Gender Disparity of Pulse Production and Management. Damot Gale Woreda Smallholder Farmers in Southern Nations, Nationalities, and Peoples Region

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABBREVIATIONS

LIST OF TABLES

LIST OF FIGURS

LIST OF TABLES IN APPENDICES

ABSTRACT

CHAPTER ONE
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
1.2 Statement of the Problem
1.3 Justification of the Study
1.4 Objective of the Study
1.5 Research Questions
1.6 Scope and Limitation of the Study
1.7 Operational Definitions
1.8 Organization of the study

CHAPTER TWO
2. REVIEW OF LITRATURE
2.1 Theoretical Background
2.2 Gender Differentiated Access to Productive Resources
2.2.1 Gender and access to farm land
2.2.2 Gender differentiated access to technology and extension services
2.2.3 Gender differentiated access to credit
2.2.4 Gender differentiated access to oxen
2.3 Gender Role and Responsibilities in Agricultural Production
2.4 Challenges and Influencing Factors in Marketing
2.5 Consumption Preferences of Pulses
2.6 Conceptual Framework of the study

CHAPTER THREE
3. METHODOLOGY
3.1 Description of the Study Area
3.2 Target Population and Sampling Method
3.3 Methods of Data Collection
3.4 Validity and reliability of tools used
3.5 Methods of Data Analysis
3.6 Model specification
3.7 Variables and their definition

CHAPTER FOUR
4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
4.1 Socio- Demographic Characteristics of Respondents
4.2 Gender Differentials in Access to Productive Resources
4.2.1 Access to farming land
4.2.2 Access to extension services
4.2.3 Access to pulse production packages
4.2.4 Access to plowing oxen
4.2.5 Access to credit
4.3 Role of Women and Men Farmers in Pulse Production
4.3.1 Haricot bean production
4.3.2 Chick pea production
4.4 Gender Related Challenges and Influencing Factors on Pulse Marketing
4.4.1 Gender related challenges in pulse marketing
4.4.2 Factors that influence pulse marketing
4.5 Consumption Preferences of Pulses

CHAPTER FIVE
5. SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
5.1 Summary
5.2 Conclusion
5.3 Recommendation

REFERENCES

APPENDICES

ABBREVIATIONS

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Socio- demographic characteristics of the respondents, (n= 218)

Table 2: Land ownership by households, (n= 218)

Table 3: Gender differentials on the means of land acquisition, (n=218)

Table 4: proportion of households with access to extension services concerning pulse Production, (n=218)

Table 5: Barriers on access to extension service

Table 6: Proportion of households who accessed pulse crop production packages, (n=218)

Table 7: Households having plowing oxen (n=218)

Table 8: Number of oxen owned by households

Table 9: Options available to plow land in absence of oxen by household type

Table 10: Proportion of households who received credit for the production of pulse crops, (n= 218)

Table 11: Source of credit received by households

Table 12: Constraints to access credit services

Table 13: Proportion of households who have challenges in pulse marketing

Table 14: Types of challenges faced in pulse marketing

Table 15: Result of multiple linear regressions for selected explanatory variables and pulse marketing

Table 16: Frequency of pulse crops consumption, (n=218)

Table 17: Reasons for not consuming pulses frequently

Table 18: Reasons for consuming pulses frequently

LIST OF FIGURS

Figure 1: Conceptual frame work of the study

Figure 2: Location of study area

Figure 3: Type of pulse production packages used in the study area

Figure 4: Role in haricot bean production by households

Figure 5: Role in chickpea production by households

LIST OF TABLES IN APPENDICES

Table (1): Result of multiple linear regressions for selected explanatory variables and haricot bean marketing

Table (2): Result of multiple linear regressions for selected explanatory variables and Chickpea marketing)

Gender Disparity of Pulse Production and Management in Damot Gale Woreda Smallholder Farmers in Southern Nations, Nationalities, and Peoples Region

ABSTRACT

Pulse crops provide an alternative source of protein, income and food security to smallholder farmers. The aim of this study was to investigate gender related challenges on the production and management of pulses among smallholder farmers in the study area. Taba kebele was selected purposively because of its potential for pulse crops production. Sample size was determined by using sample size determining formula. Accordingly 40 female and 178 male headed sample households were selected by using stratified and systematic random sampling methods. Pre-tested questionnaire was employed to collect quantitative data from the sampled households. Focus group discussion was undertaken with purposively selected community leaders to generate qualitative data. Survey data was processed by using statistical package for social science (SPSS) version 20. Quantitative data was analyzed using descriptive statistics and multiple linear regression model. Results indicated that female headed households had less access to extension services, production packages, plowing oxen and credit service in the production of pulses. The result also indicated disparity in activities that needed decision such as seed selection, credit arrangement, seed and fertilizer purchase, land allocation, and marketing of pulses. In terms of marketing, 91.7% of female headed households faced challenges in pulse marketing due to involvement of brokers, low price and distance to better markets while 46% of male headed households faced lack of transportation and low market price. Result of multiple linear regression model showed that family headship, age, land size, source of pulses for consumption, place and time of marketing significantly influenced price received from pulse sale . Result of descriptive statistics indicated that consumption preferences of pulses are determined by cooking characteristics, taste, desirable grain size, color, availability, and price of pulses. The overall result of this study indicated there was gender disparity in access to productive resources and roles in pulse production. In addition, Female headed households disproportionately faced challenges while selling pulses compared to their male counterparts.

CHAPTER ONE

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

Agriculture is the main driver of the economic performance of the country. The agricultural sector accounts for roughly 43 per cent of GDP, and 90 per cent of exports (Chanyalew et al, 2010).The average share of crop production, livestock production and forestry and other sub-sectors in the total agricultural value added is estimated to be about 60, 27, and 23 percent, respectively (MEDaC,1999).

In Ethiopia, cereals, pulses, and oil seeds cover about 78.6%, 14.4%, and 7% respectively of the total grain cultivated area of about 12.4 million hectares in 2008/09 production season. In the same production season, cereals and pulses contributed about 85% and 11. 4% of total grain production of 17.8 million tons respectively (CSA, 2009).

The major varieties of pulses grown in Ethiopia, faba bean (Vicia faba L.), field pea ( Pisum sativum L.), chickpea ( Cicer arietinum L.), and lentil ( Lens esculenta L ) are categorized as highland pulses and grown in the cooler highlands. Conversely, haricot bean ( Phaseolus vulgaris L.) and mung bean ( Phaseolus radiates L.) are predominantly grown in the warmer and low land parts of the country. Among the individual varieties, faba beans (broadly known as horse beans) accounts for the greatest portion of production, at 36 percent, followed by haricot beans (17 percent) and chickpeas (16 percent). Other pulses (e.g., lentils, peas, lupines, and mung beans) account for the remaining 32 percent (Rashid et al, 2010 ).

Pulse crops are important components of crop production in Ethiopian smallholder agriculture. It provides an economic advantage to small farm holdings as an alternative source of protein, cash income, and food security. The crops have been used for many years in crop rotation practices. Some of them have also played an important role in the export sector generating foreign currency for the country (EEPA, 2004). The share of area cultivated of pulses is increasing in the period 2003/04-2008/09 this was with 6.6 percent per year, which is a faster growth compared to the yearly cereal area growth 4.6 percent (IFPRI, 2011).

The availability of pulses has never been in surplus in the subsistence farming communities. Recently it is observed that the production and supply of some pulses was increasing due to the demand increase both in local and international markets (EPEE, 2004). Considering that pulse is one of important food crops grown in Ethiopia, women are expected to involve widely and skillfully in its production and management. Women and men perform different roles and have varying responsibilities in pulse crops production as well as management. MoARD (2010) indicates that, Ethiopian women contribute over 65% to agricultural production, storage and processing, but simultaneously, they suffer from the ‘‘invisibility’’ of their role. Their status and positions is made more difficult by patriarchal traditional values, which deny them access to productive resources and limit their participation in decision-making and development activities at all levels.

Activities, resources, and opportunities of people are significantly influenced by gender that is, by the socio-economic and cultural dimension of being male or female. Moreover, different types of activities and tasks are generally allocated to women and men within the family in terms of subsistence production and production for the market (Fernando, 1998).

Gender related challenges on pulse production and management are not sufficiently assessed in the study area. Some researches and studies have been conducted on the area of gender role in relation to agriculture and crop production in general. Thus, this study aims to investigate gender related challenges of pulse production and management specifically.

1.2 Statement of the Problem

In order to enhance production of pulse crops different technology opportunities have been introduced to smallholder farmers. However, it is still becoming difficult to achieve the intended improvement and to obtain the intended benefit. Hence, along with provision of technologies gender related challenges need to be identified and addressed.

Gender differentiated access to land, technology, extension services and credit disproportionately limit women's opportunity to undertake productive and profitable pulse production. As indicated by Umeta et al (2011), women’s productivity in agriculture is highly dependent on their opportunity to having access to productive resource such as land, credit fertilizer and to other agricultural technologies. However, the existing agricultural intervention is targeting men farmers as an active participant in the production process without considering women farmers roles and responsibilities.

Normally, due to lack of better access to market, smallholder farmers have been obliged to sell their products by unfair price. Moreover, women farmers are more impeded by their time and information constraints. As stated by Asfaw et al (2010), the opportunity for smallholder farmers to raise their incomes from agricultural production largely depends on their ability to successfully participate in the marketplace exchanges. However, this participation is complicated by the numerous internal and external challenges that smallholder farmers face.

To realize the true potential of women and men farmers in pulse production and management, their access to productive resources, marketing and consumption related determinants need to be considered. In order to fill this gap, this study investigated the role of women and men farmers in pulse production, their access to productive resources, challenges in pulse marketing and examines the determinants of preference of pulse consumption.

1.3 Justification of the Study

The intension of this study is to investigate gender roles in the production of pulse crops, women and men farmers’ access to productive resources such as land, extension services, technology, plowing oxen and credit to pulse production. It also indicates market related challenges, and determinants on the preferences of pulse consumption in the study area. The finding of this study can be used as a guide for policy makers and agricultural development planners while designing agricultural projects to provide appropriate interventions to women and men farmers based on their experiences and interests. It also indicates the factors that need great concern along with technological innovation in order to get appropriate results from production, marketing, and consumption of pulse crops.

1.4 Objective of the Study

The general objective of this study is to investigate gender related challenges in the production, marketing, and consumption of pulse crops among smallholder farmers in Damot Gale woreda

The specific objectives of the study are:

1. To investigate gender differentiated access to productive resources in the production of pulse crops
2. To assess the role of women and men farmers in the production of pulse crops
3. To examine women and men farmers challenges and influencing factors on pulse marketing
4. To examine determinants on the preference of pulse consumption

1.5 Research Questions

1. How does gender determine access to productive resources in the production of pulse crops?
2. What is the role of women and men farmers in the production of pulse crops?
3. What are women and men farmers challenges and influencing factors on pulse marketing?
4. What are the factors that determine preference of pulse consumption?

1.6 Scope and Limitation of the Study

The present study is conducted in a certain locality only in one Woreda. The focus of this study was limited to see the role of women and men farmers in pulse production, their access to productive resources, challenges and influencing factors in pulse marketing and determinants on the preference of pulse consumption. The study has focused on certain challenges; there could be other factors that may have equal importance which are not indicated in the present study. Finally, it is important to note that, Ethiopia has diversified socio-economic, cultural, and institutional environment. The study location was specific in nature. Thus, these would limit upcoming of some important gender related issues of pulse production and management existing in different Woreda of the Region. However, the recommendations of the study can be used for other areas of similar contexts.

1.7 Operational Definitions

Gender: refers to the socially given attributes, roles, activities, responsibilities and needs connected to being men (masculine) and women (feminine) in a given society at a given time, and as a member of a specific community within that society.

Pulse production : refers to the growing of pulse crops for sale or domestic consumption.

Pulse management: refers to the actions related to pulse consumption and marketing.

Productive resources : refers the resources such as land, oxen, extension services, technology and credit.

Gender Roles: refers what women and men are expected to do and how they are expected to behave towards each other.

Gender disparity: refers a specific difference or inequality between men and women in relation to their conditions, or how they access or benefits from resource.

1.8 Organization of the study

This study is organized into five chapters. Chapter one introduces the background, problems under the study, justification of the study, the research objectives and Scope of the study. Chapter two is deals with review of literature. In chapter three, research methodology including description of the study area, target population and sampling procedure, methods of data collection and analysis are included. In chapter four, the research findings are presented and discussed. Finally, chapter five presents the summary, conclusions and recommendation.

CHAPTER TWO

2. REVIEW OF LITRATURE

2.1 Theoretical Background

Analyzing individual roles and resource access and control within households has to be done with a view of local expectations of men and women as well as within the specific matrix of social relations within which the individuals are involved (Okali, 2011).

On development, the specific role of women had been largely ignored particularly the question of how development affects women's subordinate position in most societies (Beneria, 2010). Boserup (2007) indicated that a possible trickledown effect of development would not benefit men and women equally. She also described the division of labor between men and women in three different development stages, the rural stage, the urban stage and the transitional stage from rural to urban society. These different environments implied a variation of possibilities and hardships for women.

Previously, only men had been offered training for using methods to increase productivity and had also been encouraged to start producing cash crops, aiming for the commodity market. This consequently led to an imbalance between men and women, where men received a higher income and additional knowledge that resulted in a reduction of working hours per week in agriculture (Boserup, 2007). The introduction of modern technology and cash crops benefited men rather than women by creating a productivity gap between them; women were relegated to the subsistence sector of food production using traditional methods of cultivation (Beneria, 2010).

2.2 Gender Differentiated Access to Productive Resources

Women in Sub-Saharan Africa are disadvantaged because of unequal distribution of resources as well as cultural barriers (Ongile, 1998). Many societies in the rural areas do not allow women to associate equally with their male counterparts. At village meetings or any other social gathering, it is still taboo in some societies for a woman to make a contribution, more especially if they have a differing opinion on the matter. This hinders women participation further downstream in the supply chain, and reduces overall earnings from their production activities (Chilundika, 2011).

The issue of access to agricultural inputs and technologies is directly related to the issue of whether or not women are perceived as farmers. Like limited access to information and land, limited access to agricultural inputs and technologies severely constrains the productive ability of women in general, and female headed households in particular (Frank, 1999). FAO (2010) indicates that rural women and men have long had very different work experiences, often to the detriment of women. They lag behind men in access to land, credit, a broad range of technologies, information, advisory services and training. They are frequently shut out of ‘social capital’, such as farmers’ organizations, workers’ unions and community networks that can enhance productivity and growth.

MoARD (2010) indicates that women’s ability to produce enough food and earn adequate income which would ensure food security is hindered by the prevalence of gender asymmetries, both in resource allocation, i.e., access to input, credit, fertilizers, extension services, and access to technology and access to and control over productive resources/ assets, such as capital, land, income, skill/ education. Likewise, Long-standing obstacles faced by rural women in terms of lack of access to productive resources (land, credit, inputs, transport, extension services, storage, technical assistance and market opportunities and know-how) prevent them from adopting new technologies or increasing their economies of scale. Their productivity is constrained and their ability to switch to crops yielding higher returns is severely limited (UN, 2004).

2.2.1 Gender and access to farm land

Societal and cultural restrictions have limited women farmers’ potential for expansion of their activities. Uncertain access to land and a history of losing land rights have discouraged women’s long-term investments in or improvements of their own land, even though they are responsible for household food security. Allowed access mainly to less fertile land, women are often able to cultivate only cassava and other food crops, while men cultivate the more fertile land with cash crops (UN, 2004).

A critical issue for smallholder agriculture throughout Africa is the shortage of good quality farming land. Increasing population pressures and fragmentation of holdings have sharply reduced cultivated area per person. Within this context of rapid population growth and the need for increased productivity of land, there is a growing debate about whether women farmers’ access to land and their decision-making power are constraints to agricultural transformation (Saito et al, 1994). Women are poor often lacking productive assets particularly land and they are underserved with agricultural extension, credit, labor, oxen and farm implements (MOWA, 2006).

2.2.2 Gender differentiated access to technology and extension services

Umeta et al (2011) asserted that agricultural extension and advisory services play an important role in agricultural development and can contribute to improving the welfare of farmers and other people living in rural areas. Anderson (2007) defines the terms agricultural extension and advisory services as “the entire set of organizations that support and facilitate people engaged in agricultural production to solve problems and to obtain information, skills, and technologies to improve their livelihoods.” Extension services can be organized and delivered in a variety of forms, but their ultimate aim is to increase farmers’ productivity and income.

Appropriate information, given and received on a timely basis is critical to the development and use of technical innovations and improvements, yet women frequently cannot obtain such information. Agricultural research and development, including extension services, have been dominated by men and have largely ignored women’s role in crop production and have not focused on women’s needs for technology and information. Social norms and cultural practices can prevent women from participating in development interventions or information campaigns (Jiggins et al, 1997). Likewise, Umeta et al (2011) stated that Participation of women on extension events like training, field day, visits or demonstration is also very low. On the other hand, the existing linkage between development agent and women farmers is very weak. These factors can be the other major constraints to access and utilization of agricultural extension packages.

Wealth status and gender differences also influence the kind of knowledge and sources of skill for farmers. Men farmers access formal sources to improve their skills and knowledge, even in areas where women do most of the activities. Men directly access knowledge from development agents, extension agents, farmers’ conferences, and kebele meetings, although the degree and access differs between rich, middle wealth and poor farmers. Men also exploit indigenous sources to advance their knowledge, such as elders’ meetings and councils, visits to distant localities, and socializing with colleagues and relatives. In contrast, women farmers rarely get extension support that would enable them to enhance their knowledge and skills, and thereby improve the performance of their agricultural activities (Lemlem et al, 2010).

The traditional extension approach hinders agricultural development. The focus on men is based on the assumption that they will pass the knowledge acquired to their wives and other family members. But this does not happen in reality. Hence, women farmers usually have limited access to improved agricultural technologies and packages promoted by the extension system. This constrains their access to various inputs and services including knowledge, and limits their participation in market-oriented agricultural activities. This loss in productive potential not only impacts at the household level but also on the national economy (Lemlem et al, 2010). Likewise, Lemelem et al (2011) asserted that women contribute a significant amount to the agricultural labor force yet they are not updated regularly about new farming practices and have few opportunities to develop their skills base. Instead they have to rely on information being passed on to them from men, or ideas gleaned through their informal networks. In turn, this will affect their productivity and their ability to innovate and fulfill their productive potential.

Asfaw et al (2010) points out that training could balance between the development of technical and methodological skills, and creating a social awareness for putting gender strategies into action, to increase productivity in chickpea production, training should be oriented towards those persons directly involved in these activities. Efforts to introduce new technologies that do not take into account existing knowledge of men and women are unlikely to meet with success. Failure to direct information to the person responsible for a given activity may result in no increase in productivity or even in stock losses.

2.2.3 Gender differentiated access to credit

Credit availability, by increasing risk-taking capacity, increasing the ability to invest, and improving access to other productive inputs and assets, is very important for improving farm productivity and returns. The high price of fertilizer and agro-chemical supplies (implying the need for more cash) and the non-availability of loans (as much as required) from the bank and informal credit sources are among the major problems of crop production. This problem is very much reflected in the list of items (fertilizer, seed, chemicals, and equipment, in order of importance) purchased by farmers with the credit they obtained (Tiruneh et al, 2001).

Access to credit is often contingent on ownership of land, property and other material resources. Hence, security in tenure and co-ownership of land between women and men could potentially have a positive effect on women’s access to credit. However, such a link must be further documented through research in the countries studied. Further, many development organizations and projects sometimes provide credit schemes to economically poor women. However, studies of credit schemes demonstrate that the terms of projects, such as repayment schedules, interest rates and social pressure used as a tactic for repayment are not always favorable to women (Verma, 2007).

Men have easier access to credit than women. Women are rarely considered creditworthy because they have no collateral. In addition, they often cannot read and write, and are not used to frequenting governmental or official institutions without their husbands’ consent and being accompanied (Asfaw et al, 2010). As indicated by MOWA (2006), credits services are linked to agricultural inputs (fertilizer, improved seeds and pesticides), that are associated with land endowment and other resources required for agricultural production, thus marginalizing poor farmers, mainly women. Women's access to agricultural sector credit stood at 12% of total.

2.2.4 Gender differentiated access to oxen

Lack of oxen also forces women headed households into share cropping arrangement whereas men in the community bring their labor and pairs of oxen, and harvest the lion share of the produces leaving the female headed households with food insecurity (Gete et al, 2013).

2.3 Gender Role and Responsibilities in Agricultural Production

Women produce 60-80% of food in most developing countries and are responsible for half of the world food production. While men are always responsible for land clearing, burning, and plowing, women specialize in weeding, transplanting, harvesting, post-harvest work and in some areas, land preparation and both take part in seeding and harvesting (FAO, 1996). Likewise Men often do Land preparation, planting, fertilizer application, and irrigation whereas women play a great role in weeding, harvesting, transporting and threshing. The decision to sell valuable agricultural products and control the income generated from the sales of the products is a question of entitlement. In the study areas, men and women appear to make decisions regarding the sale of chickpea (Asfaw et al, 2010).

Rural women are involved in nearly all forms of work, yet their contribution is given an extremely low market value due to a patriarchal ideology and existing gender biases which fail to acknowledge the social and economic value of women’s work (Muza, 2009). Similarly, Nosheen et al (2008) asserted that the role of women in agriculture development is largely overlooked. Women are only passive beneficiaries, and only are recognized by their inferior status in society. Women are not considered strong enough to handle large agricultural tasks.

Study conducted in Ethiopia indicated production of chickpea is the responsibility of the household in general but it is important to make distinctions among the types of responsibility that women have over chickpea production: ownership, control over decision-making, use rights, and provision of labor. In most systems, women provide labor for the various tasks related to production but may or may not control the process of decision-making, particularly over the disposal of produce (Asfaw et al, 2010).

2.4 Challenges and Influencing Factors in Marketing

Reliance over the past decade or so on markets as the foundation for development strategies especially in the Developing Countries has increased. However, for developing countries, market participation in the rural areas by smallholder farmers is still quite low, and market based development strategies fail to facilitate wealth creation and poverty reduction. In the rural areas of developing countries, significant market frictions commonly impede market participation, dampening households’ capacity to take advantage of market opportunities and governments’ capacity to influence microeconomic behavior through changing market incentives (Barret and Bellemare, 2004).

Both domestic and international markets are gendered institutions. Unequal access to markets is another important source of gender disadvantage likely to undermine the achievement of decent rural employment. Gender-differentiated access to markets affects the ability of women and men to receive fair prices for their work and their produce, and to control the income they generate. It results from gender inequalities in access to resources such as capital, technology, information, education and land. All these constraints interact with each other and influence the bargaining power of the various actors participating in the production, processing and sale of goods (FAO, 2010). Studies consistently show that gender is a significant determinant of market participation, with female-headed households (FHHs) being significantly disadvantaged in terms of both participation and level of earnings from markets (Tiruneh el at, 2001). Likewise, FAO (1988) indicates that the limited access to market is another main issue when making gender-based comparisons. Women’s seclusion from the public arena, higher time scarcity, and lack of mobility limit their access to markets in various ways.

Women are hampered by factors common to all such as lack of adequate transport and communications services, inadequate equipment and facilities in marketplaces and the presence of exploitative middlemen (Asfaw et al, 2010). As stated by FAO (2010) Women in many countries have to deal with cultural biases about what are considered appropriate modes of transportation for them (many women travel on foot and transport head loads, and their control over intermediate means of transport such as draught animals, bicycles and carts is limited) and often face harassment by market or trade officials. Their time constraints prevent them from travelling long distances and seeking the best prices for their output. Likewise, women usually have less information about prices, rules, and rights to basic services. Moreover, distance from the market may limit an individual’s ability to sell or purchase in the market. Women may disproportionately face mobility constraints that limit their ability to travel or sell in markets at some distance from their households and communities (Koru and Holden, 2008). Kayama (2010) further contends that poor access to bean markets is a result of limited knowledge on market opportunities, poor organization to access markets, inability to compete effectively at all market levels, Infrastructural limitations, and poor linkage to other key players such as transporters, processors and exporters.

Men are more likely to be approached by agricultural companies or other chain actors wanting to do business. Women may also face barriers to membership in rural organizations and cooperatives, which may further inhibit a channel to facilitate market access (FAO, 2010). Information availability increases, as once a member of an alliance gets hold of information quickly pass it on to others and it is used for marketing decisions. Alliances also give high bargaining power to suppliers of a commodity. This prevents exploitation by traders and other agents in the supply chain (Chilundika, 2011).

The nature of market engagement differs significantly between women and men and is also influenced by the wealth of the household. Men from rich and middle wealth households often sell major cash crops in bulk on an intermittent basis and may travel to more distant markets to secure higher prices. They have the advantage of accessing transport to travel further afield (using cart or pack animals) and may be less pressed for time (Lemelem et al, 2010). Likewise, Chilundika (2011) asserted that household asset holdings have been recognized as key determinants of market participation.

[...]