Smallholder potato producers’ market orientation: the case of Tiyo district, Arsi zone, Oromia, Ethiopia

Abstract

This research is aimed at analysing the determinants of smallholder Potato producers’ market orientation and, their market performance in Tiyo district. For this study about 209 sample smallholder producers were selected randomly from five kebeles (peasant associations) from Tiyo district. The data were collected in 2022 production year. Descriptive statistics and an econometric model of the ordinary least square method were used to analyse the data. The Market Orientation Index of Potato producers was found to be 0.2963 revealed that farmers are moderately market orientated in potato production. The findings revealed that about 58% of the total gross market margin goes to the middlemen while 42% of total gross market margin goes to producers. The important factors including age, family size, farm size, cooperative membership, and livestock ownership excluding oxen and equines were found to be significantly affecting market orientation of smallholder potato producers in the study area. Lack of Fair sale price due to brokers, lack of market information, low price of the product, lack of market, Perishability of the product, poor linkage with other value chain actors, lack of storage facility, and lack of transportation facility were subsequent marketing problems of smallholder Potato producers in the study area The findings of this research can be used for a policy aiming at improving farmers’ cooperative development, illuminating illegal brokers, strengthening market linkages among Potato value chain actors, developing product promotion centre to enhance the development of potato production and marketing which improves farmers’ market orientation and performance in the country.

Keywords:

• Market orientation
• market performance
• potato
• ordinary least square

Reviewing Editor:

• Tejada Manuel; Universidad de Sevilla; Seville; Spain

Subjects:

• Science
• environment and agriculture
• agriculture and environmental sciences
• agriculture
• agricultural development
• agricultural economics
• agriculture and food
• social sciences
• economics, finance, business and industry
• economics
• business, management and accounting

1. Background and justifications

Potato being the world’s third most important food crop, is grown in more than 150 countries on more than 20 million hectares all around the world, and it generates income for small- and medium-sized producers and consumed by more than one million people worldwide (Mickiewicz et al., 2022). According to the FAO data, a total of 376 million tonnes of potatoes were produced worldwide, with China (94 million tonnes) and India (54 million tonnes) the largest potato producing countries (Food and Agriculture Organization [FAO], 2021). According to FAO, Asia and Africa are the regions with the largest growth in potato production, while Europe and North America are showing a decline.

Vegetable production including Potato is becoming an increasingly important activity in the agricultural sector of Ethiopia following the development of irrigation and increased emphases given by the government to small scale commercial farmers (Wondim, 2021).

Ethiopia is considered to be one of Africa’s most important regions with the greatest potential for potato production that plays an important role in improving food security, increased agricultural revenues and poverty reduction, generating cash income for smallholder producers (Hirpa et al., 2010; Tesfaye, 2016; Wubet et al., 2022). Kolech et al. (2015) indicated that, Potato is considered as a ‘hunger breaking crop’ because it can be grown and harvested when cereals don’t mature for consumption other crops fail; hence Potato holds great promise for improving the livelihoods of millions of smallholder farmers in the highlands of Ethiopia.

Despite, Ethiopia has a worthy potential in the production of vegetables; the aim of production is mainly for subsistence, with less market-oriented activities, and with very weak market linkage-production (Regasa Megerssa et al., 2020). Potato production and marketing is constrained by different production and marketing constraints including lack of wide adaptive improved potato varieties, unavailability of improved storage facilities, the high cost of improved seed tuber, inappropriate agronomic practices, low price of produced tuber especially immediately during harvest and lack of marketing and suitable post-harvest management facilities, pests and disease, low upgrading strategies to the commodity, Lack of market information providing institutions, absence of road service, and weak market linkages among market chain actors (Milkias & Keba, 2021; Tesfaye, 2016). Gebremedhin (2013) also identified that; potato production is constrained by; lack of high yielding varieties tolerant to late blight, poor soil fertility, climatic limitation, inadequate seeds, and lack of appropriate cultural practices, poor post-harvest management & storage problems, and high cost of farm inputs, diseases and insect pests; and hence these resulted in low yields of potato.

According to Demeke and Haji (2014), farmers in Ethiopia are challenged on subsistence food production and traditional activities that did not fully employ available land and labor, and hence it is contributed for low market orientation in land allocation. According to Gugerty and Schneider (2010), market oriented production allows smallholder producers to increase their income by producing products from land and labor and using the income generated from sales to purchase goods for consumption. However, researches regarding market orientation in Ethiopia were mainly focused on cereals and pulse crops.

According to Gebremedhin and Jaleta (2012) household subsistence requirements, market access and production factors including land, labor and capital affect market orientation of smallholder farmers in Ethiopia. Abera also stated that, farm size and land slope, number of oxen owned and membership in extension package program were the major factors affecting smallholder′s market orientation significantly.

Kassaw et al. (2021) showed that commercial farms in Ethiopia are used to grow vegetables over a considerable land area for years. According to Ethiopian Central Statistical Agency (2021) report, the area under Potato production from the total grain area was below 0.64% which is nearly 0.64% implying that, out of the total land area under cultivation in Ethiopia, land allocated for Potato production is insignificant as compared to other crops at the national level. Therefore, there is a strong need to estimate the factors that affect market orientation among smallholder potato producers in Ethiopia in general and in the study area in particular.

Market orientation has taken its own place in marketing thinking and business operations of manufacturing firms. Market orientation of farmers is the ultimate result of agricultural commercialization. It requires access to emerging high-income agricultural markets for buying input and selling output (Osmani & Hossain, 2016). Market orientation is a production philosophy which focuses on consumers’ taste, preferences and satisfaction as its basic production and marketing objectives. This is a situation where the production is aimed at satisfying dispersed population instead of just the household doing the production. Examining the trend of market orientation is a method of accessing the smallholder farmers‟ participation in the output market so that the objective of small-holders’ agricultural commercialization and market orientation can be justified.

Tefera (2014) on determinants of haricot bean market orientation stated that, household head education level, access to credit and land per capita positively influenced chickpea market orientation while being male head of a household and accesses to credit increased the predicted value of haricot bean market orientation. Gebremedhin and Jaleta (2012) studies on Market Orientation and Market Participation of Smallholders in Ethiopia and found that, Household size, labor supply of household, ownership of equine, involvement in Extension the previous year, rainfall, and altitude, are significant correlates with market Orientation. They specified that, the market orientation index of the crop in the study area was 0.29 and the farmers were found at moderate level of market orientation in the study area in Ethiopia. Moreover, Kemisola et al. Study on determinants of market orientation and indicated that, age, gender, and distance significantly influenced market orientation.

Despite Potato production and marketing is economically important commodity of small holder producers in our study area; insufficient regulation of the price of Potato where traders and brokers set their own price usually below the market price hurts the benefit share of Potato producers and discourages the production and marketing participation of smallholder Potato producers in the study area which has a direct effect to decrease the income of smallholder farmers in the study area particularly and the country’s income generally that should have been obtained from Potato production. To enhance the benefit of smallholder farmers from production and market supply, the Potato marketing system must operate efficiently. Hence, it is fundamental to examine the performance of producers along the Potato market chain to improve their efficiency in production and marketing and the challenges or constraints of Potato marketing faced by farmers in the study area.

Smallholder potato producers in the Tiyo district, Arsi zone of Ethiopia are confronted with challenges in marketing their produce, including issues related to low market performance. Recent studies have highlighted constraints such as inadequate market information, low product prices, and poor linkage with other value chain actors affecting the market orientation of potato producers in Ethiopia (Abro et al., 2020; Tadesse et al., 2019). Additionally, the engagement of middlemen in the potato market chain has been associated with fair trade issues for producers and potential inefficiencies in the marketing system. Despite the prevalence of these challenges, there is a lack of comprehensive understanding of the determinants of market orientation among smallholder potato producers in the Tiyo district, Arsi zone. Hence, there is a need for a focused study to examine the specific factors that influence the market orientation of smallholder potato producers in this region, taking into account the unique contextual factors that may impact their marketing activities. Therefore, analysing the factors affecting market orientation among smallholder potato producers, analysing the market performance of actors along the potato market chain, and assessing the marketing constraints faced with smallholder potato producers are the specific objectives of the study while the general objective of the study is analysing the determinants of orientation among smallholder potato producers in Tiyo district, Arsi Zone, Oromia National regional state of Ethiopia.

2. Methodology

2.1. Description of the study area

This study was conducted in 5 kebeles in Tiyo District of Arsi Zone, Oromia Region, Ethiopia in two potential vegetables producing districts. Tiyo district is one of the 24 districts of Arsi zone, Oromia regional state. It is located at 6° 59’ to 8° 49’ N latitudes and 38° 41’ to 40° 44’ E longitudes. The farming system of Arsi zone is characterized by crop-livestock mixed farming system. Crop production is carried out in both meher and belg seasons although the main cropping season is meher (Yadeta & Guta, 2019).

2.2. Study design and sampling procedure

For this study, a cross-sectional study design was employed to study the market orientation of smallholder Potato producers, the marketing performance and the challenges faced by marketing of Potato by smallholder producers in the study area. A two-stages sampling technique was employed to select sample households for this study. In the first stage five potato producer kebeles namely; Dosha, Denkaka_Konicha, Oda_dawata, Burka_Chilalo and Hora_Bilalo were selected using simple random techniques from Tiyo district. In the second stage from a total of 438 smallholder producers, 209 sample households were selected randomly based on proportional to the population size of potato producers of respective kebeles using Yamane sample size determination formula at 5% level of significance from the targeted groups; (1) $$n=\frac{N}{1+N(e{)}^2}$$(1) where n = is the sample size, N = total population size (HH) e = marginal error. Accordingly, the total population size was 438, and hence, using the above sample size determination formulae: $n=\frac{438}{1+N438(0.05{)}^2}=209$

3. Methods of data analysis

3.1. Descriptive analysis

3.1.1. Market orientation analysis of smallholder potato producers of the study area

To analyze market orientation of Potato producers, market orientation index was calculated for each sampled household heads during the study based on the resource they allocate for Potato since market orientation is also the decision farmers in resource (land) allocation for production of a crop (Gebremedhin & Jaleta, 2012). When crops are grown for dual purpose both for commercial and consumption due to proportion of land operated by a farmer, farmers have different market orientation index depending on their resource allocation (land, labor and capital) for the commodity they produce. Based on the proportion of total amount sold to total production at farming system level, a crop specific marketability index (${\alpha }_k$) was computed for Potato produced at farmer level system as follows. (2) $${\mathit{\text{CMI}}}_i=\left[\frac{\mathit{\text{gross value of Potato sold by individual farmer}}/\mathit{\text{year}}}{\mathit{\text{Total valueof Potato produced by individual farmer}}}\right]$$(2) where ${\mathit{\text{CMI}}}_i$ refers to Potato marketability index for individual farmer in 2021/2022 production year at the study area. (3) $${\alpha }_k=\frac{{{\displaystyle \sum }}_{i=1}^N{S}_{\mathit{\text{ki}}}}{{{\displaystyle \sum }}_{i=1}^N{Q}_{\mathit{\text{ki}}}}{Q}_{\mathit{\text{ki}}}\ge S_{\mathit{\text{ki}}}\hspace{0.17em}\mathit{\text{and}}\hspace{0.17em}0\le {\alpha }_k\le 1$$(3) where ${\alpha }_k$ is the proportion of Potato sold (S_ki) to the total amount of Potato produced (Q_ki) aggregated over the total sample households in a farming system. ${\alpha }_k$ Takes a value between 0 and 1, inclusive of the value between 0 and 100% if it is converted into percentage. A value of zero would signify a totally subsistence level of market orientation in production and the closer the index is to 100, the higher the market orientation in production.

After the crop, specific marketability index calculated, household’s market orientation index in land allocation (MOI_i) was computed from the land allocation pattern of the household weighted by the marketability index of the crop (${\alpha }_k$) derived from Equation (3)(3) $${\alpha }_k=\frac{{{\displaystyle \sum }}_{i=1}^N{S}_{\mathit{\text{ki}}}}{{{\displaystyle \sum }}_{i=1}^N{Q}_{\mathit{\text{ki}}}}{Q}_{\mathit{\text{ki}}}\ge S_{\mathit{\text{ki}}}\hspace{0.17em}\mathit{\text{and}}\hspace{0.17em}0\le {\alpha }_k\le 1$$(3) . (4) $$\mathit{\text{MO}}{I}_i=\frac{{{\displaystyle \sum }}_{k=1}^k{\alpha }_k{L}_{\mathit{\text{ik}}}}{L_i^T}{L}_i^T\ge 0\hspace{0.17em}\mathit{\text{and}}\hspace{0.17em}0<\mathit{\text{MO}}{I}_i\le 1$$(4) where MOI_iis market orientation index of farmer, L_kiis amount of land allocated for Potato production by smallholder producers in hectare, and ${\mathrm{L}}_{\mathrm{i}}^{\mathrm{T}}$ is the total crop land operated by farmer measured in hectare.

3.1.2. Market performance analysis along the potato marketing chain

To analyze marketing performance of the actors involved in Potato market chain, similar steps was used followed by Tegengn (2013). Marketing margin was calculated by taking the difference between Potato producers and retail prices. This can be calculated mathematically as, the ratio of producers’ price to consumers’ price and can be expressed as, (5) $$\mathit{\text{proucers}}\prime \mathit{\text{share}}=\frac{\mathit{\text{producers}}\prime \mathit{\text{price}}}{\mathit{\text{consumers}}\prime \mathit{\text{price}}}=1-\frac{\mathit{\text{Marketing margin}}}{\mathit{\text{consumers}}\prime \mathit{\text{price}}}$$(5)

Gross Marketing margin (GMM):- According to Mendoza (1995), ‘marketing margins’ should be understood as the gross marketing margins. He advises marketing researchers to emphasize on gross marketing margins in reporting their findings and considered in this study. (6) $$\mathit{\text{GMM}}=\frac{\mathit{\text{Retail price}}-\mathit{\text{farm gate price}}}{\mathit{\text{Retail price}}}\mathrm{*}100$$(6)

Where GMM = Gross marketing Margin

Total Gross Marketing Margin (TGMM): In analyzing margins, first the Total Gross Marketing Margin (TGMM) was calculated. This is the difference between producer’s (farmer’s) price and consumer’s price (price paid by final consumer) and was calculated as follows; (7) $$\mathit{\text{TGMM}}=\frac{\mathit{\text{Consumerprice}}-\mathit{\text{Producre price}}}{\mathit{\text{Consumer price}}}\mathrm{*}100$$(7)

Gross Market Margin of individual actors (jth): To find the benefit share of each actor similar procedure was applied with some adjustments, hence, the marketing margin was calculated at a given stage ‘j’ and given by: (8) $$\mathrm{\text{GM}}{\mathrm{M}}_j=\frac{\mathit{\text{SPj}}-\mathit{\text{PPj}}}{\mathit{\text{Consumer price}}\mathrm{ }}\times 100$$(8)

Where, SP_j is selling price at jth actor and PP_j is purchase price at jth actor, here, j = collectors, wholesalers and retailors.

Net Marketing Margin (NMM): is the percentage over the final price earned by the intermediary by deducting the marketing costs and is calculated as follows: (9) $$\mathit{\text{NMM}}=\frac{\mathit{\text{Gross Marketing margin}}-\mathit{\text{Marketing Cost}}}{\mathit{\text{Consumer price}}}\mathrm{*}100$$(9)

From higher NMM or profit of the marketing intermediaries reflects reduced downward and unfair income distribution, which depresses market participation of smallholders.

3.2. Econometric analysis

3.2.1. Determinants of smallholder potato producers’ market orientation

The dependent variable analyzed in this paper is market orientation index of small holder Potato producers. The econometric model used depends on the nature of the dependent variable. For the determinants of household market orientation, we use ordinary least squares (OLS) model by following Gebremedhin and Jaleta (2012). This was because the dependent variable (market orientation index) is continuous as well as all the producers were involved both in production and marketing of Potato and had an index greater than zero. Therefore, multiple regression model was applicable for analysis using the producers’ market orientation index as dependent variables and indicated below. (10) $$Y_i={\beta }_0+{\beta }_i{X}_i+{\epsilon }_i$$(10)

Where Y_i = Market orientation index for ith farmer, ${\beta }_0=\mathit{\text{constant term}}$, β_i = estimated parameters, X_i = the explanatory variables influencing market orientation of ith farmer. In our study the explanatory variables used includes; sex of the household head, education status of the respondents, family size of the respondent, farm size of potato, distance to the nearest market, crop marketability index, livestock excluding oxen and equines, cooperative membership, access to improved seed and access to extension service.

4. Result and discussion

In our research we used three stages sampling techniques to select representative Potato producers from Arsi Zone, Oromia, Ethiopia. Firstly, one district namely, Tiyo districts was selected purposively based on their production potential. Secondly, a total of 5 kebeles (small administrative) were selected randomly, and finally, a total of 209 sample respondents were selected randomly using Yamane (1967) sample size determination formula.

In our study we used kobo tool-box to collect the data from our respondents, and then we transform the data to STATA version 14. We also analyzed the data using statistical tools like frequency tables, and percentages to describe socio- economic characteristics of producers.

We used indexes like crop marketability index and market ordination index to analyses the degree of marketability of the crops and market orientation of the farmers in land allocation to produce such crops during the production of 2021/2022 respectively. Hence, to analyses market orientation of small-holder Potato producers, we calculated the market orientation index for each sampled household heads during the study based on the resource they allocate for Potato production separately since market orientation is also the decision farmers in resource (land) allocation for production of a crop.

Furthermore, to analyze the benefit share (marketing margin) of the major actors along the market chain of Potato marketing, we used market performance analysis method and were measured through the price differences of sales prices and average costs of commodity at each stage of the market chain to describe economic fitness of major actors across the chain. We also assessed the marketing challenges faced by small-holder Potato producers by ranking the problem.

4.1. Demographic characteristics of the respondents in the study area

Demographic factors: As it was shown on Table 2 above, the demographic factors describe the age of the household head, sex of the household head, family size in the household and farming Experience of the farmers in the study area. Accordingly, about 73.68% of the sample households were male headed while the rest 26.32% were female headed households where as their average age, average family size, average farming Experience were 43.41 years, 5.84 person and 13.94 years respectively.

Table 1. Sample size of producers from selected areas.

No	Name of kebeles	Total producers	Proportions	Sample
1	Dosha	113	0.258	54
2	Oda_Dawata	78	0.178	37
3	Denkaka_Konicha	90	0.205	43
4	Burka_Chilalo	88	0.201	42
5	Hora_Bilalo	69	0.158	33
Total		438	1.00	209

Source: Survey result, 2022.

Table 2. Demographic factors, and human capital characteristics of the respondents.

Variables	Categories	Frequency	Percentage
Sex of household head	Male	154	73.68
	Female	55	26.32
Education level of the household head	Cannot read and write	34	16.27
	Primary school (Grade 1–8)	93	44.50
	Secondary school (Grade 9–10)	60	28.71
	Preparatory school (Grade 11–12)	15	7.18
	Certificate	7	3.35
Variables	Measurement units	Mean	Std.Dev.
Age of the respondents	Years	43.41	12.38
Family size	Number	5.84	2.43086
Farming experience	Years	13.94	9.89

Source: Survey result of 2022 of the TOMATO project.

Human capital: Education of the household is included under human capital and it influence production and productivity of producers through adoption of newly introduced technologies and innovations. The survey result reveled that about 83.73% of them were literates and received formal education while the rest 16.27% were illiterate. Hence, literate producers are expected to be in a better position to get and use information which contributes to improve their farming practices and market orientation in production of Potato in the study area.

4.2. Potato production and supply in the study area

Table 3 above shows Potato production, supply and consumption level in the study area. Accordingly, the mean value of total land owned by producers were 1.78 hectare, this figure aligns with previous research conducted in Ethiopia in 2020, which found that smallholder farmers typically owned less than 2 hectares of land for agricultural purposes (Desta, 2020), whereas the mean value of land allocated for Potato production in 2021/22 production year was 0.63 hectare and it is in line with the previous study which highlighted the importance of potato as a cash crop for smallholder farmers in the region (Tadesse, 2021). This figure revealed that, from one hectare of land owned by the farmer, about 0.35 hectare of the land is allocated or used for potato production. Moreover, from 13,542 quintals of potato produced by sample households in the production year, about 70.2% (9508 quintals) was sold or supplied to the market to different marketing actors including collectors, wholesalers and consumers by sample households. Furthermore, from the total potato which was produced by sample households, about 5.28% (1088 quintals) was wasted during harvesting, transporting and marketing while 3.28% (709.75 quintals) was used for house consumption and the rest 16% is left or stored for seed for the next production year.

Table 3. Area and volume of production and supply of potato crop.

Variables	Measurement units	Potato (Tiyo district) (N = 209)
		Total	Mean	Std. dev
Total land operated	Hectare	371.2	1.78	1.17
Land allocated	Hectare	130.805	0.63	0.49
Quantity produced	Quintal	13452	64.36	41.67
Quantity sold	Quintal	9508	45.49	35.46
Quantity wasted	Quintal	1088	5.21	4.45
Quantity consumed	Quintal	709.75	3.39	3.20
Average selling price	Birr/Quintal		1015.5	335.7

Source: Survey result of 2022 of the TOMATO project.

4.3. Crop marketability and market orientation analysis of potato

To analyse market orientation of Potato producers, market orientation index was calculated for each sampled household heads during the study based on the resource they allocate for Potato since market orientation is also the decision farmers in resource (land) allocation for production of a crop. When crops are grown for dual purpose both for commercial and consumption due to proportion of land operated by a farmer, farmers have different market orientation index depending on their resource allocation (land, labor and capital) for the commodity they produce. Based on the proportion of total amount sold to total production at farming system level, a crop specific marketability index (${\alpha }_k$) was computed for Potato produced at farmer level system using Equation (2)(2) $${\mathit{\text{CMI}}}_i=\left[\frac{\mathit{\text{gross value of Potato sold by individual farmer}}/\mathit{\text{year}}}{\mathit{\text{Total valueof Potato produced by individual farmer}}}\right]$$(2) . After the crop, specific marketability index calculated, household’s market orientation index in land allocation (MOI_i) was computed from the land allocation pattern of the household weighted by the marketability index of the crop (${\alpha }_k$) using Equation (4)(4) $$\mathit{\text{MO}}{I}_i=\frac{{{\displaystyle \sum }}_{k=1}^k{\alpha }_k{L}_{\mathit{\text{ik}}}}{L_i^T}{L}_i^T\ge 0\hspace{0.17em}\mathit{\text{and}}\hspace{0.17em}0<\mathit{\text{MO}}{I}_i\le 1$$(4) which was derived from Equation (3)(3) $${\alpha }_k=\frac{{{\displaystyle \sum }}_{i=1}^N{S}_{\mathit{\text{ki}}}}{{{\displaystyle \sum }}_{i=1}^N{Q}_{\mathit{\text{ki}}}}{Q}_{\mathit{\text{ki}}}\ge S_{\mathit{\text{ki}}}\hspace{0.17em}\mathit{\text{and}}\hspace{0.17em}0\le {\alpha }_k\le 1$$(3) .

As it is shown on Table 1 above, the total land operated by small-holder Potato producers (total land owned used for different crop production) in the survey year was 371.2 hectare whereas the land allocated for Potato was 130.8 hectare (see Table 3). Moreover, the total Potato produced and sold during the production year were 13,452 quintals and 9508 quintals respectively and the average selling price was 944.5 birr per quintal (see Table 3).

As it was shown on Table 4 above, the crop marketability index for potato was calculated using Equation (2)(2) $${\mathit{\text{CMI}}}_i=\left[\frac{\mathit{\text{gross value of Potato sold by individual farmer}}/\mathit{\text{year}}}{\mathit{\text{Total valueof Potato produced by individual farmer}}}\right]$$(2) whereas the market orientation index of smallholder potato producers were computed using Equation (4)(4) $$\mathit{\text{MO}}{I}_i=\frac{{{\displaystyle \sum }}_{k=1}^k{\alpha }_k{L}_{\mathit{\text{ik}}}}{L_i^T}{L}_i^T\ge 0\hspace{0.17em}\mathit{\text{and}}\hspace{0.17em}0<\mathit{\text{MO}}{I}_i\le 1$$(4) . Accordingly, the crop marketability index (CMI) of potato crop and the smallholder potato producer’s market orientation index (MOI) were found to be 0.6924 and 0.2963 respectively; thus, the result revealed that farmers’ market orientation towards producing such crop is moderate which is 29.63% whereas about 16.75% of the respondents were found in the higher category which is above 0.5 while majority of the respondents which are about 43.06% were found in the medium category. However, the degree of marketability of Potato showed that, about 69.24% of the crop is sold on average which shows that the crop was important market orientated crops, even though farmers do not allocate more of their land to this crop in the study area, and also the level of crop marketability index indicated that about 81.82% of the respondents were categorized under higher level of marketability index which is above 0.5 while 16.27% of them categorized under medium level of crop marketability index. Thus, the farmers have moderate level of market orientation in land allocation for Potato production. This result is in line with the study conducted by Gebremedhin and Jaleta (2012) who specified that, the market orientation index of the crop in the study area was 0.29 and the farmers were found at moderate level of market orientation in the study area.

Table 4. Potato marketability index and producers’ market orientation index.

Variable	Obs	Mean	Std. dev	Min	Max
Potato marketability index	209	0.6924	0.1873	0.1	1
Market orientation index	209	0.2963	0.2149	0.0179	0.8571

Table

Level of marketability index	Indexes	Frequency	Percentage
	High (Above 0.5)	171	81.82
	Medium (0.20 to 0.5)	34	16.27
	Low (below 0.2)	4	1.91
	Total	209	100.00
Level of market orientation index	Indexes	Frequency	Percentage
	High (above 0.5)	35	16.75
	Medium (0.25 to 0.5)	90	43.06
	Low (below 0.25)	84	40.19
	Total	209	100.00

Source: Baseline survey result of 2022 of the TOMATO project.

4.4. Descriptive analysis of variables used in the model (N = 209)

Table 5 below illustrates the variables used in the model and discussed as follows. The independent variables used to assess the determents of market orientation for smallholder potato producers in the study area are classified in to demographic factors (gender and family size), human capital (educational status), institutional support serves (access improved seed, access to extension service and distance to the nearest market), physical assets (land allocated for potato farming and livestock ownership excluding oxen and equines), social capital (cooperative membership) and other related factors (crop marketability index) which were decided by the researcher to be a factor for market orientation of potato producers.

Table 5. Descriptive statistics of variables used in the model (N = 209).

Continuous Variable	Units	Mean		Total sample (N)
Age of the respondents	Years	43.41		209
Family size of the respondent	Number	5.84		209
Farm size of potato	Hectare	0.63		209
Distance to the nearest market	Km	25.79		209
Livestock excluding oxen and equines	Number	8.49		209
Dummy variables	Response	Freq.	%	Total sample (N)
Sex of the household head	Female	55	26.32	209
	Male	154	73.68
Cooperative membership	No	147	70.33	209
	Yes	62	29.67
Access to extension service	No	84	40.19	209
	Yes	125	59.81

Source: Authors computation from survey result of 2022 Tomato project.

As it is shown on Table 5 above, sex of the household head and family size were considered as demographic factors contribute to factors affecting farmers’ market orientation in potato production at the study area. Accordingly, about 26.32% of the sample households were female headed while majority of them (73.68%) were male headed households where as the average family size, and average age of the sample household were 5.84 person per household and 43.41 years on average.

Resource endowment especially availability of land for crop production is one of the most important factors that influence crop production. Land is the basic asset of the sample farmers in the study area. Land is the most and basic assets for farmers in the study area. The survey revealed that the average farm size of sampled households were found 1.78 hectares whereas the land allocated for potato production were 0.63 hectare per a farmer which implies from the total land owned by farmers, 35% of the land is used potato production. Hence, the farmers at the study area are moderately market ordinated in potato production. This aligns with previous research conducted in Ethiopia in 2020, which found that smallholder farmers typically owned less than 2 hectares of land for agricultural purposes (Desta, 2020). Furthermore, the allocation of 0.63 hectares for potato production is consistent with a study from 2021, which highlighted the importance of potato as a cash crop for smallholder farmers in the region (Tadesse, 2021).

Moreover, the study area is characterized by ownership of livestock resources which are useful in the livelihoods of the rural communities. Even though the holding size varied, all the sampled respondents had owned 8.49 livestocks excluding oxen and equines on average by the total sample households in the study area. Livestock are kept for various economic and social reasons in which major economic reasons include provision or supply of draught power, generation of cash income, food and energy. Hence, availability of livestock excluding oxen and equines turns away the smallholder farmers to invest more of their land for livestock production than potato production which may decrease their market orientation in producing such crop for the market (see Table 5).

Furthermore, membership of the cooperatives is one of the social capital in which the producers where participated or involved for getting different benefits. Cooperatives improve understanding of members about market and strengthen the relationship among the members. In this study, from the total respondents, only 29.67% of them were members of farmer′s primary cooperatives as a means of saving and to get guarantee during their emergency period or urgent cash needs in the study area while majority of them (70.33%) were not members of farmer primary cooperatives. A recent study by Gashaw et al. (2020) conducted in rural Ethiopia found that farmers who were members of cooperatives had better access to agricultural inputs, improved market information, and higher incomes compared to non-members. In the study area, absence of being a member of farmers’ cooperatives, respondent loss the opportunities from fast input delivery, fair farm gate output price, easy access to credit and some of bargaining power in the study area (see Table 5).

The extension services contribute to the realization of market orientation objective among smallholder potato farmers in the study area. The survey result showed that 59.81% the sample respondents had access to extension service where the office of agriculture and rural development through its development agents is the major provider of this extension service and advisory service on potato production and management practices in the study area, however about 40.19% of the respondents did not get such agricultural advisor service in the study area. Previous research in Ethiopia has also identified the importance of extension services in promoting market orientation among smallholder farmers. A study by Asfaw et al. found that access to extension services had a positive impact on farmers’ market participation and income from agricultural activities. Similarly, another study by Gebreegziabher et al. highlighted the role of extension services in improving smallholder farmers’ access to market information and enhancing their market orientation. Moreover, Distance from producer’s house to nearest market was also the factor which determines smallholder potato producer’s market orientation in production. The survey result showed that, the average distance needed for producers to travel to nearest market place took an average of 25.79 kilometres. A study by Minten et al. found that distance to markets significantly affects farmers’ marketing decisions and their ability to access markets for their agricultural produce. Similarly, research by Tadesse et al. (2019) revealed that reducing the distance to markets through infrastructure improvements can positively impact smallholder farmers’ market orientation and ultimately improve their livelihoods.

4.5. Econometric analysis

4.5.1. Determinants of smallholder potato producers’ market orientation

To examine determinants of market orientation of smallholder potato producers in the study area, a total of eight (8) explanatory (independent) variables were used in the OLS model. The model F-tests applying appropriate degrees of freedom indicate that the overall goodness of fit of the OLS model is statistically significant at 1% level of significance (Table 5). This shows that the independent variables included in the OLS model regression explain the market orientation determinants of small holder potato producers in the study area.

The coefficient of multiple determinations (R2) was found to be 0.3274 indicating that explanatory variables had a significant influence on market orientation in Tiyo district. This indicated that, 32.74% of the variation in market orientation of smallholder potato producers is explained by the explanatory variables. Regarding relationship of the variables with the market orientation of potato producers; membership of the cooperative and farm size allocated for potato production affects smallholder potato producer’s market orientation positively whereas age of the respondents, family size of the households, and livestock ownership excluding oxen and equines had negative relationship with smallholder potato producers’ market orientation. Thus, using the above mentioned explanatory variables, we regressed the average market orientation index of the respondents using OLS estimation method to identify the factors affecting farmers’ market orientation in potato production in the study area (see Table 6).

Table 6. OLS estimation results for determinants of market orientation.

Explanatory variable	Coef	Robust std. err	t	p>|t|
Sex of the respondents	−0.0073	.0269	−0.27	0.788
Age of the respondents	(−0.0029)***	.0010	−2.98	0.003
Family size per household	(−0.0091)*	.0053	−1.72	0.087
Distance to the nearest market	−0.0014	.0017	−0.79	0.431
Access to extension service	0.0248	.0255	0.97	0.332
Cooperative membership	(0.0668)**	.0308	2.17	0.031
Potato farm size	(0.2522)***	.0271	9.30	0.000
Livestock excluding oxen and equines	(−0.0039)**	.0016	−2.49	0.014
Constant term	0.3571	0.0622	5.73	0.000

Source: Authors calculation from Survey result of 2022 of Tomato project. Obs. = 209, F(8,200) = 11.97, Prob. > F = 0.0000, R-squared = 0.3274, Root MSE = 0.17973. Note: ***, ** and * indicate 1%,5% and 10% significance levels, respectively.

According the results shown in Table 6, Age of the household head affects the farmers’ market orientation in potato production negatively in the study area at 1% level of significance. It is found that there is a significant and negative relationship between family size and market orientation in the study area i.e. (β = −0.0029; p = 0.003), which indicated that as the farmer′s age increases by one year, their market orientation decreases by 0.29%. Family size of the household has negative relationship with smallholder tomato producers’ market orientation in the study area. It is found that there is a significant and negative relationship between family size and market orientation in the study area i.e. (β = −0.0091; p = 0.087). A unit increase in family size decreases the market orientation of smallholder potato producers by 0.91%. This result is in line with Gebremedhin and Jaleta (2010) who indicated that, large household sizes diminish households from market orientation due to its effect on increasing household domestic consumption requirements; and it is also in line with the findings of Abate et al. (2020) who stated that as the family size increased by one adult equivalent, the probability of being market oriented would be decreased by 14.53% remaining other factors constant. Cooperative membership has significant and positive effect in inducing market orientation for Potato smallholder farmers. The results of OLS estimation show that membership of cooperative which is any of agricultural cooperatives is correlated significantly and positively with the smallholder potato producer’s market orientation in the study area at 5% level of significance where β = 0.0668; p = 0.031 indicating that smallholder farmers’ market orientation is increased by 6.68%, if they are member farmers’ cooperative in potato production. This result is in line with Onubuogu and Onyeneke who found that membership to cooperative societies which is a social capital had a positive coefficient with market orientation of root and tuber crop production indicating that root and tuber crop farmers that are members of cooperative societies had higher market orientation than their counterparts who are not members of cooperative societies. Moreover, the result of OLS estimation found that, there is a strong significant and positive relationship between farm size of potato and market orientation in the study area at 1% level of significance i.e. (β = 0.2522; p = 0.000). This indicates that if farmers’ farm size is increased by one hectare, farmers’ market orientation will be increased by 0.2546 at 1% significance level, at 1% significance level. This implies that, a unit increase in potato farm size increases smallholders’ market orientation 25.22%. The fact might be that farm households with large farm size could allocate their land for Potato production giving them better position to participate in the output market. This study is in line with Abate et al. (2020) who found that, the larger land size for wheat production led to the farmers more likely to be a market oriented in wheat production which led farmers to supply more and produce based on market signals in Ethiopia. Furthermore, the result revealed that ownership of livestock excluding oxen and equines affects the smallholder potato producer’s market orientation negatively at 1% level of significance at the study area implying that a unit increase in livestock excluding oxen and equines decreases the farmers’ market orientation by 0.39%. This is because, as the number of animals increases (excluding oxen and equines), the probability of market orientation towards market oriented crop production is expected to decrease since the alternative income as well as food could be found from animals. This result also in line with Tegengn (2013) who found that, farmers who have a number of livestock were specializing in livestock production so that they allocated large share of their land for pasture.

4.6. Potato market channels of the study area

Table 7 above shows alternative marketing channels for potato produce by sample producers in the study areas. As the starting point for the distribution of Potato from the producer to final consumer, respondents were asked where they were selling their produce/commodity what they have produced during the production year (see Table 6). According to the respondents’ result, majority of them (49.8%) sell their produce to wholesaler followed by consumer (7.7%), collector (2.4%), and processors (1%) respectively. Furthermore, they also sell their produce to different market channels at the same time. Accordingly, 26.3% of the respondents sell their produce to consumer and wholesaler, about 4.31% of them sell their produce to consumer and collectors whereas 6.22% and 8.90% of them sell their produce to consumer, collector and wholesaler market channels at the same time respectively (Table 6).

Table 7. Potato marketing channel of the study area.

Variables	Marketing actors	Response	Frequency	Percent	Amount sold (quintal)
Market channels (For whom do you sell your potato in 2022 production year?)	To Consumer	No	193	92.3	318
		Yes	16	7.7
	To Collector	No	204	97.6	266
		Yes	5	2.4
	To Wholesaler	No	105	50.2	5028
		Yes	104	49.8
	To Processor	No	107	99.00	105
		Yes	2	1.00
	To Consumer and wholesaler	No	154	73.7	2599
		Yes	55	26.3
	To Consumer and collector	No	200	95.7	133
		Yes	9	4.3
	To Collector and wholesaler	No	204	97.6	386
		Yes	5	2.4
	To Consumer, collector and wholesaler	No	196	93.8	673
		Yes	13	6.2
	Total		Yes = 209	100.00	9508

Source: Survey result of 2022 of Tomato project.

Furthermore, marketing of potato includes different marketing channels or the producers sold their produce to consumers, collectors, wholesales and processors directly. Based on the survey result, about 8 channels were identified for each of potato produces in the study area. These includes, producers to consumers, producers to collectors, producers to wholesalers, producers to processors, producers to consumers and collectors, producers to collectors and wholesalers, producers to consumers and wholesalers, producers to collectors and wholesalers, and producer to consumers, collectors and wholesalers (see Table 7).

From the total 13,452 quintal produced by sample respondents in the study area (Tiyo district, see Table 1), about 9508 quintal of potato were supplied by 209 farmers to different buyers of Potato. This indicates that from the total produced a single farmer supply about 45.49 quintals to the market on average. Furthermore, as it was shown on the Table 6 above; the main buyers of Potato from producers were wholesalers, consumers, collectors, and processors with an estimated percentage of 49.7% (5028 quintal), 7.7% (318 quintal), 2.4% (266 quintal), and 1% (105 quintal) respectively. Nearly 50% of the producers prefer selling their produce to wholesalers. This is due to the fact that wholesalers pay price above the producers’ average selling price (966.87 birr per quintal) in the study area and, the bulk of the produce is sold to the wholesalers followed by consumers.

Furthermore, farmers were in charge of selling their produce to different buyers as the same time. Accordingly, the survey result showed that, about 26.3% (2599 quintal) of Potato was sold to consumers and collectors, about 4.3% (133 quintal) of the Potato produced was sold to consumers and wholesaler, about 2.39% (386 quintal) was sold to Collectors and wholesalers, and about 6.2% (673 quintal) of the produce was sold to three potato marketing actors namely Consumers, collectors & wholesalers at the same production year.

4.7. Market performance analysis along potato market chain

In this study, to analyze marketing performance or marketing margin of the actors along the potato marketing chain, first we collected the purchase and selling price of potato marketing actors including collectors, wholesalers and retailers; and then we also collected the marketing cost incurred in marketing activity with potato marketing from each actors; finally the gross marketing margins of collectors, wholesalers and retailers were computed using Equation (6)(6) $$\mathit{\text{GMM}}=\frac{\mathit{\text{Retail price}}-\mathit{\text{farm gate price}}}{\mathit{\text{Retail price}}}\mathrm{*}100$$(6) or Equation (8)(8) $$\mathrm{\text{GM}}{\mathrm{M}}_j=\frac{\mathit{\text{SPj}}-\mathit{\text{PPj}}}{\mathit{\text{Consumer price}}\mathrm{ }}\times 100$$(8) while the share of producers was computed using Equation (5)(5) $$\mathit{\text{proucers}}\prime \mathit{\text{share}}=\frac{\mathit{\text{producers}}\prime \mathit{\text{price}}}{\mathit{\text{consumers}}\prime \mathit{\text{price}}}=1-\frac{\mathit{\text{Marketing margin}}}{\mathit{\text{consumers}}\prime \mathit{\text{price}}}$$(5) . The total gross market margin (TGMM) of middlemen which is the sum of the gross marketing margins of collectors, wholesalers and retailers was computed using Equation (7)(7) $$\mathit{\text{TGMM}}=\frac{\mathit{\text{Consumerprice}}-\mathit{\text{Producre price}}}{\mathit{\text{Consumer price}}}\mathrm{*}100$$(7) whereas the gross marketing margin of producers (GMMP) was computed using Equation (5)(5) $$\mathit{\text{proucers}}\prime \mathit{\text{share}}=\frac{\mathit{\text{producers}}\prime \mathit{\text{price}}}{\mathit{\text{consumers}}\prime \mathit{\text{price}}}=1-\frac{\mathit{\text{Marketing margin}}}{\mathit{\text{consumers}}\prime \mathit{\text{price}}}$$(5) which is the difference of 100% and TGMM, and finally the net marketing margin or profit of actors was computed using Equation (9)(9) $$\mathit{\text{NMM}}=\frac{\mathit{\text{Gross Marketing margin}}-\mathit{\text{Marketing Cost}}}{\mathit{\text{Consumer price}}}\mathrm{*}100$$(9) respectively as it was shown on Table 7.

According to the survey result, the total cost incurred by retailors was higher (36.7%) followed by wholesalers (30.9%) and collectors (20.9%) respectively whereas the total cost incurred by farmers was found to be the least of all (11.5%) during the survey year. The market margin is used to show distribution of the various actors’ share as potato produce move from smallholder farmers to different market chain actors and was calculated by subtracting the purchase price from sale price of the commodity in percentage. Recent studies in Ethiopia have also shown comparable findings in terms of the distribution of costs and market margins along the potato market chain. According to a study by Gebrehiwot et al., retailors and wholesalers incurred higher costs compared to farmers, similar to the survey result. This demonstrates the consistent trend of higher costs being borne by downstream market actors, ultimately impacting the profitability of smallholder farmers.

Accordingly, the market performance analysis of Potato along the market chain showed that, about 58% of the total gross marketing margin (TGMM) is goes to the traders or middlemen while the rest 42% is goes to producers according to the computed result. The findings of this study revealed that, from middlemen involved in the chain, wholesalers have the largest share of Gross marketing margin followed by collectors and that of retailors with gross market margin (GMM) of 26.67%, 18.02%, and 13.33% respectively. Regarding share of profit of actors or net market margin (NMM) of market chain actors along potato market chain wholesalers are highly positioned while retailors are poorly positioned i.e., the share of profit of wholesalers was found to be 12% whereas that of collectors and retailors got a profit of 8.24% and 4.21% respectively along the marketing chain. These results also aligns with the findings of study conducted by Alemu and Haji, which found that a significant portion of the market margin in potato value chains in Ethiopia goes to traders and middlemen. This indicates that the market power is concentrated in the hands of these intermediaries, potentially leading to reduced returns for producers.

Table 9 above presents Potato marketing constraints affecting the marketing activity of potato producers in the study area. In this study, sampled farmers were asked about the presence and types of marketing problems. The types of marketing problems they faced were reported as from the most to the least problematic factor was observed. Accordingly, lack of fair sale price due to brokers (21.53%), lack of market information (16.75%), low price of the product (15.31%), lack of market (13.88%), Perishability of the product (13.88%), poor linkage with other value chain actors (9.57%), lack of storage facility (5.74%), and lack of transportation facility (3.35%) were subsequent marketing problems or challenges of farmer or Potato producers in the study area at Tiyo district (Table 8). Recent studies in Ethiopia have also identified similar marketing constraints affecting potato producers. In a study conducted by Abro et al. (2020) in the Amhara Region of Ethiopia, lack of fair sale price due to intermediaries, lack of market information, and low price of the product were identified as major constraints affecting potato producers. The study also found that poor linkage with other value chain actors and lack of storage and transportation facilities contributed to the marketing challenges faced by potato producers in the region. Similarly, another study by Tadesse et al. (2019) in the Tigray Region of Ethiopia found that lack of market access, low prices, and poor market information were key constraints affecting potato producers. Additionally, perishability of the product and inadequate storage and transportation facilities were also identified as significant challenges in marketing potatoes.

Table 8. Cost and marketing margin distribution of actors in Potato marketing.

Items (Birr per quintal)	Producers	Collectors	Wholesalers	Retailors
Production cost	626.55	0	0	0
Marketing cost
1.1.Loading /unloading cost	0	100	100	100
1.2.transportation cost	0	120	180	100
1.3.loss	0	0	10.55	5.25
1.4.processing cost	0	0	0	0
1.5.commission fee	0	0	15	0
1.6.tax	0	0	25	0
Total marketing cost	0	220	330.55	205.25
Marketing cost percentage (%)	0%	29.1%	43.7%	27.2%
Purchase price	0	944.5	1350.00	1950.00
Total cost	626.55	1144.5	1685.55	2155.25
Percentage of Total cost (%)	11.5%	20.9%	30.9%	36.7%
Average selling price	944.5	1350.00	1950.00	2250.00
GMM (%)	41.98%	18.02%	26.67%	13.33%
TGMM (%) = 58.02%	TGMM =	18.02 + 26.67% +13.33% = 58.02%
GMMp (%) = 41.98%	GMMp =	100%-TGMM = 100–58.02% = 41.98%
NMM (%)	14.13%	8.24%	12.00%	4.21%

Source: Own computation, Survey result of 2022 of Tomato project.

Table 9. Potato marketing problems/challenges of the study area.

Marketing problems	Tiyo (N = 209) potato
	Frequency	%	Rank
Poor linkage with value chain actors	20	9.57	5th
Brokers hinder fair sales price	45	21.53	1st
Lack of market	29	13.88	4th
Lack of transport	7	3.35	7th
Low price of the product	32	15.31	3rd
Perishability of the product	29	13.88	4th
Lack of market information	35	16.75	2nd
Lack of storage	12	5.74	6th
Total	209	100.00

Source: Survey result of 2022 of Tomato project.

4.8. Limitations of this study

Some potential limitations of the study:

The unfamiliarity of data collectors with the data collection tool (Kobo Toolbox) takes long time during interviewing the respondents. Furthermore, the geographical distance posed logistical challenges for data collectors; weather-related challenges during data collection which is the rainy season during data collection restricted access to remote areas.

5. Conclusion and recommendation

5.1. Conclusion

The present study examines the market orientation determinants, and marketing performance of smallholder Potato producers in Tiyo district, Ethiopia. The calculation of household market orientation index reveald that farmers allocate about 29.63% of their cultivable land for potato production indicating that farmers in the study area are nearly moderately market orientated in potato production. The crop marketability index showed that 69.24% of Potato produced is supplied to the market indicating that, there is need to focus attention on improving Potato market orientation among the producers suggesting that tomato is an important component of the household cash source at the study area.

The econometrics result showed that age of the household head, family sise in the household, and ownership of livestock excluding oxen and equines affects smallholder potato producès market orientation significantly and negatively. Hence, intervening these variables enhance the farmers’ orientation in the study area. Moreover, land size allocated for Potato production and membership of the cooperative, affects market orientation of smallholder Potato producers significantly and positively; hence, promoting these factors increases farmers’ market orientation in resource allocation for Potato production, and increases the farmers’ bargaining power in the study area.

Smallholder potato producers of the study area have four main potato marketing channels namely; consumers, collectors, wholesalers and processors where larger amount (49.8%) of Potato were sold to wholesaler whereas the least value (1%) of the potato is sold to processors. Hence, even though producers have different marketing channels, they prefer to sell their produce through to the wholesaler marketing channels due to the higher price.

The market performance analysis revealed that the smaller value of total gross marketing margin (42%) is goes to producers while the larger value (58%) is goes to the traders indicating that there is higher price difference among Potato producers and traders in the study area where producers receive lower profit.

Generally, our findings points out that; lack of fair sale price due to brokers, lack of market information, low price of the product, lack of market, Perishability of the product, poor linkage with other value chain actors, lack of storage facility, and lack of transportation facility were subsequent marketing problems or challenges faced by smallholder Potato producers in the study area which are prevalent issues that need to be addressed in order to improve the marketing activity of potato producers.

5.2. Recommendation

Based on the findings of the research the following recommendations are forwarded.

• Increasing the size of land may not be an alternative for market orientation of potato production since land is a limited and fixed resource. Therefore, implementing process upgrading strategy by government and non-government organization as well as private enterprises through promoting and provision of improved technology packages and better practices would increase the productivity of potato production which can be increase the farmers’ market orientation in potato production.

• Family size in the house was found to be significantly and negatively affecting market orientation of smallholder potato producers’ market orientation. Hence, promoting family planning among the farmers will increase their market orientation in Potato production in the study area.

• Strengthening functions of farmer’s cooperatives, increasing market linkages among potato market chain actors, improving farmers bargaining power by supporting farmer’s cooperatives and improving the information dissemination about different marketing aspects of potato produce should be done at marketing stage by all responsible bodies to reduce the marketing constraints in the study area.

• The findings of market performance emphasize the need for interventions and policies to address the unequal distribution of costs and market margins in along the potato market chains in the study area. Therefore, Efforts to strengthen the bargaining power of smallholder farmers and improve their access to markets should be prioritized to ensure a more equitable distribution of benefits along the value chain.

• Generally, policies focusing on reducing illegal brokers, increasing farmers’ awareness to allocate more cultivable land, reducing the price difference among producers and traders, enhancing farmers to join agricultural cooperatives, strengthening market linkages among the marketing participants should be implemented to improve smallholder tomato producers’ market orientation and marketing performance to the study area in particular and at the country level in general.

5.3. Future research work

• Value chain analysis of potato and the enabling environment to diversify its production and value addition

• Determinants of smallholder potato producers market channel choice decision in Ethiopia

Acknowledgements

The TOMATO project team, represented by the dedicated members from Arsi University and Weihenstephan-Triesdorf University of Applied Sciences, wholeheartedly acknowledges the German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD) for its pivotal role in enabling the realization of the TOMATO project. The financial support provided by the esteemed DAAD Award has been instrumental in driving the success of this initiative, for which we are profoundly grateful.

We extend our sincere appreciation to Weihenstephan-Triesdorf University of Applied Sciences, Germany, and Arsi University, Ethiopia, for their invaluable contributions and unwavering support in facilitating the practical implementation of the TOMATO project.

Furthermore, we express our gratitude to all those who have collaborated with us, as their dedication has played an integral part in driving the synergy of this and related ventures.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the Deutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst.

Notes on contributors

Samuel Weldeyohanis Kifle

Samuel Weldayohanis Kifle is an academic and researcher at Arsi University College of Agriculture and Environmental Science, and he has been a valued member of the institution’s Department of Agribusiness and Value Chain Management Since 2017. Graduating with an MSc degree in Agribusiness and Value Chain Management from Jima University and a BSc degree from Hawassa University in 2011, Samuel’s expertise lies in conducting research on value chain analysis, market orientation, and factors influencing market supply in Ethiopia, with a focus on crops such as coffee malt barley, Potato and Tomato. His research interests extend to value chain finance, market development, price integration, Agricultural entrepreneurial development and others. Since 2021 he was a member of the TOMATO project, funded by DAAD, and he contributes to innovative research initiatives. Additionally, his dedication to entrepreneurship is demonstrated by his training as a Trainer at the Ethiopian Entrepreneurship Development Institute since 2023.

SisayYefru Derbe

SisayYefru Derbe is professionally an Agricultural Economist, and serving as a lecturer and researcher in the department of agricultural economics at college of agriculture and environmental sciences, Arsi University. He holds his MSc and BSc degree in Agricultural Economics from Haramaya University and has a long years of academic and research experience both at Adama Science and Technology University and Arsi University. Moreover, he served as a Coordinator of University-industry Linkage in Arsi University for over four years. Currently, he is offering courses for undergraduate students enrolled at Arsi University and also engaged in different research and community service activities with Arsi University as well as with partner universities both from in country and international. In addition, he is currently in charge of coordinating TOMATO Project which is funded by DAAD since 2021. Furthermore, he was certified by UNDP –UNCTAD for EMPERTEC (Entrepreneurship) Training of Trainers (TOT).

Zegeye Tirfe Mamo

Zegeye Tirfe Mamo is an assistant professor of Agricultural Economics at department of Agricultural Economics, School of Agriculture and environmental Science, Arsi University, Ethiopia. He has enough experience in teaching and research. His research interests are topics related to Agricultural Economics such as Economic efficiency, Food Insecurity, Food Quality and Safety, Agricultural Policy, Rural Land planning and Marketing, and Agribusiness Value Chain Management. This paper focused on smallholder farmers, so its finding has an important role as a reference for related research projects that will be conducted somewhere else.

Diriba Shiferaw Geleta

Diriba Shiferaw Geleta (Ph.D., Associate Professor of Horticulture) is an academic with a strong focus on agricultural education and research. Currently serving as an Associate Professor at Arsi University’s College of Agriculture and Environmental Science, he previously held the position of Vice Dean for Academic Affairs at the same institution. With expertise in Horticulture, he has actively contributed to the improvement of education quality in the Department of Plant Sciences. He has played a vital role in the potato project, a collaborative effort between Arsi University and Germany’s Weihenstephen University of Applied Sciences, funded by DAAD. He has also made significant contributions to entrepreneurship and agricultural development through his involvement as a trainer in the GIZ project for development. Furthermore, he has been actively engaged in scholarly activities, serving as an Associate Editor and Reviewer for Arsi University Journal of Sciences and Innovations (AJSI) and as a reviewer for the Ethiopian Academy of Sciences (EAS). He is a member of the Ethiopian Horticulture and Coffee Sciences Societies, and his expertise extends to community services and research projects both within Ethiopia and internationally.

Samuel Mezemir Yimenu

Samuel Mezemir Yimenu has a Ph.D. in Food Biotechnology from the University of Science and Technology (UST), South Korea, and is currently an Assistant Professor from March 2019–present at the Department of Food Science and Postharvest Technology, Arsi University, Ethiopia. Previously, Head of the Department (April–June, 2014) at Adama Science and Technology University, Ethiopia. Dr. Samuel has published over 12 peer-reviewed journal articles, 6 scientific papers and 5 poster presentations, and is serving as reviewer of different Journals. Besides, he is serving as UIL and Consultancy Coordinator. Team member in DAAD project ‘TOMATO-project-2021–2024’, Chairperson of Postgraduate Committee (since 2021), and research ethical committee (since 2019). Samuel has consulted LVIA–on the performance evaluation of different prototypes of photovoltaic cell-assisted solar dryers’, on storage and processing of fresh vegetables and fruits (January–March, 2022). His research areas include sustainable food systems, traditional foods bioprocessing and commercialization, food safety, quality, and shelf-life management, Time-Temperature monitoring techniques and prediction modeling.

Bezawit Seifu Woldegiorgis

Bezayit Seifu Woldegiorgis is a Lecturer and researcher at the Food Science and Post-Harvest Technology department in Arsi University. She has worked in teaching, research and consultancy for more than eight (8) years. Her research interest is on postharvest technology and value addition of agricultural commodities.

Dekeba Moges Tola

Dekeba Moges Tola (Ph.D. candidate) is a senior lecturer of Food Science and Technology in Arsi University. As his own research activities, he was and is working in different research activities including: post-harvest loss reduction through cost effective postharvest technologies, process optimization for diverse and balanced nutrients food products, and currently working on exploring underutilized crops toward food and nutrition security as his PhD research work. As a group, he is working on Harnessing of efficient vegetable and fruit production, processing and marketing systems of which our current Article is part of it, and Performance Evaluation of different solar drier technologies for adding value to vegetables and expanding market opportunity.

Anis Dzankovic

Anis Dzankovic has master’s degree Agriculture, Agriculture Operations, and Related Sciences. He is a member of Tomato project at Germany.

Bernd Müller

Bernd Müller (Ph.D.) has been the deputy head of the International School since February 2021. In this role, he focuses on the establishment and implementation of further education programmes. In a team with nine colleagues, he manages research and exchange projects with partner universities in Africa and Southeast Asia. He is also responsible for lectures in the study programmes on agriculture and international agricultural management at the Weihenstephan-Triesdorf University of Applied Sciences (HSWT). His research focus is on food supply chain management. Before joining HSWT in 2018, he finalised his doctoral thesis on agricultural policy at the University of Gießen and managed two agricultural farms in southern Germany. He also worked as a managing director and advisor on organic farming for an organic growers’ association in Germany.