|
Greener Journal of Agricultural Sciences Vol. 11(4), pp. 228-236, 2021 ISSN: 2276-7770 Copyright ©2021, the copyright of this article is retained by
the author(s) |
|
Determinants
of Technical Efficiency in Rice Production on the Weta
Irrigation Scheme in the Volta Region, Ghana
Tutor, Science Department, Saint Catherine Senior High School, Sogakofe, Ghana.
|
ARTICLE INFO |
ABSTRACT |
|
Article No.: 110921119 Type: Research |
The study investigated the determinants of technical efficiency in
rice production on the Weta Irrigation Scheme in
the Ketu North District of the Volta Region of
Ghana during the 2014/2015 cropping season. A two-stage sampling procedure
was used to select a sample of 290 rice farmers from a population of 1,024.
Primary data, collected from 285 respondents using structured interview
schedule, were used for the study. A translog
stochastic frontier production function which incorporates a model for
inefficiency effects, using the Maximum Likelihood Method was employed in
the analysis of the data. Results indicated that the mean technical
efficiency index was estimated at 70.7 per cent which implies that the rice
farmers were not fully technically efficient. Thus there was the opportunity
to increase the output of rice in the study area by 29.3 per cent via
efficient reallocation of available resources. Also, the socio-economic
characteristics of rice farmers which were significant determinants of
technical efficiency in the study area were age, sex, farming experience and
membership of a farmer based organization. The study recommended among
others that the Ministry of Food and Agriculture should intensify training
of farmers on how to improve upon their production activities through the
efficient combination of inputs by establishing demonstration farms within
the vicinity of farmers. Furthermore, the study recommended the organization
of rice farmers in the study area into groups since group membership
positively influenced their efficiency. |
|
Accepted: 13/11/2021 Published: 28/11/2021 |
|
|
*Corresponding Author Francis K. Kavi E-mail:
kastro8k@ yahoo.com |
|
|
Keywords: |
|
|
|
|
INTRODUCTION
Rice is considered as
the second most important grain food staple in Ghana, next to maize, and its
consumption keeps increasing as a result of population growth, urbanization and
change in consumer habits [Ministry of Food and Agriculture (MoFA, 2009)].. The total rice consumption in Ghana in 2005
amounted to about 500,000 tonnes and this is
equivalent to per capita consumption of 22 kilograms per annum. According to MoFA, per capita
consumption of rice per annum is estimated to increase to 63 kilograms by 2018
as a result of rapid population growth and urbanization.
Rice is also the most
imported cereal in the country accounting for 58 per cent of cereal imports
(CARD, 2010) accounting for 5 per cent of total agricultural imports in Ghana
over the period 2005-2009. Ghana largely depends on imported rice to make up
for the deficit in rice supply. On the average, annual rice import in Ghana is
about 400,000 tonnes (MoFA,
2009). It is therefore important for stakeholders in the food and agriculture
sector to ensure increased and sustained domestic production of good quality
rice for food security, import substitution and savings in foreign exchange.
Domestic
rice production satisfies around 30 to 40 per cent of demand with a
corresponding average rice import bill of US $450 million annually (MoFA, 2010). The massive dependency on rice imports has
always been a concern for policy makers, especially after food prices soared in
2008. However, import duties and other
taxes as well as interventions to boost productivity and quality of local rice
do not seem to produce any substantial impact on Ghana’s import bill.
In May, 2008, Ghana was one of the first
countries within the Coalition for Africa Rice and Development to launch its
National Rice Development Strategy (NRDS) for the decade 2009 – 2018. The main
objective of the NRDS is to double domestic production by 2018, implying a 10
per cent annual growth rate and enhance quality to stimulate demand for
domestically produced rice. These increases will most likely come from
utilizing potential irrigable lands and valley bottoms with water supply,
promoting rice production, and increasing the productivity of existing growers.
The inability of local rice
production to meet domestic demand can be attributed to the inability of the
rice farmers to obtain maximum output from the resources committed to the
enterprise (Kolawole, 2009). According to Rahman, Mia and Bhuiyan (2012),
farm level performance can be attained in two alternate ways: either by
maximizing output with the given set of inputs or by minimizing production cost
to produce a prescribed level of output. The former concept is known as
technical efficiency which is a measure of a farm firm’s ability to produce
maximum output from a given set of inputs under certain production technology.
It is a relative concept in so far as the performance of each production unit
is usually compared to a standard. The standard may be used on farm-specific
estimates of best practice techniques (Herdt & Mandac, 1981) but more usually by relating farm output to
population parameters based on production function analysis (Timmer, 1971).
A
technically efficient farm operates on its frontier production function. Given
the relationship of inputs in a particular production function, the farm is
technically efficient if it produces on its production function to obtain the
maximum possible output, which is feasible under the current technology. Put
differently, a farm is considered to be technically efficient if it operates at
a point on an isoquant rather than interior to the isoquant.
Technical efficiency
in agriculture production is an important element in the pursuit of output growth.
A high level of technical efficiency implies that output is being maximized
given the available technology. In this situation, output growth will be
achieved through the introduction of new technology that will shift the
production frontier outward. A low level of technical efficiency, on the other
hand, indicates that output growth can be achieved given current inputs and
available technology. Therefore, it is important to determine the degree of
technical efficiency among farmers, and if low technical efficiency is found,
to investigate the factors that will increase efficiency.
In
an economy where resources are scarce and opportunities for new technologies
are lacking, further increase in output can best be brought about through
improvement in the productivity of the crop. In this context, technical
efficiency in the production of a crop is of paramount importance.
Measurement of
technical efficiency (TE) provides useful information on competitiveness of
farms and potential to improve productivity, with the existing resources and
level of technology (Abdulai &Tietje,
2007). Moreover, investigating factors that influence technical efficiency
offers important insights on key variables that might be worthy of
consideration in policy-making, in order to ensure optimal resource utilisation.
Several
studies have been conducted on rice production in Ghana. However, most of these
studies on rice focused on other areas rather than the technical efficiency of
production. Examples are: “Impact of improved varieties on the yield of rice
producing households in Ghana” (Wiredu, et al.,
2010); “Cooking characteristics and variations in nutrient content of some new
scented rice varieties in Ghana”(Diako et al., 2011),
“Rice price trends in Ghana” (Amanor-Boadi, 2012) and
“Patterns of adoption of improved rice technologies in Ghana’’(Ragasa et al., (2013).
Even
though some studies have been conducted on technical efficiency in rice
production in Ghana, most of these studies are concentrated in Northern Ghana;
especially on the Tono Irrigation Scheme, for example
Technical efficiency in rice production at the Tono
irrigation scheme in Northern Ghana (Donkoh, Ayambila & Abdulai, 2012).
Besides, in the Ketu
North District rice is a major food crop and its production serves as a source
of employment for many years. Yet, not much study has been conducted to
determine the technical efficiency of rice farmers.
The
aforementioned reasons informed a study to be conducted to determine the
technical efficiency in rice production on the Weta
irrigation scheme in the Ketu North District of the
Volta Region of Ghana. This would fill the knowledge gap and inform policy
decisions.
Objectives of the study
Generally,
the study seeks to measure the technical efficiency in rice production in the Ketu North District of the Volta Region. The specific
objectives include:
1. To estimate the level of technical
efficiency of rice farmers in the district.
2. To analyse the
determinants of technical efficiency.
Research
questions
The following research questions have been
developed to guide the study.
1. What are the levels of technical
efficiency in rice production in the district?
2. What are the determinants of technical
efficiency?
Hypotheses
The study seeks to test the following hypotheses:
1.
H0: Rice farmers are not fully technically
efficient.
H1: Rice farmers are fully
technically efficient.
2.
H0: The socio-economic characteristics of
rice farmers have no significant influence on technical efficiency.
H1: The socio-economic
characteristics of rice farmers significantly influence technical efficiency.
METHODOLOGY
Research design
The study employed cross-sectional survey research design to
measure the technical efficiency of rice farmers. In this design, a sample of
the population was selected from which data were collected to answer research
questions of interest. It is called cross-sectional because the information
that were gathered about the phenomenon represent what
existed at only one point in time. A cross-sectional study is one that
produces a ‘snapshot’ of a population at a particular point in time. The single
‘snapshot’ of the cross-sectional study provides researchers with data for
either a retrospective or a prospective enquiry (Louis, Lawrence & Keith,
2007). This research design is
appropriate as it makes inference about the effect of one or more explanatory
variables on the dependent variable by recording observations and measurements
on a number of variables at the same point in time (Gay, 1992).
Population
Amedahe (2002)
defines population as the target group about which the researcher is interested
in gaining information and drawing conclusions. The target population was all
rice farmers in the Ketu North District of the Volta
Region. The accessible population for the study included all the 1,024 rice
farmers on the Weta irrigation scheme in the Ketu North District.
Sample size and sampling technique
Hummelbrunner, Rak and Gray (1996) explain
sampling as selecting a portion of the population that is most representative
of the population. The study employed a two-stage sampling technique to select
the participants for the study. The rice farmers on the Weta
Irrigation Scheme were grouped into 11 sections by the Irrigation Development
Authority. Considering each section as a cluster, six sections were selected at
random at the first stage. At the second stage, a total of 290 rice farmers
were chosen from the six sections using proportionate random sampling technique
to form the sample for the study. A sampling frame was obtained from the
Irrigation Development Authority. The computer software programme
known as excel was then used to generate a list of randomly selected numbers
within a specified range. Rice farmers with those randomly selected numbers
were then identified and interviewed. This sample size was determined using the
sample size determination table produced by Krejcie
and Morgan (1970). However, out of the 290, only 285 rice farmers were reached,
giving a response rate of 98.3 per cent.
Instrumentation
The structured interview schedule was developed by the
researcher and used to collect data relating to technical efficiency in rice
production from the respondents (farmers). It contained both open-ended and
close ended questions. A structured interview is an interview in which the
specific questions to be asked and the order of the questions are predetermined
and set by the researcher. It is based on a strict procedure and a highly
structured interview guide which is no different from a questionnaire. The
structured interview is, in reality, a questionnaire read by the interviewer as
prescribed by the researcher. The rigid structure determines the operations of
this research instrument and allows no freedom to make adjustments to any of
its elements such as content, wording or order of questions (Amedahe, 2002).
Data were collected on socio-economic characteristic of
farmers, input and output quantities and the constraints faced by rice farmers. The
structured interview schedule comprised four sections; namely, A, B,C and D.
Section A covered the farm and farmer- specific characteristics such as the age
of the farmer, sex of farmer, household size, educational level, marital
status, off-farm work, farming experience and years of formal education. Section
B of the interview schedule dealt with the production activities of the farmer
such as methods of weed control, access to technical training, access to
credit, access to agricultural extension services and number of times of
producing rice in a cropping year. Section C of the interview schedule provided
information on the inputs used and the output obtained by the farmer. These
included information on land, labour, materials used
for planting, fertilizer, equipment, chemical use and output obtained. The last
section, D covered the constraints that farmers face in the production of rice
in the district. This included input, production, and marketing constraints.
Pre-testing
of instrument
The instrument was pre-tested before it was
used for data collection. The pre-test was undertaken in November, 2014 using
30 respondents who cultivated rice in the South Tongu
District. This helped to check the adequacy of response categories, ambiguity and
respondents’ interpretation of certain questions, thereby making it possible
for adjustments to be made where necessary. Inaccuracies identified during the
pre-testing were corrected before the actual data collection took place.
The reliability of
the instrument was established using the Cronbach’s
alpha reliability coefficient. The reliability coefficient was estimated at
0.75. According to Cohen, Manion and Morrison (2007),
the widely acceptable minimum standard of internal consistency is 0.70. Therefore,
the reliability coefficient of 0.75 is interpreted as high; implying that the
individual items or sets of items on the instrument would produce results
consistent with the overall instrument.
Data
collection procedure
Data were collected
by the researcher and two field assistants during the 2014/2015 cropping
season. The selection of the field assistants took into consideration their
level of education and their ability to speak the local language of the
farmers. A visit was paid to the study area by the researcher with an
introductory letter from the Department of Agricultural Economics and
Extension, University of Cape Coast to inform the District Director of
Agriculture, the Irrigation Scheme Manager, the Sectional Heads and the rice
farmers about the study a month ahead of the data collection date. A two-day
training programme was organised
to equip the field assistants with interviewing skills and to explain to them
the various items on the instrument. A second visit was paid to the study area
to agree on the date and duration for data collection with the rice farmers and
their Sectional Heads a week before data collection began. Data collection was
done for a period of two months.
Data
analysis
Descriptive statistics, including the mean, frequencies,
charts and standard deviation were used to describe the socio-economic
characteristics of farmers. The stochastic production frontier analysis, a
parametric approach in measuring technical efficiency was employed in this
study. The transcendental logarithmic (translog) form
of production function was then fitted to the production function to estimate
technical efficiency level of rice farmers and the determinants of technical
efficiency simultaneously (Research questions one and two). Data were analysed using the SPSS version 21
and the R programming software.
Specification of the models
The explicit translog
stochastic frontier production function used in this study is given in equation
(vii):
Where;
The inefficiency
model of the stochastic frontier function is given by:
Where,
The translog
function was adopted in order to estimate the level of technical efficiency in
a way consistent with the theory of production function after preliminary
testing for the most suitable functional forms of the model under the data set
available using the generalised likelihood ratio test(Griffiths,
Hill & Judge, 1993). The generalised likelihood-
ratio test statistic is of the form:
where,
Table 1: Likelihood ratio test
Model Log-Likelihood value
Degree of freedom Chi-square P-
value
Cob-Douglas
-18.9452 -
- -
Translog 4.4345 33 46.76 0.05676**
**-------Significant at 10%
Source: Field survey data, 2015
RESULTS AND
DISCUSSION
Description
of socioeconomic characteristics of rice farmers
Table 2 presents the summary statistics
of farmer-specific characteristics as well as production parameters. It can be
observed from Table 6 that on average, rice farmers in the study area had 19
years of farming experience, with a minimum of 2 years and a maximum of 36
years. Table 6 also shows that the mean number of years of formal education was
5 years with a minimum of zero and a maximum of 13 years. Also, the mean
extension contacts was twice a year. This is relatively low considering the
importance of extension in agriculture. The low extension contacts imply that
not much information got to the farmers as far as innovations and technologies
are concerned. Table 6 also indicates that on average, rice farmers in the
study area produced an output of 6059.9 kilograms of rice per hectare using an
average of 1.66 hectares of land, 21.15 litres of weedicide per hectare, 492.33
kilograms of fertilizer per hectare, 16.98 litres of pesticide per hectare, 625
person days of labour per hectare, 275 kilograms of seeds per hectare,
GH¢608.50 worth of irrigation facilities per hectare and GH¢40.75 worth of
equipment per hectare. The minimum output of rice was 3250 kilograms/hectare
and the maximum was 22000 kilograms/hectare. The large variation in output of
rice in the study area can be attributed to variations in their levels of
technical efficiency.
Table 2: Summary statistics of production parameters and
farmer characteristics
|
Variable |
Minimum |
Maximum |
Mean |
Standard deviation |
|
Output(kg)/ha |
3250.00 |
22000.00 |
6059.85 |
4082.75 |
|
Land area(ha) |
0.80 |
4.00 |
1.66 |
1.77 |
|
Fertilizer(kg)/ha |
187.50 |
1000.00 |
492.33 |
163.55 |
|
Seed(kg)/ha |
75.00 |
600.00 |
275.00 |
101.88 |
|
Pesticide(litres)/ha |
2.50 |
40.00 |
16.98 |
7.78 |
|
Weedicide(litres)/ha |
10.00 |
35.00 |
21.15 |
6.38 |
|
Labour(person days)/ha |
195.00 |
1350.00 |
625.01 |
282.95 |
|
Irrigation cost(Gh¢)/ha |
150 |
1240 |
608.50 |
236.65 |
|
Equipment(Gh¢)/ha |
17.50 |
70.00 |
40.75 |
12.05 |
|
Farming experience (years) |
2.00 |
36 |
18.58 |
1.77 |
|
Years of formal education(years) |
0.00 |
13.00 |
5.58 |
3.58 |
|
Extension contacts(number) |
0.00 |
6.00 |
2.34 |
1.77 |
Source: Field survey
data, 2015.
Frequency
distribution of technical efficiency of rice farmers
Table
3 shows the frequency distribution of technical efficiency of rice farmers. The
mean level of technical efficiency of rice farmers was 70.7 per cent with a
minimum of 29.6 per cent and a maximum of 96.3 per cent. This shows that there
was a wide disparity among rice farmers in their level of technical efficiency.
This, in turn, indicates that there was an opportunity to improve the existing
level of production of rice in the study area through enhancing the level of
technical efficiency of rice farmers.
The mean level of
technical efficiency further implies that the level of output of rice in the
study area could be increased on an average by about 29.3 per cent if
appropriate measures are taken to improve the level of efficiency of rice
farmers. In other words, there was a possibility of increasing the yield of
rice by about 29.3 per cent using the available resources in an efficient
manner without introducing a new technology.
The
results in the table 3 also show that 45.26 per cent of the respondents operated
below the mean level of technical efficiency. Thus the null hypothesis that
rice farmers in the Ketu North District are not fully
technically efficient is not rejected.
Table 3:
Frequency distribution of technical efficiency of rice farmers in the Ketu North District
Technical Frequency Percentage (%)
Efficiency (%)
<50 26 9.12
50
– 59 44 15.44
60
– 69 59 20.70
70
– 79 61 21.40
80
– 89 63 22.11
>89 32 11.23
Total
285 100
Mean
technical
70.7
Efficiency
Minimum 29.6
Maximum
96.3
Source:
Field survey data, 2015
Determinants
of technical efficiency
The determinants of
the technical efficiency are discussed using the estimated (δ)
coefficients associated with the inefficiency effects in Table 4. Variables
with negative coefficients have negative relationships with inefficiency while
those with positive coefficients have positive relationships with inefficiency.
The results show that age, sex, farming experience and membership of farmer
based organization were the only significant determinants of the level of
technical efficiency in the study area. Education, extension contact, off farm
occupation, access to credit and household size were not statistically
significant. This means that these factors were not important determinants of
technical efficiency in the study area. Furthermore, the insignificance of
extension visits has not come as a surprise. This is because even though most
of the rice farmers had access to extension services in the study area, the
mean extension contacts was found to be only twice in a year. This might be due
to the low extension agent-farmer ratio in the study area (1:3500) which could
make extension services ineffective (MoFA, Ketu North District, 2014). However, the positive sign on
extension means that rice farmers who had access to extension services were
less technically efficient than those who had no access to extension. This is,
however, contrary to the apriori expectation.
Among the significant
inefficiency sources, only age has a positive sign. This implies that older
farmers were less technically efficient than younger farmers. This finding
lends support to the finding of Maganga (2012) who
found that older farmers were less technically efficient than younger farmers
in the production of Irish potato at the Dedza
District of Malawi. The finding is also consistent with that of Njeru (2010) who found that older wheat farmers were less
technically efficient than younger ones in the Uasin Gishu District of Kenya. This could be explained by the
fact that older farmers have the tendency to stick to their old methods of production
and are usually unwilling to accept change. This finding is however contrary to
the position of Ali, Imad and Yousif
(2012) that adequate inputs coupled with long years of farming enable older
farmers to produce more efficiently. Furthermore, the finding contradicts that
of Etwire, Martey and Dogbe (2013) who found younger soybean farmers in the Saboba and Chereponi Districts of
Northern Ghana to be less technically efficient than older ones.
The negative sign on the sex variable means that male farmers were
more technically efficient than female farmers in the study area. This
finding is consistent with that of Donkoh, Ayambilah and Abdulai (2012) who
found male farmers to be more technically efficient than female farmers in the
production of rice on the Tono irrigation scheme in
the Northern Region of Ghana. This could be explained by the fact that male
farmers are wealthier and therefore are able to acquire technologies that are
costly (Onunmah &Acquah,
2010). This finding is corroborated by that of Anang,
Blackman and Sipilainen (2016).
The negative sign on
experience implies that farmers with more years of farming experience are more
technically efficient than those with less farming experience. Again, this
finding confirms that of Maganga (2012). Farmers with
longer years of farming may combine inputs more optimally leading to high
technical efficiency than the less experienced farmers.
Finally, the
coefficient of the dummy variable for membership of a Farmer-Based Organisation
(FBO) is negative and statistically significant at 10 per cent. This implies
that rice farmers who belonged to a farmer based organisation were more
technically efficient or less technically inefficient than those who did not
belong to any farmer based organisation. This finding lends support to that of Awunyo-Vitor, Bakang and Cofie (2012) who found that cowpea farmers who belonged to
a farmer based organisation were more technically efficient than those who did
not. The finding is further supported by that of Anang,
Blackman and Sipilainen (2016) where smallholder rice
farmers in Northern Ghana who belonged to farmer based organisations were found
to be more efficient than non-members. Membership of a farmer based
organization is part of social capital. It also affords farmers the opportunity
to share information on modern rice production practices through interactions
with other farmers (Awunyo-Vitor, Bakang&Cofie,
2012). The finding is however contrary to that of Kuwornu,
Amoah and Seini (2013) who
found membership of farmer based organization to positively influence technical
inefficiency in maize production in the Eastern Region of Ghana.
The maximum
likelihood estimates of the inefficiency model indicate that the socio-economic
characteristics of the rice farmers significantly influence technical
efficiency in the study area. Thus the null hypothesis that the socioeconomic characteristics of rice farmers has no significant effect on
technical efficiency is rejected.
Table 4:
Maximum likelihood estimates of the inefficiency model.
|
Variable |
Parameter |
Coefficient |
Standard Error |
Z-Value |
|
Intercept |
d0 |
0.0346 |
0.2723 |
0.1269 |
|
z-
Education |
d1 |
0.0034 |
0.0063 |
0.3623 |
|
z- Age |
d2 |
0.0115* |
0.0047 |
2.4381 |
|
z- Sex |
d3 |
-0.1807* |
0.0715 |
-2.5262 |
|
z-
Extension |
d4 |
0.0262 |
0.0701 |
0.3733 |
|
z- Off
farm |
d5 |
0.1005 |
0.0686 |
1.4662 |
|
z – Credit |
d6 |
-0.0589 |
0.1135 |
-0.5195 |
|
z-Household
size |
d7 |
0.0051 |
0.0090 |
0.5637 |
|
z-
Experience |
d8 |
-0.0125* |
0.0056 |
-2.2385 |
|
z-FBO
membership |
d9 |
-0.2119** |
0.1224 |
-1.7326 |
Significant codes: * ------- Significant at
5%
**-------
Significant at 10%
Source: Field survey data, 2015
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the findings,
it can be concluded that rice farmers in the study area were not fully
technically efficient. With the mean technical efficiency estimated at 70.7 per
cent, there was an opportunity for the rice farmers to increase their output by
29.3 per cent through efficient reallocation of the available resources without
introducing a new technology. Also, the
socio-economic characteristics of rice farmers which were significant
determinants of technical efficiency in the study area were age, sex, farming
experience and membership of a farmer based organization.
From
the conclusions drawn, the study recommends that the Ministry of Food and
Agriculture should intensify training of farmers on how to improve upon their
production activities through the efficient combination of inputs by
establishing demonstration farms within the vicinity of farmers since the
farmers were not fully efficient in production.
More Agricultural Extension Agents should be employed by the Ministry of
Food and Agriculture to facilitate the training of farmers. Also, since male
farmers were more technically efficient than female farmers in the study area,
the Ministry of Food and Agriculture should formulate policies targeted at
empowering male farmers by improving their access to agricultural inputs,
especially, land, fertilizer and irrigation facilities
to increase their efficiency in rice production. Furthermore, the study
recommends that .in order to improve efficiency in rice production on the Weta Irrigation Scheme, farmers need to organise themselves
into groups since group membership positively influenced their efficiency.
REFERENCES
Abdulai,
A., &Tietje, H. (2007). Estimating technical efficiency under unobserved heterogeneity with
stochastic frontier models: Application to northern German dairy farms. European Review of Agricultural Economics,34(3), 393–416.
Alarima, C.I., Adamu,C.O. Masunaga,
T.,&Wakatsuki, T. (2011). Constraints to sawah rice production system in Nigeria. Journal
of Human Ecology, 36(2),
121-130
Ali, A. A., Imad,
E. E., &Yousif, A. K. (2012). Economic efficiency of wheat and faba
bean production for small scale farmers in the Northern State of Sudan. The journal of Animal and Plant sciences, 22(1)
Amanor‐Boadu, V.
(2012).
Rice price trends in Ghana (2006–2011).METSS‐Ghana
Research and Issue Paper Series 02‐2012.Accra.
Amedahe, F. K.
(2002). Notes on
educational research. Unpublished lecture notes. University
of Cape Coast. Cape Coast.
Anang, B.T.,
Blackman, S, & Sipilainen, T. (2016). Technical
Efficiency and its determinants in smallholder rice production in Northern Ghaana. The journal
of Developing Arears, 50(2), 311-328
Awunyo-Vitor, D.,Bakang, J.,
&Cofie, S. (2013). Estimation
of farm level technical efficiency of small scale cowpea production in Ghana. American-Eurasian Journal of Agriculture &
Environmental Sciences, 13 (8), 1080-1087
Bempomaa, B.
(2014). Technical
efficiency in maize production in Ejura-Sekyedumase District
of the Ashanti Region. Unpublished master’s
thesis. University of Cape Coast. Cape Coast.
Cohen, L., Manion,
L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in
education. (6th Ed.). Routledge: London
Diako, C. E.,Sakyi-Dawson, B., Bediako-Amoa, F. K. S., & Manful J. T. (2010). Consumer perceptions, knowledge and preferences for aromatic rice types in Ghana. Nature and Science, 8 (12), 12–19
Diako,
C. E., Sakyi-Dawson, B., Bediako-Amoa,
F. K. S., &Manful, J.T. (2011). Cooking
characteristics and variations in nutrient content of some new scented rice
varieties in Ghana. Annals. Food science and Technology,
12 (1), 39–44.
Donkoh, S.A., Ayambila, S., & Abdulai, S. (2012). Technical efficiency of rice production at the Tono irrigation scheme
in Northern Ghana. Unpublished master’s thesis. University of Development
Studies. Tamale.
Ellis,
F. (1993). Peasant Economics: Farm households and agrarian
development. (2ndEd.). Wye studies in
Agricultural and Rural Development. Cambridge University Press: London.
Etwire, P. M., Martey, E.,
& Dogbe, W. (2013). Technical efficiency of soybean farms and its
determinants in Saboba and Chereponi Districts of Northern Ghana: A stochastic
frontier approach. Sustainable Agriculture Research, 4, 106-116.
Gay, L. R. (1992). Research
methods for business management.Macmillan and Co. : New York.
Griffiths,
W.E.,Hill, R. C., &
Judge, G.G. (1993). Learning and practicing econometrics. Wiley: New York
Herdt, R.W. & Mandac, A. M. (1981). Modern
technology and economic efficiency of Philippines rice farmers. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 29,375-399.
Hummelbrunner,
S.A., Rak, L.J., & Gray, J. (1996). Contemporary business statistics
with Canadian applications. (2nd Ed.).Prentice Hall, Canada Inc.: Ontario
Kendall, M. G., & Smith, B. B. (1939). The problem of
rankings. Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 10(3), 275-287
Kolawole, O.
(2009). Technical, allocative and economic efficiency
in upland rice production system in Nigeria: A frontier function approach. Food production in a
developing economy, 1, 273-279.
Krejcie, R.V.,& Morgan, D.W. (1970). Determining sample size for research activities. Educational &
psychological measurement, 30, 607-610.
Kuwornu, J. K.,
Amoah, E., & Seini, W. (2013). Technical efficiency
analysis of maize farmers in the Eastern Region of Ghana. Journal of Social
and Development Sciences, 4(2),84-99.
Lau, L. J. (1986). Functional forms in
econometric model building. Elsevier Science Publishers : New York.
Louis,
C., Lawrence, M.,& Keith, M. (2007).Research methods in education. Routledge Publishers: New York.
Maganga, A. M. (2012).
Technical efficiency and its determinants in Irish potato production: Evidence
from Dedza District, Central Malawi. African Journal of Agricultural
Research, 7(12), 1794-1799.
Ministry of Food and Agriculture (2009). Evaluation of the Ghana rice campaign: A
marketing campaign implemented by Engineers without Borders and the Ghana
Ministry of Food and Agriculture to stimulate the rice value chain, April,
2009.
Ministry of Food and Agriculture (2010). Agriculture in Ghana: Facts and figures. SRID:
Accra.
Ministry
of Food and Agriculture, Ketu North District (2014). District
Agriculture Profile. District Agriculture Development Unit:Dzodze.
Musiime, O. Tenywa, M. M., Majaliwa,
M.J. G., Lufafa, A. Nanfumba,
D., Wasige, J., Woomer, P.
L. & Kyondha, M.(2005). Constraints to rice production in Bugiri
district. African Crop Science Conference Proceedings, 7,
1495-1499
Njeru, J.
(2010).Factors influencing technical
efficiencies among selected wheat farmers in Uasin Gishu District, Kenya. African Economic Consortium Research Paper, 206
Natural
Resources Institute, NRI. (2013). Contrasting rice value
chains: A benchmarking study of rice in Ghana, Senegal and Thailand, draft
report. Natural Resources Institute, University of Greenwich: Greenwich,
UK.
Onumah, E. E., & Acquah,
H. D. (2010). Frontier analysis of aquaculture farms in the southern sector of Ghana. World Applied Sciences Journal, 9(7), 826-835.
Ragasa, C., Dankyi, A., Acheampong, P., Wiredu, A. N., Chapoto, A., Asamoah, M., &Tripp, R (2013). Patterns of adoption of
improved rice technologies in Ghana. GSSP Working
Paper, IFPRI, Accra, Ghana.
Rahman, K.M.M., Mia, M.I.A.,&Bhuiyan, M.K. J. (2012). A
stochastic frontier approach to model
technical efficiency of rice farmers in Bangladesh:
An empirical analysis.A scientific Journal of Krishi Foundation, 10(2), 9-19
Timmer, C. P.
(1971). Using a probabilistic frontier production function to
measure technical efficiency. Journal of Political Economy,
79, 776- 794.
Wiredu, A.N., Gyasi, K.O., Marfo, K.A.,Asuming-Brempong,
S., Haleegoah, J. Asuming-Boakye,
A.,&Nsiah, B.F. (2010). Impact of improved varieties on the yield of
rice producing households in Ghana. Council for
Scientific and Industrial Research – Savanna Agricultural Research Institute,
Tamale.
|
Cite this Article: Kavi
FK (2021). Determinants of Technical Efficiency in Rice Production on the Weta Irrigation Scheme in the Volta Region, Ghana. Greener Journal of Agricultural Sciences
11(4): 228-236. |