and identify the main actors in its market chain. Moreover, it is aimed to identify
opportunities and constraints facing honey sub-sector in selected districts of South Wollo zone.
The information you provide to this questionnaire will be used purely for academic purpose and
handled with the highest order or confidentiality and thus does not affect you in any case. Hence, I
request your honest and fair responses of the questions of this questionnaire.

Thank you, in advance for your cooperation and response.

Zone South Wollo Wereda_____________Kebele_ ___ Date ____________

I. PERSONAL INFORMATION OF HOUSEHOLD HEAD

1. Name of respondent __________________________________PA __________________

2. Sex 1. Male 2. Female
3. Age _________________(years)
4. Marital status
1. Single 2. Married 3. Divorced 4. Widowed
5. Educational status 1. Illiterate 2. Basic education 3. Grade 1-4
4. Grade 5-8 5. Grade 9-12. 6. Above grade 12

108
II. FAMILY CHARACTERISTICS

6. Family composition: Family size: Male Female

Number
Age composition
Male Female Total

Number of children below 14 years of age

Number of youth (15-40 years of age)
Number of adults (41-60 Years of age)
Number of old persons (Above 60 years)

7. Land holdings of the respondents

Allocated area (local unit) Allocated area (ha) Remark
Land holding

Crop land
Forest land
Grazing land
others
Total

8. Major crops grown by the respondents

No Major crops grown Remarks

1
2
3
4
5
6

9. Major animals currently owned by the respondents (type and number)

Animals Animals
No Number No Number
owned owned

1 Oxen 6 Horse
2 Cows 7 Mule
3 Calf 8 Donkey
4 Sheep 9 Chicken
5 Goat 10 Bee colony
11 Camel

109
 10. Lists of Honey Source Plants of the area given by the respondents
Food
Plant category
Local/common Flowering No of Days Source
(tree, shrub, Means of
name of the season stayed (Nectar, Remarks
No herb, crop, propagation
plant (Months) Bloom pollen,
vegetable)
propolis)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

III. BEEKEEPING SITUATION

11. Do you keep bees 1. Yes 2. No

12. If yes, for how long do you keep bees and practiced beekeeping?

1. More than 15 years 2. 10 – 15 Years 3. 5 – 10 years 4. 1 – 5 Years

13. How do you get colony to start beekeeping practices? Source of bees

1. Gift from parents 2. Catching swarming bee 3. Buying

4. caves and forests 5. GOs and/or NGOs 6. Other (specify)

14. Does bee colony selling common in your locality? 1. Yes 2. No

If yes, what is the price of one strong colony? ETB
15. What are the driving forces to be engaged in beekeeping practices?

1. Income 2. Home consumption 3. Hobby 5.Others (specify) ______________

110
 16. No of colonies owned, honey & beeswax yield per year of the last 3 years

Hive type 2006 E.C 2007 E.C 2008 E.C

Col. Honey Wax Col. Honey Wax Col. Honey Wax
Pure Crude Pure Crude Pure Crude

Traditional
Transitional
Frame

17. Where do you place your beehives? Use √ sign

Type of hive
Placement of Keeping Hives
Traditional Transitional Frame

Back yard
Apiary site
Under the eaves of the house
Inside the house
Hanging on trees near homestead
Hanging on trees in forests
Other (specify)

18. How do you increase your number of colonies?

1. Catching swarming bee 2. Buying 3. Splitting
4. Overcrowding 5. Other (specify)
19. Is there colony decline in the area? 1. Yes 2. No
20. If your answer for the above Question is yes, what are the reasons? Rank them in order of
importance.

No Reasons/threats Rank Season of occurrence

1 Absconding
2 Swarming
3 Diseases
4 Pests
5 Predators
6 Chemical application
7 Drought
8 Lack of bee forages
9 Lack of water
10 Lack of management
11 Unknown reason
12 Other (specify)

111
21. Is there absconding of colonies at your site/placement? 1. Yes 2. No
22. How many colonies abscond during the last three years?
23. What are the reasons for absconding?
.

24. Which types of hives are frequently absconded? Why? Specify the reason on the space.
1. Traditional
2. Transitional
3. Frame hives
25. How do you control absconding of your honeybee colonies?
.

26. Is there swarming of colonies at your site/placement? 1. Yes 2. No

27. From which type of hives does swarming occurs?
1. Traditional 2. Transitional 3. Frame hive
28. What is the frequency of swarming?
1. Every year 2. Once in two years 3. Other (specify)
29. How do you control the swarming of your own honeybee colonies?

Swarm control Yes No

Removal of queen cells

Harvest or cut honey combs
Return back to the colony
Supering
Using large volume hive
Others, specify:

30. What are the major pests and predators found in the area that threat your colonies? List in
order of importance.
No Pest Rank Local control No Pest /Predators Rank Local control
/Predators measures measures

1 Ants 8 Toads
2 Wax moth 9 Lizard
3 Bee lice 10 Snake
4 Beetles 11 Monkey
5 Spiders 12 Birds
6 Wasps 13 Hamagot
/Shelemetmat/
7 Prey mantis 14 Others (specify)

112
IV. HONEY AND BEESWAX RELATED

31. Do you consume your honey? 1. Yes 2. No

If yes how much of it?
32. If you use for home consumption, List the home use of honey.
1. As a food 2. As a medicine 3. For beverages (‘‘Tej’’ and ‘Birth’) making

4. For cultural and ritual ceremonies 5.Others (specify)

__________________________________

33. How do you harvest honey from the hives? (Procedure)

34. How many times do you harvest honey per year, and the season of harvest?

No Frequency of harvest/yr Months of harvest Remarks

1 1 time
2 2 times
3 3 times
4 4 times

35. Do you strain honey from traditional and transitional hive? 1. Yes 2. No
36. If yes, what are the materials used
1. Honey presser 2. Strainer 3. Sieve 4. Other (specify)
37. If not, why?
1. Lack of awareness 2. Lack of materials 3. Straining reduce honey amount
4. Consumers prefer non-strained honey 5. Other (specify)
38. Do you use honey extractor for frame hive’s honey? 1. Yes 2. No
39. If your answer for the above question is no and if you have a frame hive how do you harvest
the honey?
1. Cut and use/sell as crude 2. Use honey presser 3. Use sieve 4. Use no material
40. How do you process honey? (separation procedure)
.

41. What do you do with the rest of your honey beyond consumption?
1. Sell 2. Store 3. Both 4. Others (specify)

113
42. What is the price of honey?
Crude honey/kg ___ ____Birr Extracted honey/kg _ ______Birr

Strained honey/kg _______________Birr

43. When do you sell your honey? Month(s)

44. Where do you sell your honey? Distance from market km
45. Who are the buyers for your honey?
1. Consumers 2. Local collectors 3. Traders 4. Processors 5. ‘Tej’ brewers 6.
Cooperatives 7. Others (specify)
46. How long do you store your honey?
47. What materials are used to store your honey?
48. What are the major uses of beeswax in your area? (In order of importance)*
* This question implies only for the local use of beeswax by the beekeepers or respondents.
No Use Rank

1 Candle (‘tuaf’) making

2 Income (selling)
3 Foundation sheet making
4 For cultural and ritual ceremonies
5 Medicine
6 As cosmetics
7 Other (specify)

49. Do you collect beeswax at home? 1. yes 2. No

50. If yes, how do you collect /harvest/ your beeswax?
1. From crude honey extraction 2. Discarded, old and broken combs
3. Empty combs during harvesting 4. Collection after honey utilization
5. Uncapping and spout beeswax 6. Others (specify)

51. If the answer is No, what is the reason?

1. Lack of awareness 2. Lack of processing skills 3. Lack of market
4. Lack of processing materials 5. Don’t know the use and economic value
6. Others specify:
52. How do you process beeswax? (Procedure)

114
53. What are the materials used during processing?

54. What did you do with your processed beeswax?

Sell store both others (specify)
55. Where do you sell your beeswax?
56. Who are the buyers of your beeswax?
1. Direct users 2. Local collectors 3. Traders 4. Processors 5. Churches
6. Cooperatives 7. Others (specify)
57. Who will determine the price of beeswax?
1. Seller 2. Buyer 3. Direct negotiation
4. Cooperatives 5. Government
58. Is there seasonal price fluctuation? Yes No
59. If yes, when is the lowest price? When is the highest price?
60. What is the reason for seasonal fluctuation?

61. What is the price of? Crud beeswax/kg ______Birr Extracted beeswax/kg _____Birr
62. What is the annual income from sale of beeswax? Birr
63. When do you sell your beeswax (Season)?
64. Why you choose this season?
65. Where do you get beeswax for your frame hives foundation sheet making?
1. From own 2. From Gov’t 3. from NGOs 4. Buying from market
5. From cooperatives 6. use no wax for frame hives
66. What challenges exist in the marketing of beeswax?

67. How long do you store your wax?

68. What materials do you use to store beeswax?

69. Is there any wax adulteration practice in the area? 1. Yes 2. No

70. If yes, what is the extent of adulteration? 1. High 2. Medium 3. Low
71. What are the reasons for adulteration of beeswax?
72. Who are the adulterators through the market chain?

73. When do you think adulteration occurs?

74. Do you know what adulterant materials are used? 1. Yes 2. No
75. If yes, mention the materials used as an adulterant

115
76. How the adulterants are mixed with beeswax?

77. How do you differentiate adulterated beeswax from the pure one?

78. Is there price difference between adulterated and pure wax? 1. Yes 2. No
79. Have you encountered a problem due to wax adulteration? 1. Yes 2. No
80. What challenges appear concerning the quality of beeswax in the area?

81. Do you participate in beekeeping extension packages? 1. Yes 2. No

82. If yes, which package you take?
83. Do you get beekeeping training? 1. Yes 2. No
84. If your response of the above question is yes,
No Places of training Focus of training Duration Organized by

1
2
3

85. What issues to add concerning beeswax production, quality and market?

116
List of Appendix Pictures
Appendix Picture 1. Traditional method of predator protection at backyards

Photo: Godguadit kebele, Tehulederie district

Appendix Picture 2. Data collection (survey) by the researcher

Photo: Godguadit kebele, Tehulederie district Asgedo kebele, Dessie Zuria district

117
Photo: Kolamotie kebele, Dessie Zuria district Addis mender kebele, Kalu district

Photo: Tekake kebele, Kalu district Asgedo kebele, Dessie Zuria district

118
Appendix Picture 3.Sample preparation for laboratory analysis

119
Appendix Picture 4. Beeswax samples prepared for analysis

Appendix Picture 5. Data collection by the researcher (at SDARC Laboratory)

120
121
Appendix Picture 6. Model beekeepers, cooperatives

Photo: Getachew Yimam, Addis Mender kebele, Kalu district

Photo:Yimer Eshetu, Asgedo kebele, Dessie Zuria district

Photo:Motie kebele cooperative apiary site, Dessie Zuria district

122
Appendix Picture 7. Hanging hives to catch swarms near homestead

Photo: Addis Mender kebele, Kalu district Asgedo kebele,Dessie Zuria district

Appendix Picture 8. Traditional beekeeping in the study areas

Photo: Tekakie kebele, Kalu district Addis mender, Kalu district

123
Appendix Picture 9. Poorly managed FTC apiary site

Photo: Abasokotu kebele, Dessie Zuria district

Photo: Gobeya kebele, Tehulederie district

124
Appendix Picture 10. Other observations on survey data collection

125
 BIOGRAPHY

The author, Addisu Bihonegn Eshetu, was born from his father Ato Bihonegn Eshetu and
his mother W/ro Gebeyanesh Endalew on April 30, 1980 in Sekota district, Wag Himra
zone of Amhara Region. He started his elementary school in 1987 at Addis ketema
Elementary school, Assab. He also followed his junior and high school at Sekota Junior
and Secondary School, and then, he took ESLCE in 1999. He joined Ambo College of
Agriculture in October 1999 and graduated with diploma in General Agriculture by June
2001. After graduation, the author was employed by Sekota Dry land Agricultural
Research Center in February 2003 as a Technical Assistant in livestock research
department. After two years, he joined Haramaya University in July 2005 and graduated
with B.Sc degree in Agriculture (Animal Sciences) in September 2009. After graduation,
he joined the Apiculture research team by his enthusiasm and he worked as Apiculture
Assistant Researcher for five years until he joined the School of Graduate Study of Bahir
Dar University, college of Agriculture and Environmental Science in October 2014 regular
Program to pursue his graduate study in Apiculture.

126